Industrial-strength scare-propaganda: mind control

by Jon Rappoport

October 18, 2018

(To join our email list, click here.)

From time to time, I reprint my interview with Dr. Barbara Starfield. Each time I try to write a new introduction.

In this case, I’ll highlight the arbitrary nature of scare-propaganda. And by arbitrary, I mean “has a covert agenda.”

For instance, suppose you learned that a single source in the US, every year, like clockwork, kills 225,000 people. That would be 2.25 million killings per decade.

Wouldn’t you think we’d hear about it? Wouldn’t public health agencies make a big deal about it? Wouldn’t they call it an epidemic?

After all, we supposedly have a handful of “Ebola cases” in the US, and the media are hyping this “fact” to the skies.

Suppose they had far, far bigger numbers to work with? Suppose they had 225,000 deaths, not just once, but every year, as the raw material for their stories?

Suppose they could say, “We now have 225,000 deaths in the US as a result of Ebola, and the authorities are quite sure that next year, and the year after that, and every year we’re going to have 225,000 more.”

Can you imagine the reaction at every level of society? The insane panic? The madness in the streets? The attacks against institutions tasked with preventing such a cataclysm? The collapse of the stock market and the healthcare system? The predictions of the end of the world? The churches on roaring business highs?

On July 26, 2000, the Journal of the American Medical Association published Dr. Barbara Starfield’s review, “Is US health really the best in the world?”


The Starfield paper can be downloaded freely (as a .pdf) from here (via drug-education.info). The paper is fully cited as Starfield B. Is US health really the best in the world?. JAMA. 2000; 284(4):483-4.


In it, Starfield, who was a respected public health expert working at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, stated that:

* The US medical system kills 225,000 Americans a year.

* 106,000 deaths per year from FDA-approved medical drugs.

* 119,000 deaths per year from error-ridden treatment in hospitals.

I’m aware that independent research puts those death figures much higher, but I focus on Dr. Starfield’s work because no mainstream reporter or government official could challenge her credentials or the credentials of the journal that published her findings.

And yes, there were stories in the press at the time, in 2000. But the coverage wasn’t aggressive, and it faded out quickly.

And none of the mainstream coverage did the obvious extrapolations. For example, we are talking about 2.25 MILLION deaths per decade. And over a MILLION deaths per decade from medicines the FDA has approved as safe and effective.

The US government is aware. You can search for an FDA page titled, “Why Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs)?”

It states: “Over 2 MILLION serious ADRs yearly.” And “100,000 DEATHS yearly.” (The capital letters are the FDA’s, not mine.)

The FDA, of course, is the single federal agency responsible for certifying all medical drugs safe and effective before they are released for public use. They readily admit the human death-and- maiming devastation…but take no responsibility for it.


On December 6-7, 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email. Here are excerpts from that interview.

JR: What has been the level and tenor of the response to your findings, since 2000?

BS: The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.

JR: In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?

BS: The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).

JR: Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the [devastating] effects of the US medical system?

BS: NO.

JR: Since the FDA approves every medical drug given to the American people, and certifies it as safe and effective, how can that agency remain calm about the fact that these medicines are causing 106,000 deaths per year?

BS: Even though there will always be adverse events that cannot be anticipated, the fact is that more and more unsafe drugs are being approved for use. Many people attribute that to the fact that the pharmaceutical industry is (for the past ten years or so) required to pay the FDA for reviews [of its new drugs]—which puts the FDA into an untenable position of working for the industry it is regulating. There is a large literature on this.

JR: Aren’t your 2000 findings a severe indictment of the FDA and its standard practices?

BS: They are an indictment of the US health care industry: insurance companies, specialty and disease-oriented medical academia, the pharmaceutical and device manufacturing industries, all of which contribute heavily to re-election campaigns of members of Congress. The problem is that we do not have a government that is free of influence of vested interests. Alas, [it] is a general problem of our society—which clearly unbalances democracy.

JR: Can you offer an opinion about how the FDA can be so mortally wrong about so many drugs?

BS: Yes, it cannot divest itself from vested interests. (Again, [there is] a large literature about this, mostly unrecognized by the people because the industry-supported media give it no attention.)

JR: Would it be correct to say that, when your JAMA study was published in 2000, it caused a momentary stir and was thereafter ignored by the medical community and by pharmaceutical companies?

