Ten essential elements of a covert op

Ten essential elements of a covert op

by Jon Rappoport

December 12, 2017

I’m talking about major covert ops, not small ones.

ONE: Compartmentalization.

The tasks necessary to carrying out the operation are divided among players at different levels. In a successful op, these groups of players are unaware of each other. They wouldn’t be able to confess to more than their own roles.

And in many cases, the disparate players would never believe they were part of an op. They would swear they were “doing good”—as, for example, in medical research that was—unknown to the researchers—actually designed to obscure a chemical attack on a population, by locating a virus as the false culprit. By training and by general stupidity, the researchers are always predisposed to finding a virus. The last thing on their minds is that they’re part of an op.

TWO: Gaining tremendous media coverage for the effect of the op (even exaggerating the effects), while hiding the cause and the players who planned it.

THREE: Blaming the wrong people as the originators of the op. Relentlessly discrediting truth tellers who see what’s really going on.

FOUR: Developing and promoting a false cover story to describe the details of the op; in many cases, those details are wrong. For example, the famous truck bomb parked at the curb of the Murrah Federal Building on April 19, 1995, did most assuredly not cause the human and property destruction that ensued. There were bombs inside the building.

FIVE: Laying down false trails for investigators and independent researchers. In the wake of the JFK assassination, we saw the emergence of many, many “alternative” scenarios. Some of that “information” was designed to lead into dead-end alleys—after much time and frustration.

SIX: At least several goals. In any large covert op, there are a few different objectives, at different levels. For example, certain players gain an increase in status; profits for the elite planners; control of market share; demonizing of opponents; general demoralization of the population. Arguments over “the real purpose” of an op are often misguided. There was never just one purpose.

SEVEN: Testing public response. After an op, analysts are tasked with assessing the public reaction. Did most people buy the official scenario? What objections were raised? Who raised them? An effort is made to be as precise as possible. What lessons were learned that can be applied to the next op?

EIGHT: Controlled opposition. This aspect involves infiltrating independent voices with plants, who try to take charge of unofficial and truthful narrative and steer it AWAY from the truth.

Among the plants are people who promote the most absurd theories possible about the op. And then there are those plants who accuse everyone who doesn’t agree with them of being “CIA agents.”

Note: Several of these functions are actually carried out by people who aren’t plants at all. They’re just crazy and/or desperate egomaniacs. They obtain their highest degree of satisfaction from making accusations against innocent people and inventing sleights against themselves. They live in an unenviable sewer.

NINE: Distraction. After a covert op, the government and the press will sometimes promote and pump a new story, concerning a different “sensational event”—and lean on it for a period of time sufficient to distract the public from the original op.

TEN: Limited hangout. This strategy involves seeding a cover story with some bit of truth to attract the unwary, in hopes that they will buy the whole cover. Or, admitting to a watered down piece of truth about the op itself, to “let off steam” and make it seem as if the whole op has been exposed.

These ten elements (there are more) are standard. They’re not esoteric. Any intelligence agency deploys them in a variety of situations.

For the most part, the press simply takes dictation and reports what front men for covert ops want reported. Of course, the press is seeded with intell assets.

How does a researcher deal with these ten elements? He drills down below the cover story to discover the core facts about the op. He isn’t diverted by the distractions and the fake news.

He must be ready to find some mind-boggling truths at the core and accept what he finds.

Having discovered the core, he can then “reverse engineer” the op and see how it was put together. He can see who benefited at various levels.

In my 1987-8 investigation of AIDS/HIV, what lay at the core was the fact that the virus had never been shown to cause anything. Nor was it a reasonable candidate as a disease agent.

From there, I could assemble the multiple purposes of the op and see who was benefiting. I could separate the dupes and pawns and true believers from the actual operators.

My research uncovered a formidable structure of hierarchical power.

Fortunately, I and other independent researchers who were arriving at different conclusions managed to maintain a cordial relationship, instead of sniping at each other. The few times I encountered megalomaniacs, I basically ignored them. It was a good lesson to learn.

A final note for now: just because ops are covert, that doesn’t mean they are well executed. Quite often the operators make blunders. In that case, the following cover-up carries the freight of mistakes and smooths them out by concocting fantasies that are relayed to the press, and in turn, to the public. And even then, the cover-up can fail to impress intelligent observers. However, through repetition, and by using “experts,” the mainstream media keeps promoting the cover story. In the end, it is the sheer monopolistic power of the press that functions as the ultimate cover.

That is why I named this site NoMoreFakeNews.com 16 years ago. Because that blunt power needs to be dismantled.

We are in the middle of a sea change, where that very thing is happening.


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.

