Fake news: actors, robots, androids, television creations

Fake news: actors, robots, androids, television creations

—Notes on media invention—

—Notes on interviewees who try to appear normal on television and who are bizarre to the nth degree. These interviewees are so bizarre, in part, because they ARE trying to appear normal—

by Jon Rappoport

February 5, 2017

I wrote this Sandy Hook article in 2013. It’s about the soap opera called television. I’ve added some new comments:

Online investigations of what really happened at Sandy Hook easily number in the thousands by now. Among other reporters, I have listed and described many contradictions and lies in the official scenario, and I’ve offered alternative explanations.

People have concluded:

No one was really killed in Sandy Hook, it was all faked;

The killings were real, but Adam Lanza wasn’t the shooter, he was the patsy;

Lanza was the killer, compelled by psychiatric drugs.

A Satanic group was behind the killings;

Players in the federal government secretly contracted the killings in order to take guns away…

No matter what the conclusion, many of the investigations and analyses have turned up startling and useful information.

On YouTube, clips of Sandy Hook citizens being interviewed reveal astonishing reactions and non-reactions that are light years away from what you would expect to see in the immediate wake of such a tragedy.

You can look for YouTube interview clips featuring “the people of Sandy Hook”: Robbie Parker, the Sotos family, Sally Cox, H Wayne Carver, Gene Rosen, Kaitlin Roig, etc.

Their reactions, non-reactions, strange behavior, inexplicable attitudes are stunning.

First of all, you have to realize that only certain people get on television. That’s fact #1, and it’s a major key. Only certain people are interviewed.

Television is the filter through which we see.

Parents who are completely grief-stricken, who have fallen apart and are incoherent (which is what you would expect): not interviewed.

Parents who are very angry and outraged: not interviewed.

Parents who demand answers from a full investigation, who aren’t satisfied with the emerging media-controlled story line: not interviewed.

Then we have parents who refuse to be engaged by any media person, who feel any media contact is insane and invasive and massively insensitive: obviously not approached for an interview.

We don’t see these people, because they aren’t on television. So making some vast generalization about all of the Sandy Hook community is sketchy at best.

Then, on top of that, television news people are creating a story line about what happened at the school and in the town, and they are finding people who will corroborate that plot line, or can be convinced by news producers to corroborate it. This further narrows the field of acceptable interviews.

We have interviewees who have never been on television before, but have watched thousands of television interviews. They have a strong tendency to “act like people are supposed to act” when they are put on camera.

They speak like television, they act like television, they think like television, they admire what television admires. They learn how to behave from television. They learn what is appropriate from television.

In this sense, television is the Stepford Village enabler. It invades a town during a tragedy, it sets up, it rolls out a story line that is independent from reality, and it cues selected people to be the robots who confirm that story line, no matter how grotesque the distortion.

“I know you’ve just lost your daughter, and I can’t imagine how you feel at this moment, but you see, when we interview you, we want to honor her life. This is your chance to let people all over the world know what and who she was. Her spirit, her interests, her hobbies, what her friends felt about her. You can show the world how alive she was and how happy she was, and you can remember that and you can even smile…”

And the mother of that daughter hesitates, pauses, thinks about what she really feels, and then decides the television producer is right and she’ll go along with it. On camera, she tries to act normal. She tries to fulfill her television role. And she comes across as a twisted android.

Some of the Sandy Hook interviewees appear to be machine-made cartoons. Something leaps out of them when they appear on television. They laugh, they smile, they act casual, they act “efficient” and stone-faced, they act placid and calm, they act polite, they act as if they’ve been cast for a stage play that has nothing to do with Sandy Hook.

They act as if they have no resource or experience that allows them to contact what they actually are. As if a wall has been built between what they are and how they are behaving.

In my opinion, this is a lot worse than if they had been (badly) trained at an actor’s school to intentionally provide material for an all-out hoax.

It’s a lot worse, because the manufactured front is their only reference point. As such, it takes only minimal direction to move them to any chosen square on the media-controlled checkerboard.

“How do I need to behave to fit myself into the situation as an acceptable person?” This is the guiding question they ask themselves. The answer plugs in immediately. It is always going to be wrong, because every situation is, to some degree, alive, and their answer dictates dead behavior. Machine behavior.