BS: Are you sure it was a momentary stir? I still get at least one email a day asking for a reprint—ten years later! The problem is that its message is obscured by those that do not want any change in the US health care system.

JR: Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?

BS: No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies. Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated.

JR: Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?

BS: It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!

JR: Do the 106,000 deaths from medical drugs only involve drugs prescribed to patients in hospitals, or does this statistic also cover people prescribed drugs who are not in-patients in hospitals?

BS: I tried to include everything in my estimates. Since the commentary was written, many more dangerous drugs have been added to the marketplace.

—end of interview excerpt—


Comment: Hyping death is an industry. It cuts two ways. The people who do the scare-propaganda also delete the uncomfortable truths.

As always, they are fronting for an agenda.

They are inventing reality for the public.

Reality-invention is the biggest business in the world.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Destroy Trump for opposing NAFTA

by Jon Rappoport

September 3, 2018

(To join our email list, click here.)

NAFTA…The North American Free Trade Agreement…born on January 1, 1994…it’s a deal among the governments of the U S, Mexico and Canada.

One group has stated:

“Negotiated behind closed doors with hundreds of official corporate advisors, NAFTA was radically different than past trade deals that focused on traditional trade matters, like cutting border taxes. Instead, most of NAFTA’s provisions grant new powers and privileges to multinational corporations.”

So Trump recently spoke out decisively against NAFTA—and as in any situation where he speaks at all, he’s attacked by the press.

Here is a pop quiz. Here are three statements about NAFTA. You decide who uttered them.

ONE: “…most of NAFTA’s provisions grant new powers and privileges to multinational corporations. These new powers make it easier for corporations to outsource jobs…NAFTA’s ‘investor protections’ create incentives for corporations to relocate production and jobs elsewhere. Indeed, the U.S. has lost more than 950,000 American jobs due to NAFTA, according to the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) database.”

“Plus, NAFTA guts the Buy American policies that require the government to buy American-made goods when spending our tax dollars. This outsources our tax dollars rather than investing them to create jobs here.”

“NAFTA has also lowered U.S. wages, increased inequality, and hurt U.S. manufacturing and agriculture in all 50 states. At the same time, it has decimated the Mexican economy, driving millions from their homes.”

TWO: “I will fundamentally rewrite NAFTA, other trade agreements…Not only did I oppose permanent normal trade relations with China, I stood with Steel workers and united electrical workers in opposition to it…Normalized trade with China cost us 3.2 million jobs including over 120,000 here in Pennsylvania.”

THREE: “Remember, NAFTA was one of the WORST Trade Deals ever made. The U.S. lost thousands of businesses and millions of jobs. We were far better off before NAFTA – should never have been signed. Even the Vat Tax was not accounted for. We make new deal or go back to pre-NAFTA!”

OK? Ready with your answers? Yes, you guessed correctly from recognizing the rhetoric—statement 3 was written by President Trump (an additional part to that statement was also tweeted here).

Statement 1 was written by Lori Wallach, who works for Ralph Nader’s group, Public Citizen, which is decidedly on the political Left. And statement number 2 was made by none other than presidential candidate and avowed socialist, Bernie Sanders.

What’s the main difference between these three characters? Wallach and Sanders can say anything they want to, and the amount of heat coming their way is relatively minor. No matter what Trump says, he gets heat. And yet…

On this MAJOR issue, NAFTA, and free-trade treaties in general, Wallach, Sanders, and Trump are in agreement. They all see the insanity and criminality. A socialist, a far-left activist, and a bull capitalist.

Thus demonstrating that, for the press, it matters not what you say, it only matters who they decide you are.

And they decide who you are according to an agenda. Whose agenda? Simple: Rockefeller Globalists, who love free trade treaties, who have spent decades crafting them and foisting them on the public, who see President Trump as a wild card unpredictable swaggering cowboy…


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Socialism equals triumph for corporate criminals

by Jon Rappoport

August 29, 2018

(To join our email list, click here.)

In several recent articles, I’ve exposed the myth that socialism is a revolution of and for the people. (‘socialism’ archive here)

I’ve presented evidence that socialism is actually a movement owned, operated, and funded by ultra-wealthy elites.

Dupes, foot soldiers, blind idealists, indoctrinated students, and low-level thugs are recruited through cutouts to serve the agenda of Rockefeller Globalists, for example, who are determined to bring about worldwide socialism.