The collapse of major media

The collapse of major media

by Jon Rappoport

December 11, 2017

As I indicated in a recent article, the B-team, or even the C-team, is now heading up the national evening news in America. These anchors’ faces and voices (Muir, Glor, and Holt) are not even faint reminders of the so-called Golden Age, when father figures like Cronkite and Reasoner fed official truth into the brains of viewers. The new C-team is vague gloss from a paint job on a used car. This is an ominous sign for the news bosses in the upstairs suites. They can’t find adequate hypnotists anymore.

What happened?

Many things—among them, the father figures left the fold. They decided to sell real estate or take corporate work in PR. They saw the handwriting on the wall: the networks were fostering a youth movement, seeking younger and prettier talent. Why? Because Madison Avenue was convinced the younger viewer demographic was the important one, in terms of consumer buying power. Therefore, on-air news faces had to be younger as well. This sounded right, but it overlooked one vital fact. The young news anchors couldn’t pull off the appropriate level of mind control. They were merely bland robots. Friendly, nice, literate to the point of being able read copy. (Lester Holt at NBC is a bit older, but he comes across as a corpse someone dug up at a cemetery for a role in a Frankenstein remake.)

There is another gross miscalculation. The commercials, between news segments, are overwhelmingly pharmaceutical. Those drugs aren’t intended for the youth demographic. They’re for the middle-aged and the seniors, who want to toxify themselves for the rest of their lives.

So the commercials are playing to the older crowd, while the faces of the news are supposedly attracting younger viewers. It’s a mess. The news execs and programmers really have no idea what they’re doing.

They’re basically hoping their game somehow lasts until they can retire.

There’s more.

Terrified by “visionary” Ted Turner, who started CNN as a 24/7 cable news outlet in 1980, NBC decided they had to spin off their own cable news channel. This move, on its own, splintered the unitary hypnotic effect of having one anchor deliver one version of the news to one audience. Suddenly, there were several hypnotists on stage, all talking at once. It was a disaster in the making.

Then you had the various financial news channels, and FOX, and the sports channels, and the weather channel, and Bloomberg, and C-SPAN, etc. Plus all the local news outlets.

This fragmentation began to erode the programmed mind of the viewer. If, hoping to retreat to an earlier time, he sought out one face and one voice and one great father figure on ANY of these channels, he came up empty. The archetype was gone.

In a pinch, a viewer on the political right might opt for Bill O’Reilly, and a viewer on the Globalist left might choose Charlie Rose. But they’re both out of the picture now.

Enter, from stage left, the goo-goo behemoth, the CIA- connected Facebook, which, amidst building a tower of likes for infantile posts, is trying to convince its adherents that it IS the Internet and a source of tailored news that is sufficient unto the day. Unanchored news. No single voice or face.

Big media, in all its forms, has lost the mind control war.

It has lost it from inside itself.

Into the vacuum have swept the million voices of independent media. I’ve written about that revolution at length, and won’t recap it here.

Instead, consider the Youth Phenomenon. You could peg it at the Beatles’ US invasion of 1964.

Why? Because that was the moment when children began to be entertained by other children. Seriously, deeply, religiously.

Add in the drugs, and other factors, and you had the groundswell of the 1960s.

Stay young forever. Never grow up. Adults are dull dolts.

These children eventually became parents, and their children became parents…and you have the whole generation-to-generation, societal, eternal-youth package. “I want to be young. I want to be happy forever.”

How do you sell these people the news?

You put a nice face on it.

And you lose the hypnosis.

You still have all the lies and cover-ups and diversions and omissions…but the trance element at the core grows weaker over time.

Like the snowfall from a great blizzard, the aftermath shows patches of snow disappearing, piece by piece.

This is happening, and the news titans can do nothing to stop it.

It’s a long-term trend, and it’s called good news.


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.

The evening news and the gunslinger called Trump

The evening news and the gunslinger called Trump

by Jon Rappoport

December 8, 2017

Every television newscast: staged reality

The news is all about manipulating the context of stories. The thinner the context, the thinner the mind must become to accept it. If you want to visualize this, imagine a rectangular solid. The news covers the top surface. Therefore, the mind is trained to work in only two dimensions. Then it can’t fathom depth, and it certainly can’t appreciate the fact that the whole rectangular solid moves through time, the fourth dimension.

Focus on the network evening news. This is where the staging is done well.

First, we have the studio image itself, the colors in foreground and background, the blend of restful and charged hues. The anchor and his/her smooth style.

Then we have the shifting of venue from the studio to reporters in the field, demonstrating the reach of coverage: the planet. As if this equals authenticity.

Actually, those reporters in the field rarely dig up information on location. A correspondent standing on a rooftop in Cairo could just as well be positioned in a bathroom in a Las Vegas McDonald’s. His report would be identical.

The managing editor, usually the elite news anchor, chooses the stories to cover and has the final word on their sequence.