We need to understand that these extraordinary and stunning and bizarre interviews from Sandy Hook are mirrored in other places. For example, what are we to say about thousands of soldiers who are duped into a war that had no sane reason to exist in the first place?

But there the soldiers are, on the battlefield. They are living and breathing and mouthing sentiments that have absolutely nothing to do with the situation in which they have been placed.

The war is promoted as necessary. It is heralded as an opportunity to do service, to protect freedom, but those are gross lies.

Is a typical soldier in such a war going to look any less strange than one of those parents interviewed at Sandy Hook?

Two of the most egregious Sandy Hook interviews, with Robbie Parker, father of a six-year-old girl who was just reported killed in the school, and with H Wayne Carver, the Connecticut medical examiner, are mind-boggling.

First of all, you can confirm that Parker is a real person with a real background by searching Utah newspapers; e.g., The Deseret News. Parker is seen, in his now-famous Sandy Hook interview, smiling broadly and chuckling and having a good time just prior to stepping in front of the microphone to make a public statement, at which point he huffs and puffs and tries to get into the character of a grieving father.

It’s hideous.

Carver, in response to press questions, not only gives absurd and completely inappropriate answers, he guffaws once or twice, as if he’s out of control.

In Carver’s case, I would say he’s covering up some gigantic medical lies about the case. He’s trying to dissemble and, underneath his shaky exterior, he’s very nervous and scared that something is going to jump out of the hopper. He doesn’t know what to do. At moments, it looks as if he’s going to come apart at the seams.

If by some miracle, we had been able to see long uncensored interviews with many, many citizens of Sandy Hook; if we could have seen and heard, unvarnished, everything the people of Sandy Hook were experiencing; what would we think? What would we know? (And since the events in Sandy Hook, why haven’t we seen 20 or 30 long open interviews with parents of the schoolchildren? Who put a lid on that?)

Whatever the truth is about what happened and didn’t happen in that town, whatever the true operation that was mounted and carried out there—the role of television is central.

It is the prime programmer.

Television is the calculated average on display for the average viewer. It is the hyper-normal maniac.

The people who own and run television for the masses are bringers of an emotional wasteland.

Why are they successful?

They plug into a deep cynicism that underlies the robotic behavior and thought of millions of people.

This inner cynicism comes about because people already feel cut off from their own wide emotional range.

Television magnifies and exacerbates that disconnectedness.

Some high priest, some dictator, generalissimo, president, elite news anchor, some numbers cruncher who sees this modern world as a playground in which to forward market research, looks for the golden average, the emotional sweet spot on which gobbling maggots can prey.

I have no ax to grind here. The people who honestly conclude that Sandy Hook was one great hoax from the beginning and no one died; the people who conclude that Lanza was the patsy for professionals who did the killing at Sandy Hook Elementary School; the people who believe Lanza was the killer driven over the edge by psychiatric drugs: the people who believe the Sandy Hook killings were a secret-society operation or a black-ops horror designed to grab the guns of Americans; all these people will continue to explore their paths and they will unearth important information.

What I’m offering here is a perspective on how much of what we see is delivered to us through the twisted lens of television.

The great goal of media and its controllers is reduction, so populations will accept whatever seems “more efficient,” more ordered, more systematic, more organized, more automatic, more predictable, more repetitive.

Television could, if it chose to, make Sandy Hook look and feel like Columbine or the McMartin School…

Feeling, thought, data, facts—television can rearrange these to fit its purposes.

It can emphasize the grief, or the police actions, or the horror, or the need for new laws…in any proportions it chooses.

It also could, if it chose to (but never would) highlight the outrage of local citizens who are demanding a deeper investigation by law-enforcement; at which point, the whole course of the story would change.

Keep in mind that, at Sandy Hook or any other major news event, the field reporters and anchors on the scene are NEVER digging up the story. They’re working off of statements from the police or the FBI. There is no reason for media to be there, aside from ratings. They could be assembling the storyline back in the studio.