Socialism, in a nutshell, equals ultra-rich elites (represented by the Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg, etc.) owning the free market, cutting out competition, and creating more powerful, overarching, central governments.

Hidden in the plan is the granting of greater dominion to mega-corporations. This is a key fact.

The US Constitution was a document that established extremely limited central government. Regardless of the motives of the authors and the state legislatures that ratified it, the ideas contained in the Constitution were, and are, extremely oppressive toward large centralized structures controlling the people.

But there was another factor present at the beginning of the American Republic.

At the dawn of the United States, corporations were chartered and thus allowed to operate by the individual states. If a corporation, in the eyes of a state legislature, violated a basic trust by harming the people, committing offenses against the citizenry, the legislature could summarily cancel their charter and literally exile them from the state.

This power followed, in part, from the fact that corporations were not and are not individuals. They do not have the rights and freedoms of individuals. Corporations were not granted the rights of citizens in the Constitution.

Richard Grossman, an activist and scholar of US corporate history, unearthed and made lucid these facts.

At the birth of the American Republic, therefore, there was a double limitation on power. Central government and corporations were both strapped and shackled.

Of course, just as the federal government has been allowed to expand like an unchecked fungus, so has corporate power.

Under socialism (aka Globalism), mega-corporate power is the prow of a ship that sails on and on and conquers the economies of the world.

Corporate crimes go unpunished.

Contrary to popular belief, the real agenda of socialism has nothing to do with prosecuting those crimes.

The idea, for example, that greater socialism in America would defeat Monsanto is ludicrous in the extreme.

Monsanto is one of the components of actual socialism—the real, not the fake, version.

Again, socialism is by, for, and of the ultra-wealthy elites. It is not a movement on behalf of the downtrodden.

As Gary Allen puts it in his 1971 classic, None Dare call It Conspiracy: “…pressure from above and pressure from below… The pressure from above comes from secret, ostensibly respectable Comrades in the government and [elite Globalist] Establishment, forming, with the radicalized mobs in the streets below, a giant pincer around middle-class society. The street rioters are pawns, shills, puppets, and dupes for an oligarchy of elitist conspirators working above to turn America’s limited government into an unlimited government with total control over our lives and property.”

“The American middle class is being squeezed to death by a vise. In the streets we have avowed revolutionary groups… Virtually all members of these groups sincerely believe that they are fighting the Establishment. In reality they are an indispensable ally of the Establishment in fastening Socialism on all of us. The naive radicals think that under Socialism the ‘people’ will run everything. Actually, it will be a clique of Insiders in total control, consolidating and controlling all wealth. That is why these schoolboy Lenins and teenage Trotskys are allowed to roam free and are practically never arrested or prosecuted. They are protected. If the Establishment wanted the revolutionaries stopped, how long do you think they would be tolerated?”

Gary Allen wrote that passage in 1971. Does it ring a familiar bell now?


As philosopher George Santayana famously wrote in 1905, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Equally famous is the prescription for all advertising: repeat the same message over and over, so it sinks into the mind and forms a false impression of truth.

Thus it has been with the basic message of socialism. “This is a form of government that finally serves the people. It is the people rising up to take the reins of power.”

Once that notion is rigidly fixed in consciousness, it is impossible to believe socialism is actually emanating from the elite of the elite.

Fortunately, more and more people are waking up to the basic con of fake news, which doesn’t only broadcast distorted current events spooling out through screens, day by day.

Basic themes of fake news also span decades and even centuries.

What will happen when enough young people, who want to tear down the structures of the monopolists, realize those same men are bankrolling them in the streets?

What will happen when these young people realize their teachers and mentors and handlers and professors have been feeding them the precise reverse of the truth?

As long as independent media continue to proliferate, that day is coming.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Life and death in the fake news business

by Jon Rappoport

August 23, 2018

(To join our email list, click here.)

I wrote this piece based on my knowledge of mainstream reporters and their work, their lives, their forgotten hopes, their realizations (in some cases) that they’re trapped in a system.

Most of them don’t want to get out. They become creatures of the night they once wanted to illuminate.