The anchor goes on the air: “Our top story tonight, more signs of gridlock today on Capitol Hill, as legislators walked out of a session on federal budget negotiations…”

The viewer fills in the context for the story: “Oh yes, the government. Gridlock is bad. Just like traffic on the I-5. A bad thing. We want the government to get something done, but they aren’t. These people are always arguing with each other. They don’t agree. They’re in conflict. Yes, conflict, just like on the cop shows.”

The anchor: “The Chinese government reports the new flu epidemic has spread to three provinces. Forty-two people have already died, and nearly a hundred are hospitalized…”

The viewer again supplies context, such as it is: “Flu. Dangerous. Epidemic. Could it arrive here? Get my flu shot.”

The anchor: “A new university study states that gun owners often stock up on weapons and ammunition…”

The viewer: “People with guns. Why do they need a dozen weapons? I don’t need a gun. The police have guns. Could I kill somebody if he broke into the house?”

The anchor: “Doctors at Yale University have made a discovery that could lead to new treatments in the battle against autism…”

Viewer: “That would be good. More research. Laboratory. The brain.”

If, at the end of the newscast, the viewer bothered to review the stories and his own reactions to them, he would realize he’d learned nothing. But reflection is not the game.

In fact, the flow of the news stories has washed over him and created very little except a sense of (false) continuity.

Therefore, every story on the news broadcast achieves the goal of keeping the context thin—night after night, year after year. The overall effect of this staging is: small viewer’s mind, small viewer’s understanding.

Next we come to words over pictures. More and more, news broadcasts are using the rudimentary film technique of a voice narrating what the viewer is seeing on the screen.

People are shouting and running and falling in a street. The anchor or a field reporter says: “The country is in turmoil. Parliament has suspended sessions for the third day in a row, as the government decides what to do about uprisings aimed at forcing democratic elections…”

Well, the voice must be right, because we’re seeing the pictures. If the voice said the riots were due to garbage-pickup cancellations, the viewer would believe that, too.

We see Building #7 of the WTC collapse. Must have been the result of a fire. The anchor tells us so. Words over pictures.

Staged news.

It mirrors what the human mind, in an infantile state, is always doing: looking at the world and seeking a brief summary to explain what that world is, at any given moment.

Since the dawn of time, untold billions of people have been urging a “television anchor” to “explain the pictures.”

The news gives them that precise solution, every night.

“Well, Mr. Jones,” the doctor says, as he pins X-rays to a screen in his office. “See this? Right here? We’ll need to start chemo immediately, and then we may have to remove most of your brain, and as a follow-up, take out one eye.”

Sure, why not? The patient saw the pictures and the anchor explained them.

Eventually, people get the idea and do it for themselves. They see things, they invent one-liners to explain them.

They’re their own anchors. They short-cut and undermine their own experience with vapid summaries of what it all means.

And then, of course, when the news cuts to commercial, the fake products take over:

“Well, every night they’re showing the same brand names, so those brands must be better than the unnamed alternatives.”

Which devolves into: “I like this commercial better than that commercial. This is a great commercial. Let’s have a contest and vote on the best commercial.”

For “intelligent” viewers, there is another sober mainstream choice in America, a safety valve: PBS. That newscast tends to show more pictures from foreign lands.

“Yes, I watch PBS because they understand the planet is interconnected. It isn’t just about America. That’s good.”

Sure it’s good, if you want the same thin-context or false-context reporting on events in other countries. Instead of the two minutes NBC might give you about momentous happenings in Syria, PBS will give you four minutes.

PBS’ experts seem kinder and gentler. “They’re nice and they’re more relaxed. I like that.”

Yes, the PBS experts are taking Valium, and they’re not drinking as much coffee as the CBS experts.

Anchors deliver the long con every night on the tube, between commercials.

Staged.

They’re marketing thin context.

There are various forms of mind control. The one I’m describing here—the thinning of context—is universal. It confounds the mind by pretending depth doesn’t exist and is merely a fantasy.

The mind, before it is trained away from it, is always interested in depth.

Another way of putting it: the mind naturally wants more space, not less. Only constant conditioning can change this.

Eventually, when you say “mind,” people think you’re referring to the brain, or they don’t know what you’re talking about at all.

Mind control by eradicating the concept of mind.

That’s quite a trick.

But now, on the national evening news, something has changed. The quality of the elite anchors has plummeted. These mind-control pros are less and less capable of delivering: the voice of authority.

In the old days, you had Water Cronkite, Harry Reasoner, Chet Huntley, Tom Brokaw, and (before he crashed and burned) Dan Rather. Big-time fakers.

Eventually, this devolved into a B-team of bench players: Dianne Sawyer, Brian Williams, Scott Pelley. Less believable—but still fairly effective.

However, now, at the three major networks, it’s androids on parade. Two pretty boys, David Muir and Jeff Glor, and the NBC cadaver, Lester Holt.