“Yes, folks, we have our reporters out there in Sandy Hook, but they’re not actually doing anything, they’re just telling you what the cops are saying. But we want to give you the impression that you’re there, too, so you plug into the horror and the grief. We want to give you the impression that we’re discovering, on our own, new facts every few minutes. Suspense, mystery.”

The media learned a few lessons from Sandy Hook. Among them: don’t put a medical examiner on camera until he’s been vetted, until it’s clear he’ll present a bland summary of findings; don’t release footage of interviewees (e.g., Robbie Parker) before they make their official statement.

Consider an analogy to sports. The players on the field are the main attraction and focus. The referees, who make important decisions, stay in the background. But in media, the roles are reversed. The anchors and reporters (referees) are in the foreground. The witnesses, victims, and perpetrators (the players) are kept in the background. Why? Because media are the story. Media take over. They position themselves front and center. They believe they own the news. They don’t piece together the story from witnesses. They unroll the story based on law-enforcement statements. The witnesses are merely used for flavor. This, of course, is absurd.

But it’s par for the course for media.

“We own the news. We make the news. We report the news. We invent the news. We are the news.”

If the media are the news, then we need reporters who will report on the media.

And now, online, we have just that, exactly that.

And it’s taking apart and destroying the news as it was, as it has been for a long time.

The best film ever made about television’s war on the population is Paddy Chayefsky’s scorching masterpiece, Network (1976).

Network bursts forth with lines like these, from newsman Howard Beale, at the end of his rope, on-camera, speaking to his in-studio audience and millions of people in their homes:

“So, you listen to me. Listen to me! Television is not the truth. Television’s a god-damned amusement park. Television is a circus, a carnival, a traveling troupe of acrobats, storytellers, dancers, singers, jugglers, sideshow freaks, lion tamers, and football players. We’re in the boredom-killing business… We deal in illusions, man. None of it is true! But you people sit there day after day, night after night, all ages, colors, creeds. We’re all you know. You’re beginning to believe the illusions we’re spinning here. You’re beginning to think that the tube is reality and that your own lives are unreal. You do whatever the tube tells you. You dress like the tube, you eat like the tube, you raise your children like the tube. You even think like the tube. This is mass madness. You maniacs. In God’s name, you people are the real thing. We are the illusion.”

The media, as I say, not only believe they make the news and own the news; they believe they are the news. They are trapped in that “model.” They can’t get out.

Now, in 2017, as they rail against fake news, they’re basically exclaiming, “The news couldn’t exist without us, because we embody and encircle what news IS.”

This rises to the level of insane metaphysics. The tree falling in the forest doesn’t make a sound unless CNN is there to film it and broadcast the audio.

And if CNN decides the falling tree is singing Deutschland, Deutschland über alles on the way down, and rigs the audio to make it so, then that’s what’s happening.

This is an Empire that’s supposed to last forever?

The pillars are crumbling, and we don’t need CNN to hear it.

Jon Rappoport

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

28 comments on “Fake news: actors, robots, androids, television creations

  1. IMNAHA says:

    What is unsaid here is that the ALT MEDIA is ALSO being used as a tool of the PTB to confuse inquiring minds, neutralize blowback and paralyze any possible independent protest or investigation.

    It’s a Pavlovian technique that’s little expounded upon on the internet but was unbelievably effective at preventing a counterrevolution at the time of the Khazarian takeover of Russia. Any outlier “bulldog” investigators like Wolfgang Halbig are easily handled the “mafia way” with threats to his family and person. That’s how the reality programmers in the U.S. roll…

      • wily says:

        The Bolshevik’s were small in number compared to the’white’s – it was all about shock & ah – I expect the Almighty’s shock & awe will soon blow the minds of these’s elite evil troll’s like the Rothshields/Khazar’s & Rome (Vat i can’s cesspool of Harlots) – I believe the Lord will let everyone see the corruption behind the Ce NN’s… being paid for CS (camel s#it) pseudo Fake News stories!
        The Hell w/the Bolshevik’s, notice the Gideon effect will blow the globes mind – Why did the Lord choose Gideon (knocking his army down to 300) to destroy the army of 30,000? To prove that it was the Lord (only) for the victory. The elites have been pumping huge amounts of mammon into they’re agenda & the Lord GRIN’S!
        Listen folk’s, the Lord has plans for His city & land, we shouldn’t blame every Hebrew/Jew for what the Khazar’s AND Rome (Vat) etc are doing by the one who flits! Things ain’t falling apart! They are falling together!
        The orthodox of Jacob & the secular Jews/Hebrews believe they can usher in the millennial reign w/out the One Who gave His life 2000 yrs ago. Jesus told the Pharisee’s Scribes & Saudacees (Den of Vipers) that for refusing the real deal you’ll accept the other. The Bible tells us 2/3rd’s of Israel/people will be destroyed while the (true?) Hebrew’s (these will realize who they pierced) that leave (to Petra, Egypt etc) when the anti Christ sits in the 3rd Temple claiming to be ‘I am that I am’ – I believe the Blessings (Abraham covenant & blessing Israel) there in Genesis for Her support – I got a bit off trac, but we can’t slam all the Jew’s for all the worlds troubles – The devil is behind all lies. Some say they can’t believe in the God of the Holy Bible? Why? The Bible is so mind boggling spot on with prophecy’s from eternity past & present and will be spot on w/the remaining!


        • RAW says:

          Historically speaking, the return of Jesus was, and continues to be, an imminent event.

          Any day now…

          Year 533 – “Getting the world ready for the Second Coming of Christ, Emperor Justinian sends his army to reconquer what had been parts of the Roman Empire. In North Africa he defeats the Vandals, who are Arian Christians, and he conquers territory and souls for the Church.”

          Year 1000 – “For centuries Christians have been expecting the Second Coming of Jesus – the Day of Judgment. Giving importance to a round figure such as 1000, and assuming that Jesus was born exactly one thousand years earlier, many believe this is the year that it will happen. The passing of the year leaves believers thanking God for the postponement of Armageddon.”

          Here’s a kicker for you – the ‘mandala effect’ is poised to erase this weary story line… observe closely over next few months and years as your mind goes through a memory-shift that causes events and conditions in the past to be totally forgotten. But in this case, the act of forgetting is not merely denial or amnesia: it actually changes the past. That is technically speaking reverse paramnesia. The mandala effect is very real.

          I know, I know, it will be Satan’s fault… but this is more delusion. Be thankful this narrative gets scrubbed. It’ll be the end of The Great Deception.

          Regarding the Kazars and the Bolshies (high percentage executive level Jews) – A brief history lesson…

          Year 650 – “A mid-eastern people of mixed race, the Khazars, expand westward along the north shore of the Black Sea and push Bulgars from east of the Dniester River. The Bulgars migrate south, across the Danube River, and found the kingdom that in modern times is called Bulgaria. The Khazars sell captured people, mainly Slavs – the origin of the modern English word, slave.”

          Although officially Jews have never made up more than five percent of the country’s total population,5 they played a highly disproportionate and probably decisive role in the infant Bolshevik regime, effectively dominating the Soviet government during its early years. Soviet historians, along with most of their colleagues in the West, for decades preferred to ignore this subject. The facts, though, cannot be denied.

          With the notable exception of Lenin (Vladimir Ulyanov), most of the leading Communists who took control of Russia in 1917-20 were Jews. Leon Trotsky (Lev Bronstein) headed the Red Army and, for a time, was chief of Soviet foreign affairs. Yakov Sverdlov (Solomon) was both the Bolshevik party’s executive secretary and — as chairman of the Central Executive Committee — head of the Soviet government. Grigori Zinoviev (Radomyslsky) headed the Communist International (Comintern), the central agency for spreading revolution in foreign countries. Other prominent Jews included press commissar Karl Radek (Sobelsohn), foreign affairs commissar Maxim Litvinov (Wallach), Lev Kamenev (Rosenfeld) and Moisei Uritsky.6

          sources –

          • RAW says:

            ‘The Hell w/the Bolshevik’s’ he says, inconsequential… who cares about 17m dead?

            “The total number of military and civilian casualties in World War I was more than 38 million: there were over 17 million deaths and 20 million wounded, ranking it among the deadliest conflicts in human history. The total number of deaths includes about 11 million military personnel and about 7 million civilians.”

    • dmpeters60077 says:

      good one ___________thanks

  2. Roger Doger says:

    Mano, that is some dead-bang-on great STUFF!!