You’re a mainstream reporter striving to stay afloat. The word has drifted down from the top that this is the season for inflicting wounds on Donald Trump, no matter what, no matter what happened or didn’t happen on a rumpled bed in a hotel room in Moscow, no matter what Putin did or didn’t do to influence the election, no matter who leaked the DNC emails to WikiLeaks, no matter what Michael Flynn said or didn’t say to a Russian on the phone, no matter who or what James Comey is fronting for; every real or possible or non-existent detail needs to be blown up into a gigantic scandal of the moment, this president has to go, and your assignment is to keep cutting him, it’s beyond the point where anybody in your business cares who he is and what he’s done and what he’s doing, so pump up the hysteria, shove in the blade wherever you can, THIS is how your success will be measured, you want a light to shine on you, so attack, attack without let-up, don’t think, don’t think about what’s going on here, the important thing is:

The news business is: careers.

Having a career is life. Losing it is death.

Your career is on the line.

It doesn’t matter what you’ve done over the years, what you’ve written, what you’ve said, this is the big one.

You can’t lose your career.

You know what losing it means.

It means the end.

Losing your career is hanging around a bar until closing time and silently cursing the boss and the other reporters who are climbing faster up the ladder, it’s worrying about where the next story is coming from and how it can zing the editor’s brain so he grunts with satisfaction like an ape on a little throne, it’s all the while knowing that NO ONE at the newspaper or the network can put out a piece that will cause serious ripples in the behind-the-curtain power structure, and you know that because in the past, in what was supposed to be your finest hour, you carefully peeled just one glove from the body of a scandal that should have been stripped entirely naked for the public to see and then you were stopped; suddenly, for you, losing a career is desperately clinging to the biased political stance of the news division, clinging to it as if it were a message from God, it’s taking a piece of info that smells like a rotten slug from an anonymous source and turning it into caviar because it decorates a story that has no foundation whatsoever, it’s pruriently hinting in a story that the enemy, as defined by the editorial staff and the publisher and the corporation that owns the soul of the publisher, is a despicable traitor who should be carted off in the middle of the night and dumped on a boat to the 10th circle of Hell, it’s being wired into who at the news division is moving up and who is moving down, who is the teacher’s pet and who is the bad boy at the back of the room, it’s scouting out jobs that are coming up at rival networks, it’s knowing when dreaded staff layoffs are emerging over the horizon and how flimsy the severance packages will be, it’s grinding on preposterous assignments that have no function other than filling space, it’s pretending one political party or another will stave off the end of civilization, it’s your paycheck that handles the mortgage and the kid’s college fund although how does the kid get into college when he can’t even write a coherent paragraph unless he plagiarizes it from Wikipedia, it’s finally getting your teeth into a good story only to be told there’ll be no follow-up and you know exactly why because you know which person or corporation or advertiser would be rammed into handcuffs if you dug down a foot deeper, it’s forgetting you were once smart and sharp and alert and ready to roll as a member of the fourth estate on a mission to protect the public from the raging excesses of government, it’s sitting for a half-hour with a Congressman and listening to him lie so extensively you can’t believe he knows he’s lying anymore because if he did know, how could he consciously keep up the charade every waking moment, it’s looking at THE elite anchor of your network and knowing he’s a complete cartoon of an ego on parade, it’s wondering how the public even in the depths of its trance can believe what is coming out of the mouth of that ego, it’s lying in bed at night not recalling whether you took a sleeping pill, it’s tearing the cap off a bottle of antidepressant with shaking fingers after coming out of the drug store where you filled the prescription and swallowing a pill and three hours later sitting in your work-cubbyhole thinking with great and rising surety that you want to burn down the newsroom, it’s standing in the kitchen of your silent apartment remembering you wrote a paper in college about the 1776 revolution although you can’t bring back one word of it now, it’s rubbing elbows with celebrities at a cocktail party on the Upper East Side and sensing a few B-listers are giving you a quick once-over to gauge whether you can do them any good and deciding you can’t, it’s having a dream you’re drowning in your bathtub and your editor is standing above you grinning with pistols in his hands, it’s sitting in the antiseptic office of a therapist who is telling you that getting a dog as a friend will rescue your state of mind, it’s standing in the newsroom on election night watching so-called analysts on big screens talking numbers and trends and possible outcomes and you’re thinking you’re supposed to be on the screen yourself but it hasn’t worked out that way, it’s wondering whether selling Porches or hawking real estate would be a better option at this point, it’s wondering by what method you would commit the oh so grand gesture of suicide, because it should be grand, it should have some significance in the scheme of things, it can’t be a mere disappearance, can it, there would at least be a need for some sort of plan, would it be gun or slit wrist or rope or leap—and then you laugh—AND WHY DOES IT SOUND LIKE MUSIC—and then, THEN you recall that in your desk drawer there is a fat folder full of documents proving a major prime-cut number one advertiser for your newspaper, a major advertiser and a colossus apparently beyond the reach of any president with its far-flung global interests in brain-crippling pharmaceuticals and carcinogenic pesticides and real estate and banking is also—and how perfect is THIS—is also a giant HOG-RAISING FACTORY (millions and millions of oinking pigs) that has polluted the soil of half a southern state with hundreds of toxic chemicals and untold numbers and types of germs and the corporation has bribed its way into permission to create gigantic hog-feces lagoons that sit out in the sunlight year after year festering and percolating and seeping down into the groundwater and poisoning every form of life, and you sit there and nod to yourself and open the drawer and take out that fat folder of documents and you find a piece of blank paper and without thinking you write a brief note of resignation to your ape editor and you stand up and walk out of the newsroom carrying the folder and you hit the night street and walk along with the surging crowds and you feel your blood coursing through your veins and you realize there are a few tears on your cheeks and you grin a savage grin and head home to write the story that will rip that hog-colossus a deep wound and you look up at the moon and a shiver goes through your body, it’s almost midnight but it’s not your midnight, all of a sudden a cockeyed sun is coming up for you between big buildings and through some strange unfathomable equation you’re hitting your stride because you just lost your career and a new and unnameable SPACE is swimming into view, and you’re already writing the first paragraph of the REAL story and THIS is the drama you were imagining so long ago, so long ago when you believed in working a real beat as a real newsman…