The ship is sinking.

Instead of trying to label their competition Fake News, the networks should look to themselves and try to figure out why they can’t find father figures to deliver their no-context broadcasts.

The audience is wising up. The correct notes on the scale of mind control aren’t being struck.

The system is falling apart.

When I named this site No More Fake News 16 years ago, I could see a fatigue factor setting in—not only in the mainstream news audience, but in the networks themselves. They were playing out the string, hoping to coast on their prior reputations. They weren’t just putting their viewers to sleep (their covert goal), they were slowly falling asleep themselves.

In the following years, the situation grew worse. The networks were moving on auto-pilot.

And now, they’re reaching the end of the line. They’re focusing on the only story that can deliver them ratings: Trump.

They fear him, they hate him—and they love him, because he gives them the numbers that justify their advertising rates with sponsors.

It’s always problematical when the only thing maintaining your survival is your enemy. Especially an enemy whose whole method of attack is to accuse you of subverting your basic mission, which is telling the truth.

And it’s far worse when he’s right.

No matter what you think of Trump, he’s delivering hammer blows to the foundation of network news.

I’ve been aware of every president since Roosevelt, and nothing like this has happened in that time span. A sitting president is virulently going up against The News. Not just the content—which would be bad enough—but the people delivering it.

Since the dawn of time on this planet, news has been controlled, for good reason. It’s the source of supposed fact. Important objective fact. The people who own the news have therefore been able to paint an overall portrait of reality for the masses. Which has been their intent.

In this age of science, the news has donned that cloak. “We’re recording events in the lab. We only relay confirmed results, checked and double-checked.”

And now this crazy cowboy hustler comes along, swaggers into the spotlight, and demeans the whole enterprise. IT’S FAKE!

And millions of people, who have long believed that very thing in the recesses of their minds, sit up straight in their couches and say THAT’S RIGHT!

Overnight, the situation turns surreal.

Up is down, down is up.

The bull is wandering through the china shop, deciding which object to crash next.

Naturally, the networks call him crazy, mentally ill, unfit for office, a Russian agent—while they’re reaping ratings from going to war with him. They have to strike back, and it‘s good for their desperate business to do so.

Whether Trump is, in fact, unfit for office is beside the point of the war.

The truth about Trump, whatever it may be, went out the window a long time ago. It was never in the house.

As the network news business was in a long slide from its former prominence, Trump showed up and stepped on its neck and ground in his heel. Impolitely, he spat in its face.

If you think the total effect was to draw people to Trump’s side, or to the networks’ side, think again.

People began swimming out of their hypnotic attachment to The News. The spell broke. Rudely. The swaggering gunslinger was showing up in their living rooms, accusing and laughing and setting off explosions.

And yes, you can separate that from everything else Trump has been doing or not doing, saying or not saying, committing or not committing.

And you should.

Because The News is supposed to be the ears and eyes and mouth and brain of the public.

And now—for several reasons, Trump very much included—it no longer is.

Which is a good thing, a very good thing.

Even if your hatred of Donald Trump knows no bounds.



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.

Does the push for mass vaccination point toward a staged bioterror event?

Does the push for mass vaccination point toward a staged bioterror event?

by Jon Rappoport

December 4, 2017

We’ve seen the signs. I’ve been highlighting them. The infamous childhood mandatory vaccination law in California. Other states that are considering similar bills. The lunatic push in Australia to outlaw medical exemptions from vaccination. The all-out campaign in the press, in various countries, to stigmatize people who defect from official “truth” about the safety and efficacy of vaccines.

On a larger stage, over the past 20 years, we’ve seen the promotion of fake “pandemics” demanding universal vaccination to ward off “millions of deaths”: SARS, West Nile, Swine Flu, smallpox, etc. All duds.

Now we have the boggling case of the University of Massachusetts, where two supposed instances of meningitis have triggered an immediate campaign (video 1, video 2) to vaccinate all 20,000 students against meningococcal B meningitis.

It’s clear that the logistics of carrying out such an extensive program have been in place for some time. The University just needed an occasion for a test launch of the system. Now they have it.

Yet USA Today reports: “Sarah Van Orman, a physician and executive director of University Health Services at UW-Madison, said… the new [meningitis] B vaccine… may not be as effective as the routinely given vaccine against the four other major bacteria strains.”

“In a study of 499 Princeton University students who received the new B vaccine during an outbreak there, up to a third did not show a good immune response eight weeks after the second dose, Van Orman said.”

“Some research suggests the vaccine also may provide immunity only for six to 12 months, she said.”