  3. dmpeters60077 says:

    GOOD post Jon R

  4. truth1 says:

    I see media, TV, and movies from a different perspective. Most info comes in to us thru our eyes and ears. If something is visually displayed, along with sound, we pay more attention and we take for granted when we see and hear people that its life and reality. But what is often presented thru sight and sound it not accurate reality. It is a modified substitute, much the GMO food. Looks similar, tasted similar, but is rather harmful in the long term consumption.

    In a sitcom, the people always work things out and are always reasonable in the end and accept they were wrong or whatever. We sit back in an alpha state and take it all in without critical examination. It looks and feels so real that we never think to consider the details. “Hey, how come that does not work that way in my family?” or something like that.

    We let our guard down if someone has not taught us to be questioning and critical about what we see and hear. We trust. We trust our parents, our teachers, our friends, the News on TV, the Papers. Parents are vital. Those who become awake and aware on their own, are few. The Gov knows this. We trust instinctively when we are born. Its important for kids to trust at first. But then parents are supposed to teach us how to think and reason. They never do, though. so its pot luck after that. We either keep on trusting everyone around us or we smarten up and begin the path to enlightenment, which involved learning not to trust.

    For many, that sucker punch, that Pearl Harbor, is our first awakening that we can not always trust. And then, some never learn, not matter how many sucker punches. That’s life!

  5. Reblogged this on amnesiaclinic and commented:

  6. elliottjab says:

    Truth to the GENUINE core. And thanks again, Jon.

  7. Diogenes Shrugged says:

    “(And since the events in Sandy Hook, why haven’t we seen 20 or 30 long open interviews with parents of the schoolchildren? Who put a lid on that?)”

    Nobody put a lid on that because nobody died at Sandy Hook. This article is sheer misdirection. There were no normal people who succumbed to a television mind set. That’s because there were no normal people. None. This was a CIA operation front-to-back, staged near a long-abandoned school building. And by the way, Columbine was as phony as a three-dollar bill, too.

    Jim, I strongly recommend you take the time to see this, and THEN tell us what you think:

    You’ve provided a grasping over-analysis here based on insufficient information.

    • truth1 says:

      Spot on comments, Dio! I Appreciate them!

    • RAW says:

      Sheer misdirection? Words from an arrogant mind.

      In defense of Jon (not Jim), he did acknowledge your worldview of ‘no one died there’.

      Jon has been straight forward in all of his writings, a refreshing elixir of common sense. I challenge you to dig through any of his past work and summarize your so-called findings of misdirection. Post it here in this thread and we can go from there… hint: you’ll be wasting your time, cause you won’t find it.

  8. Sunshine says:

    Media – pure theater. We have hurricanes skirt our coasts most years. Always hope they don’t hit us. We rely on the media to report projections, where to evacuate if we need to, and when we can safely return home. In the past we’ve seen reporters dressed from head to toe in rain garb, looking like Maine fishermen, being gusseted by unseen winds and almost falling over, while couples in shorts and t-shirts walking small dogs stroll carelessly behind them while they’re broadcasting.

    Last year’s media went beyond the usual charade, though. As we were tuned into the news with the storm just off the coast, trying to find out if it was waning, picking up strength, what direction it was going, and when we could safely return home, all we could learn about was an old recording of Trump talking about what women would let men with power do to them, and that Hillary was claiming hurricanes were man made. and this on local media channels!

  9. chris says:

    Right on….and I do think the public is awakening, big time, which we need. Turn off all msm…..make them feel it.

    • truth1 says:

      I would say Christ, that you are near to right. I say don’t watch it often but don’t lose complete touch with what the masses and the enemies are being fed. it is important to keep your friends close and your enemies closer. So an occasional glance at evening new can be useful. Yes, nauseating, too. Keep a barf bag by the chair.

  10. Salliboy says:

    You’re one of the good ones JR.

    Grief, pain and outrage are universal and they generally manifest the same way for everyone. If one feels the need to balance the day’s-removed reaction to a slaughtered child in New England, one should seek out footage of war-torn regions…bombed out towns…and watch people react to the carnage. For suggestions, contact the US Army.

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.