OR…

IS THAT ALL A FANTASY, MR. NEWSMAN?

YOUR CHOICE.

YOUR CHAPTER ONE.

OR YOUR END.

YOUR CHOICE.

It’s life or death in the news business.


Exit From the Matrix

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


Jon Rappoport

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

The war to destroy Alex Jones, Part 2

The war to destroy Alex Jones, Part 2

Many strange things can be implemented on the basis of “protecting the herd.”

by Jon Rappoport

August 8, 2018

(To join our email list, click here.)

(For Part 1, click here) (For Part 3, click here)

“You see, censorship is good if the person being censored is someone you don’t like. That’s right. You didn’t know that, did you? That’s the secret meaning of the 1st Amendment.”

—Here is how foul the political air is now, how low the ‘logic’ has sunk. If you don’t agree that Facebook censoring a particular person is a good thing, then you must be supporting that censored person. You must be on his side. There is no middle ground. There is no Bill of Rights. There is only like and hate, and hate implies there is a target to be censored—

Whole generations are being raised to think of censorship as a pleasant solution to speech they don’t like, people they don’t like, ideas they don’t like.

I’ve received an email outlining reasons not to like Alex Jones. It stopped short of saying he should be censored. Instead, it accused me of supporting him. Which of course ISN’T THE ISSUE. The issue is, should Jones be banned.

Several generations know NOTHING about the 1st Amendment or corporate monopoly of the news. All they know is: “shut bad people up.”

You could run the following Noam Chomsky quote by such people and see what reaction you get: “If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely for views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech.”

The reaction you’d get? Some form of non-comprehension. In the case of the massive social-media banning of Alex Jones that occurred yesterday, these know-nothings would say: “Good. I’m glad he’s censored.”

But if social media giants can ban Jones, they can move right along to another target. They can decide that anyone who speaks out against vaccination is a danger to the community and must be silenced. They can decide anyone who defends Russia for any reason is by implication a Trump supporter, and a menace, and should have his social media presence diminished; perhaps covertly.

Many strange things can be implemented on the basis of “protecting the herd.”

The animals in the herd have a boss and if they obey the boss all goes well. The boss knows what language they should be exposed to, and what language they shouldn’t encounter. The boss understands the herd’s needs.

The Washington Examiner: “Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., is calling on other tech companies to ban more sites like InfoWars, and says the survival of American democracy depends on it.”