But it’s full steam ahead for the U of Massachusetts. Other colleges have long been making preparations. For example, the University of Rochester, according to its Newscenter (September 19, 2014): “On Thursday, Oct. 30, University Health Service (UHS) staff will attempt to vaccinate 5,000 students, faculty and staff against this year’s flu virus [in one day]. The effort will doubly serve as a test of emergency preparedness to practice delivering mass quantities of vaccine or drug in response to an urgent public health concern. The effort is being coordinated by UHS, RC/MERT (University of Rochester River Campus Medical Emergency Response Team), University Environmental Health & Safety and the Monroe County Office of Emergency Preparedness…’We will have to give about 600 vaccinations an hour to meet our goal,’ said Ralph Manchester, MD, vice provost and UHS director.”

Understand: this was a test of a system, an emergency system. That was the primary goal of the operation.

Piece by piece, in the US—and undoubtedly in other countries—the groundwork is being laid for huge networks that can, at a moment’s notice, go live and mass-vaccinate extraordinary numbers of people.

And they would do exactly that—upon the announcement of a “new deadly pandemic that threatens the population.”

How would the “pandemic” occur—or rather, how could it be staged?

Obviously, the vaccine itself could be a carrier, since all sorts of new toxins could be covertly inserted, in addition to the more familiar toxic substances already present in vaccines.

But beyond that?

Here is backgrounder I wrote on the subject: How to Stage a Bioterror Event:

The germ is the cover story for chemical destruction.

In general, the primary fact is: no matter what kind of germ you’re talking about or where it came from, releasing it intentionally does not guarantee predictable results. Far from it.

For instance, people whose immune systems are at different levels of strength are going to react differently.

The perpetrators may find that far less than 1% of people exposed get sick.

Therefore: use a chemical and claim it is a germ.

In other words, there is no germ attack. It’s called a germ attack, but that’s a lie. The perps bring in researchers to the affected area, who go on to claim they have isolated a germ that is the cause of death and illness. It’s a sham. What really happened was the spread of a toxic chemical that can’t be detected, unless you’re looking for it.

The chemical has severe, deadly, and predictable effects for a week or two. Then it disperses and loses potency and the “epidemic” is done.

In some town, a fairly isolated community, the word goes out that people are suddenly falling ill and dying. The CDC and the Army are called in to cordon off the area and quarantine all citizens. A peremptory announcement is made, early on, that this is a biowar attack.

Major media are allowed outside the periphery. Network news anchors set up on-location and do their wall to wall broadcasts “from the scene.”

The entire nation, the entire world is riveted on the event, 24/7.

People inside the cordon fall ill and die. Reports emerge from the town:

The networks state that “heroic doctors are taking samples of blood and the blood is being analyzed to find the germ that is causing the epidemic.” The DoD confirms over and over that this is, indeed, a biowar attack.

Human interest stories pile up. This family lost three members, that family lost everybody. Tragedy, horror, and the desired empathic response from “the world community.”

It’s a soap opera, except real people are dying.

The medical cartel promotes fear of the germ.

All controlling entities get to obtain their piece of the terrorist pie.

Finally, the doctors announce they have isolated the germ causing death, and researchers are rushing to develop a vaccine (which they produce in record time).

Everyone everywhere must be vaccinated, now. No choice. Do it or be quarantined or jailed.

—Mass vaccination clinics emerge from the shadows, all over the nation. They are ready to go. The system is in place. Everyone must get the vaccine now.

In this declared martial law situation, the doctors are the heroes. The doctors and the Army. And the government, and even the media.

Then, after a few weeks, when the potency of the secret chemical has dispersed, it’s over.

When you think about it, this scenario is a rough approximation of what happens every day, all over the world, in doctors’ offices. The doctors are prescribing chemicals (drugs) whose effects are far more dangerous than germs that may (or may not) be causing patients to be ill.

In other words, a chem-war attack is being leveled at people all over the world all the time.

See Dr. Barbara Starfield (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), July 26, 2000, Journal of the American Medical Association, “Is US health really the best in the world.” 106,000 people in America are killed every year by FDA-approved medical drugs. That’s a million people per decade.

In the wake of a staged “biowar” terror attack, new laws are enacted. The State clamps down harder on basic freedoms. The right to travel is curtailed. Criticizing the authorities is viewed as highly illegal. Freedom of assembly is limited.

“Citizens must cooperate. We’re all in this together.”

A new federal law mandating the CDC schedule of vaccines for every child and adult—no exceptions permitted—is rushed through the Congress and signed by the President.

It’s all based on a lie…in the same way that the disease theory of the medical cartel is based on a lie: the strength of an individual’s immune system is the basic determinant of health or illness, not germs considered in a vacuum.

There are people who are determined to inflate the dangers of germs. They trumpet every “new” germ as the end of humankind on the planet. They especially sound the alarm when researchers claim a germ may have mutated or jumped from animals to humans.

“This is it! We’re done for!”