“’Infowars is the tip of a giant iceberg of hate and lies that uses sites like Facebook and YouTube to tear our nation apart. These companies must do more than take down one website. The survival of our democracy depends on it’,” Murphy tweeted Monday.

So ignorance of the 1st Amendment easily reaches as high as the US senate. Who is this moron, Chris Murphy? What lies is he talking about? What hate? Let’s see the examples and the evidence—unless Murphy isn’t a standard moron at all. He’s a Democrat pushing an agenda: get rid of Alex Jones because Jones is a threat to the political Left.

Major media, in particular, have their knives out for Jones, because he is taking away chunks of their audience, and they have no solution for it—except to appeal to their social media brethren to censor Jones, block him, and declare war against him.

In this day and age, the easiest way to do that is to say a person is a hater and a bigot and a violator of community standards. It falls out this way: “MR. JONES, YOU’VE INSULTED SO MANY GROUPS AND RAISED SUCH HATRED AGAINST THEM, WE’RE CENSORING YOU AND BANNING YOU. YOU’RE SUCH A PARIAH THE SPIRIT OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT DOESN’T APPLY TO YOU.”

What Jones, IN TOTALITY, has actually been doing and saying for the past couple of decades is another matter entirely. You’re not supposed to explore that. You’re not supposed to go to Infowars.com and find out, because you might become exposed to dangerous thoughts or facts. You’re supposed to pretend you know what’s happening at infowars by listening to its critics and leave it at that. You’re supposed to be incurious and oblivious and, therefore, a “perfect citizen.”

You’re supposed to be apathetic about censorship.

IF YOU DON’T LIKE A PERSON FOR ANY REASON, YOU’RE NOT SUPPOSED TO CARE IF THEY’RE CENSORED.

“Well, you see, Jones is not a good person. Therefore, ban him. Yes. Who cares? And if anyone is against banning him, they are supporting him and they’re bad, too.”

“That new criminal running around? He just posted a piece about keeping Mein Kampf on library shelves and not banning Hitler. That means he supports Hitler and Hitler’s ideas. So he is a copy of Hitler. Ban him. Censor him. Excommunicate him.”

“Colored people don’t like Little Black Sambo. Burn it. White people don’t feel good about Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Burn it.” (Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451 (1953).

“The FCC, the Federal Communications Commission, decided all by itself that radio and television were the only two parts of American life not protected by the free speech provisions of the first amendment to the Constitution. I’d like to repeat that, because it sounds… vaguely important! The FCC—an appointed body, not elected, answerable only to the president—decided on its own that radio and television were the only two parts of American life not protected by the first amendment to the Constitution. Why did they decide that? Because they got a letter from a minister in Mississippi! A Reverend Donald Wildman in Mississippi heard something on the radio that he didn’t like. Well, Reverend, did anyone ever tell you there are two KNOBS on the radio? Two. Knobs. On the radio. Of course, I’m sure the reverend isn’t that comfortable with anything that has two knobs on it… But hey, reverend, there are two knobs on the radio! One of them turns the radio OFF, and the other one [slaps his head] CHANGES THE STATION! Imagine that, reverend, you can actually change the station! It’s called freedom of choice, and it’s one of the principles this country was founded upon. Look it up in the library, reverend, if you have any of them left when you’ve finished burning all the books.” (George Carlin, 1988)

“To whom do you award the right to decide which speech is harmful, or who is the harmful speaker? Or to determine in advance what are the harmful consequences going to be that we know enough about in advance to prevent? To whom would you give this job? To whom are you going to award the task of being the censor?…To whom you would delegate the task of deciding for you what you could read? To whom you would give the job of deciding for you – relieve you of the responsibility of hearing what you might have to hear? Do you know anyone? Hands up. Do you know anyone to whom you’d give this job? Does anyone have a nominee?” (Christopher Hitchens, 2006)


Here are links to go to, to listen to the Alex Jones show now:

Live stream: 9am to Noon ET:
http://streams.infowars.com/realnews

Live stream: Noon to 4pm ET:
http://streams.infowars.com/alexjones

Live stream: 4pm to 7pm ET:
http://streams.infowars.com/warroom

Additionally, here:
https://www.infowars.com/watch-alex-jones-show/


power outside the matrix

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Trump, the NY Times, and fake news

by Jon Rappoport

July 30, 2018

(To join our email list, click here.)

—Major newspapers will, now and then, break big stories. But then they’ll walk away from them. The follow-up leads are obvious. But no. Those leads would result in some SERIOUS revelations about IMPORTANT PEOPLE. So forget it. It’s one and done—

We’re in the middle of an escalating information-war.

Trump and Sulzberger, the NY Times publisher, meet, talk, and then launch charges at each other. Sulzberger claims Trump’s attacks on MSM could result in violence against journalists.

Like him or hate him, Trump is threatening the media monopoly as no other modern president has.

Social media are shadow-banning and censoring voices perceived as pro-Trump.

I thought I’d boil a few things down and simplify them for AG Sulzberger, the 37-year-old publisher of the Times.

He and his paper are fake for several reasons—one is, they don’t follow up on their own best stories. It’s called continuing investigation—and they don’t do it. It’s their duty, and they are grossly derelict.

Two examples, both from the spring of 2015. On April 23, the Times ran a story under the headline: “Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal.” The piece made an excellent circumstantial case for Hillary and Bill as key players in a criminal scheme to sell 20% of US uranium to Putin.

But…no serious follow up. No deeper investigation. No pressure on the players. Just one and done.

Ditto for a 3/15/15 Times story, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” The article details a revolutionary candidate for next-generation vaccines—injecting synthesized genes into the body to “protect against disease”—and thereby permanently altering the vaccine recipient’s DNA.

The story is nothing less than a revelation about a plan—right out in the open—to do genetic engineering on billions of humans who get vaccinated. No speculation necessary.

And again, no follow up. No deeper digging. No pressure on the vaccine researchers and their funders.

Here is the same pattern, from the Times’ chief competitor, the Washington Post (9/4/13), “When the US looked the other way on chemical weapons”: “…The administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush authorized the sale to Iraq of numerous items…including poisonous chemicals and deadly biological viruses, such as anthrax and bubonic plague…”

Mind-boggling. The US government, using a non-profit called the American Type Culture Collection and the US Centers for Disease Control (!), shipped dozens of biowarfare materials to Iraq in the 1980s.

No follow up. No further ongoing investigation. No laying open the corrupt CDC.

Here’s another Post story—October 15, 2017, “The Drug Industry’s Triumph Over the DEA”: “In April 2016, at the height of the deadliest drug epidemic in U.S. history, Congress effectively stripped the Drug Enforcement Administration of its most potent weapon against large drug companies suspected of spilling [trafficking] prescription [opioid] narcotics onto the nation’s streets.”

This piece is a blockbuster. It indicts virtually every member of Congress, and Obama, for passing a law hamstringing enforcement in the fight against the biggest opioid traffickers, pharmaceutical companies. But again, no ongoing digging. No pressure on members of Congress to repeal the 2016 law they passed, a law which keeps the DEA from busting Pharma executives and freezing illegal opioid shipments.

Here is where the Post could go with that story (but won’t) in an ongoing way:

“So, Senator, why haven’t you introduced a new bill to cancel the damaging one you helped pass in 2016? In your home state, the latest reports show there are at least 100,000 opioid addicts, 800 of whom have died. Don’t you want to let the DEA do its job? What are you waiting for?”

“This is outrageous. You’re accusing me of—“

“We’ve conducted a poll in your state. Your constituents want to know what you’re doing. So tell them…”

“I’m very active.”

“How? Exactly how are you active? Yesterday, we interviewed the mayor of your home town. He’s a Democrat like you. He says you’ve done nothing to stem the tide. We’ve put together a list of pharmaceutical money you’ve taken over the past ten years…”

This is why the Times and the Post and other similar mainstream outlets are fake.

Outrageously fake.

They have the resources and the reporters, but they don’t follow up on the most crucial stories they cover.

They refuse. They “move on.”

If they’ll comment at all on this glaring dereliction of duty, it’s: “Well, we already covered that.” “It’s old news.” “Our readers aren’t interested in that anymore.” “Mounting an ongoing investigation would cross the line into making the news instead of reporting on it.” Etc., etc.

All lies.

Mr. Sulzberger, who was handed the job publishing the NY Times by his family, should stop worrying about the Trump effect and just do journalism.

Of course he won’t, because he’s fake.

He has no intention of getting to the bottom of things in a way that would upset some very powerful apple carts.

He knows it, we know it.