However, if you check into actual confirmed cases of death from recent so-called epidemics, such as West Nile, SARS, bird flu (H5N1), Swine Flu (H1N1), and MERS, the numbers of deaths are incredibly low.

If political criminals, behind the scenes, wanted to stage a confined “biowar” event, they would choose a chemical, not a germ, and they would leverage such an event to curtail freedom.

Understand: researchers behind sealed doors in labs can claim, with unassailable ease, that they’ve found a germ that causes an outbreak. Almost no one challenges such an assertion.

This was the case, for example, with the vaunted SARS epidemic (a dud), in 2003, when 10 World Health Organization (WHO) labs, walled off from view, in communication with each other via closed circuit, announced they’d isolated a coronavirus as the culprit.

Later, in Canada, a WHO microbiologist, Frank Plummer, wandered off the reservation and told reporters he was puzzled by the fact that fewer and fewer SARS patients “had the coronavirus.” This was tantamount to confessing that the whole research effort had been a failure and a sham—but after a day or so of coverage, the press fell silent.

SARS was a nonsensical farce. Diagnosed patients had ordinary seasonal flu or a collection of familiar symptoms that could result from many different causes.

But the propaganda effort was a stunning success. Populations were frightened. The need for vaccines, in the public mind, was exacerbated.

Exacerbated; and prepared, for the “next one.”

…Until eventually—a chemical attack would be called a germ attack.

A staged reality.


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.

Boom: Michael Flynn pleads guilty

Boom: Michael Flynn pleads guilty to lying to the FBI; but an Obama aide went to Russia and huddled with Russian officials BEFORE Obama was even elected

by Jon Rappoport

December 3, 2017

Michael Flynn has pled guilty to lying to the FBI about his conversation with the Russian Ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak.

The conversation occurred AFTER Trump won the 2016 election and before he was inaugurated. The conversation involved US sanctions against Russia and a UN resolution concerning Israel.

Why did Flynn lie? There was nothing wrong with him speaking to the Ambassador during the presidential transition phase. Claims that he was undermining Obama’s policy toward Russia are nonsense. It’s common practice for an incoming president’s staff to speak with foreign officials, in order to set up future goals and policies.

The prosecution against Flynn is of the so-called “process” variety.

That means, in this case, he lied to federal officials about a matter that was itself inconsequential.

It’s probable the FBI was holding other charges over Flynn’s head—relating to his private-sector work on behalf of the Turkish government. A deal was struck: the FBI would forget all about that, if Flynn pled guilty to lying about his conversation with the Russian ambassador, and if he cooperated by rolling over on other members of the Trump team.

Michael Flynn is now (ridiculously) seen as having interfered with President Obama’s policy toward Russia during Obama’s last days in the White House, in 2016.

But what about CANDIDATE Obama interfering in President Bush’s policy toward Russia in the fall of 2008, BEFORE the election?

Geohistory.today has an article, dated October 27, 2008, a few days before Obama won the presidential election for the first time, titled, “US Elections Come to Moscow,” by Anna Wiesfieler:

“Last week [before the 2008 presidential election] saw the release of Obama’s book, The Audacity of Hope, in Russian translation to Russian markets. One of his foreign policy advisors, Mike McFaul, also made a trip to Moscow to meet with various Russian officials and interest groups, speaking off the record and answering questions.”

“McFaul addressed how US relations with Ukraine and Georgia might affect US-Russia relations in the future [!]. Speaking at the Peking Hotel in Moscow at an event organized by Democrats Abroad Russia for Americans living in Russia, McFaul established that this is potentially a major campaign issue for Senator Obama. There are a large number of swing voters (several million) whose heritage comes from Eastern Europe or the Caucasus region. For these voters, US-Russia relations and relations with states in those regions has become a vital issue that could potentially swing votes to one candidate or the other.”

“The day before, at the Carnegie Endowment Center in Moscow, McFaul also fielded questions ranging from explanations of the primary and general election process to the August crisis in Georgia and Russia’s concerns about Ukraine and Georgia receiving NATO membership action plans.”

“Pointing to a number of Senator Obama’s statements, including one from April 2008 (before the crisis) where Senator Obama was concerned that violence may erupt in the southern part of the Republic of Georgia, McFaul conveyed concern about the situation in the Caucasus. Speaking to NATO enlargement, he noted, as have many others, that both US candidates for president support NATO expansion. However, Senator Obama has consistently referred to NATO rules whereby the people of a candidate state must support entry into NATO and that NATO rules state that not only must territorial disputes be resolved before entry into the Alliance, but that a member state cannot use violence against its own people.”

Talk about sticking fingers in the foreign policy of the US—and BEFORE Obama was elected!

Contrast Obama’s and McFaul’s 2008 actions to Mike Flynn’s in 2016.

Imagine what the press would be screaming now, if CANDIDATE Trump had sent Mike Flynn to Russia, BEFORE the 2016 election, to chat with officials about Trump’s future policy goals regarding Russia.

In 2008, the compliant US press, fawning over Obama, saw nothing that rose to the level of a scandal.

The current blow-up about Flynn is coming out of pretended media shock, playing to a naïve public encased in a television bubble. Since the American Revolution of 1776, US politicians, military men, business leaders, intelligence operatives, and financiers have been traveling to foreign countries, seeking and coercing front-door and back-door and side-door deals. To say George Washington’s warning about “entangling foreign alliances” has been ignored is a vast understatement. Mike Flynn’s recent conversation with the Russian ambassador is a sub-atomic ripple in the pond.

Police Captain Renault (“Casablanca,” 1942): “I’m shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!” A croupier hands Renault a pile of money. Croupier: “Your winnings, sir.”


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.

Want vaccine truth? Now you’re a Russian dupe. I’m serious.

Want vaccine truth? Now you’re a Russian dupe. I’m serious.

by Jon Rappoport

November 27, 2017

It had to happen. In the UK, warnings are going out that “anti-vaccination” posts online are the work of Russian disinformation agents who are trying to destabilize the West.

OK, I confess. For the past 30 years, during which I’ve exposed lies about vaccines from top to bottom, I’ve been working for the Kremlin. My code name is Ivan the Giant Killer.

The ibtimes has the story: “UK health officials fear Russian cyber units are ‘spreading false information’ on flu and measles jabs”.

“Concerns have prompted UK government departments to monitor social media and flag false stories.”

“Experts are warning that Russian cyber units are spreading false information about flu and measles jabs in the UK.”

“In an apparent attempt to erode trust in US and European governments, state-sponsored units are using social media to spread lies, the Mirror reported. The Kremlin is believed to be attempting to foster distrust over flu jabs and the MMR measles vaccines.”

“The former National Counter Terrorism Security Office head Chris Phillips warned that Russian cyber farms are a threat to daily life. ‘This is all about destabilisation by external forces. War is ever changing and becoming much more cyber-based,’ Phillips told The Mirror.”

“He added: ‘If the Russian government, or whoever, wishes to exert this kind of influence, is able to cause difficulty in decisions, in trusting the government of the day in that country, or otherwise trusted media and news organisations, then so much the better for them’.”

“According to the Mirror, concerns over the threat to public health and security are so high that government departments have been ordered to monitor social media and flag any troublesome articles.”

“Health chiefs have reportedly held emergency meetings concerning the spread of ‘fake news’ about vaccination campaigns. There are also concerns that the strides made through information programmes [unvarnished propaganda] in schools and communities could be undone by these false stories.”

“Public Health England and the Royal College of GPs have expressed concern over how much false health news is shared online and on social media.”

ERODE PUBLIC TRUST IN GOVERNMENT AND MAINSTREAM MEDIA? Excuse me, but those institutions having been doing a marvelous job destroying public trust all on their own.

And they think you’re complete morons; they think you’ll buy the idea that anti-vaccination information must be false and fake and coming out of Russia.

They think you’ll support censoring that information.

“OK, boys, today we’re going to merge the ‘Russia-did-it’ meme with the ‘beware-of-unofficial-vaccine-disinformation’ meme, roll it all up into a ball and push it out there. We’ve got to do something. More people are waking up to vaccine damage and the preposterous nature of our claims that vaccines are wonderfully safe and effective. We know our claims are bullshit, but we’re supposed to know. They’re not supposed to. But more of them do know.”

Coming up next: “Let’s see. During the presidential campaign, Trump suggested that vaccines could cause autism. Obviously, he got that information from…Russia. More proof he’s an agent working for Putin.”

The Amish are all Russians.

That soccer mom down the street with the kid who pretends he’s super-healthy and has never been vaccinated? She has a secret transmitter in her basement. Every night she taps out signals to her handler in Moscow, using marked pages from Tolstoy’s War and Peace for code. Quick, report her to the FBI. Call the shock troops from Merck and Glaxo.


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.

COMPROMISED: Sex-abuser Congressmen are open to massive blackmail

COMPROMISED: Sex-abuser Congressmen are open to massive blackmail

by Jon Rappoport

November 23, 2017

Most people are naïve about how intelligence operations are run. Holding damaging secrets on public figures equals the opportunity for blackmail. This strategy was probably discovered by cave men.

—Sex-abuse claims filed against members of Congress—beyond Al Franken and John Conyers—

Where are all the names of these Congressmen? We’re now told that, in the past 10 years, $17 million has been paid out to accusers in small sums. An unknown part of that money was compensation for explicitly sexual offenses.

There are more cases where the accusers simply gave up and refused to pursue claims. They’re potentially waiting in the wings.