And oh yes, one other thing, via Gateway Pundit: “NYT Publisher Complains to Trump About ‘Potential’ Violence Against Journalists – Ignores Over 500 Violent Attacks on Trump Supporters.” “There have been over 538 violent attacks against Trump supporters since the 2016 election season.”

Is Mr. Sulzberger interested?


power outside the matrix

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


Jon Rappoport

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

Washington Post-CIA connections: back to basics

by Jon Rappoport

July 26, 2018

(To join our email list, click here.)

There are now hundreds of supposed “facts” which prove Russia influenced the 2016 US election. I thought I’d go back to a few basics…

“The CIA says” is never a great way to start a sentence. But that’s one basis of the charge that Russia “hacked” the US presidential election.

Members of Congress were secretly briefed by the CIA on “the Russian affair,” and media, led by the Washington Post, ran with the story that Russia influenced the US election on the side of Trump.

Major media outlets are happy to cite the CIA as an authority—conveniently ignoring the fact that people in the intelligence field are taught to lie. It’s their stock in trade.

You might remember the Washington Post’s role in defaming and destroying Gary Webb, who, in 1996, published a series of articles in the Mercury News about the CIA seeding black Los Angeles neighborhoods with crack cocaine. The Post basically asked the CIA whether the charge was true, and when the Agency denied it, the Post attacked Webb as a “fake news” reporter. The same Washington Post led the campaign to tie the Russian government to Hillary Clinton’s defeat. And the Post, once again, used unproven statements from the CIA to back up their claim.

I could go on and on about the Post and its historic CIA ties. But now, right now, the owner of the Post is Jeff Bezos, who also owns Amazon. And Amazon has a $600 million contract to provide the CIA cloud computing services.

Boom.

Ordinarily, that would be called a fatal conflict of interest, whenever the Post opens up its yap about the CIA in any context.

However, mainstream news outlets, the very big ones, don’t go around criticizing each other’s ownerships; so the Bezos-CIA relationship is conveniently ignored.

An honest lead paragraph on Russia-CIA-Trump allegations in the Post, however, would start this way:

“Our paper is owned by Jeff Bezos, and Jeff is making $600 million to provide the CIA with computing services, so take everything below with a grain of salt the size of Langley.”

Going one step further, Amazon and the CIA are both in the data-collecting business. What are the chances that Amazon, in the interest of “national security,” has been sharing its massive customer data with the CIA and other US intelligence agencies?

This should lead to another conflict-of-interest statement from the Washington Post: “As you read any article in our paper, keep in mind that our owner may be data-mining you and passing the information to the CIA. Have a nice day.”

Am I being too hard on Amazon? Do they have the basic guts to stand up to the intelligence community and resist its demands? Here is what author Norman Solomon had to say about that in 2014 (Huffington Post):

“Amazon’s trajectory into the CIA’s spooky arms may be a bit more than just corporate eagerness to land a lucrative contract. In late 2010 — amid intense public interest in documents that WikiLeaks was posting to illuminate U.S. actions overseas — Amazon took a notable step. As the Guardian reported at the time, Amazon ‘pulled the plug on hosting the whistleblowing website in reaction to heavy political pressure.’

“It didn’t take much for Amazon to cave. ‘The company announced it was cutting WikiLeaks off … only 24 hours after being contacted by the staff of Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senate’s committee on homeland security,’ the Guardian noted.”

Let’s see. In 2010, Amazon cuts off WikiLeaks, proving its willingness to cave to the intelligence community.

In 2013, Jeff Bezos, the owner of Amazon, buys the Washington Post.

In 2016, during the presidential campaign, WikiLeaks releases tons of email data exposing Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee, and associated players.

In 2016, after Clinton loses, the CIA—now Amazon’s business partner, and by extension, the Washington Post’s business partner—tells the Post that Russia influenced the election on behalf of Trump, and also implies/asserts that Russian hackers supplied WikiLeaks with those tons of email data…

And the Washington Post accepts what its business partner, the CIA, is saying at face value and then leads the charge to blame Russia for handing the election to Trump.

The Post doubles down and absurdly accuses numerous sites and blogs of being a) “fake” and b) conscious or unconscious dupes of the Russian government.

A nice neat package.

Who exactly is the fake news outlet?


The Matrix Revealed

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


Jon Rappoport

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