Not only are the Congressmen guilty, they’re open to blackmail. As they vote on bills; as they decide which lobbyists to favor; as they decide what advice to follow from intelligence agencies; as they decide whether to take meetings with agents from other countries; they’re always looking over their shoulders, wondering: HOW MUCH DO THESE PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT ME? WHAT SHOULD I DO TO STAY SAFE?

And in some hotel room, late at night, when a person slips them a folder with details of their sexual misdemeanors or felonies, what are they going to do? How are they going to resist whatever is being asked for?

COMPROMISED.

This is the political elephant in the room the mainstream press isn’t talking about.

What about the NSA and the CIA and other spying agencies in the US (and other countries)? How much devastating information about sexual abuse have they gathered on these Congressmen?

How much covert control have the agencies chosen to exercise?

WE OWN YOU.

The levels of complexity can be dizzying. Suppose a guilty Congressman learns actual secrets about another politician? His impulse is to blow the whistle. But can he? What will he bring down on his own head?

Suppose he knows vital secrets about Monsanto, Dow, Exxon, Eli Lilly?

I’LL KEEP YOUR SECRETS IF YOU KEEP MINE.

A BROTHERHOOD OF SECRET-KEEPERS.

An awareness, over the years, spreads through Congress: “Many of us are guilty and we need to protect each other.”

Because it isn’t just the sexual secrets anymore. It’s the subsequent immoral actions taken and not taken, based on being compromised. Based on being controlled.

“Appreciate your committee vote to kill the bill yesterday, Senator. I assure you that thing in Miami last summer…”

“When does our deal end? When are we even? This is worse than prison.”

“It’s not worse. And it never ends. But don’t worry, be happy. Keep playing the game. It’s no skin off your nose.”

“What about honor?”

“Please. You gave that away a long time ago. In Miami. But we also know about the hotel rooms in New York, Washington, Chicago, LA…”

The Congressman can’t believe the bind he’s in. He’s having the above conversation with a man from the CIA. He and the CIA are supposed to be on the same team. And they are, if he’ll understand who is higher in the pecking order, who gives the commands.

One day, he’ll wake up and realize that, among the four women he abused, three were innocent, but one was sent in by the Agency with the task of seducing him. If necessary, at a later date, she could use their night together as blackmail. (For a rough variation on this theme, see numerous accounts of NY Governor Eliot Spitzer’s 2008 hooker scandal, which caused his resignation from office. Spitzer was attacking Wall Street and Big Pharma.)

Then we come to the issue of reporters, who themselves could be compromised, because they’re secretly guilty of sexual abuse.

For example, long-time political reporter, Glenn Thrush (Politico, NY Times, MSNBC), has just been accused of kissing and groping four women. The Times has suspended him from his position covering the White House.

If Thrush, at any time, has been aware of politicians’ misdeeds, did he cover them and expose them fully—or was he “under the gun” to play ball because of his own secrets?

One could reasonably ask this question about Thrush’s relations with the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign.

Case in point. WikiLeaks (October 2016) released an email from Thrush to John Podesta, Hillary’s campaign manager. Thrush was writing an article that referred to Podesta. He emailed Podesta part of the draft, asking him to “fact-check” it. Astonishingly, Thrush remarked in the email:

“No worries Because I have become a hack I will send u the whole section that pertains to u. Please don’t share or tell anyone I did this. Tell me if I fucked up anything.”

Podesta replied: “no problems here.”

Politico’s vice president of communications, Brad Dayspring, made an impassioned and transparently moronic defense of his reporter:

“Glenn is one of the top political reporters in the country [!], in no small part because he understands that it is his job to get inside information, not appear perfect when someone illegally hacks email [!]…I can speak with firsthand knowledge and experience that Glenn checks the validity of often complex reporting with everybody, on both sides of the aisle.”

So who is Brad Dayspring, the ardent defender of his “top political reporter?”

Years earlier, on October 25, 2011, while Dayspring was working as Communications Director for House Majority Leader, Eric Cantor, ADWEEK reported (link here):

“Turns out Dayspring’s personal Twitter feed, @BDayspring… follows 1,007 accounts, one of which is SexyTwitPics… Description: ‘We RT [retweet] only the HOTTEST Pics DIRECTLY from Sexy Ladies’ Twitter Accts! (No random girls, xxx, guys) Ladies Mention us w your pics! 18+’”

Maybe it’s a stretch, but I’d say the level of intelligence Dayspring exhibited in defending Glenn Thrush is matched by his interest in SexyTwitPics.

One of the elephants in the room is, of course, Bill Clinton. For several decades, people having been writing about his sexual predations. It’s assumed that he and his allies (including his wife) have been able to avoid final excommunication from politics because of their power—but it would be foolish to assume he has been free from blackmail.

We wouldn’t be talking about some reporter with a damning file on Bill Clinton. We would be talking about an agency like the CIA and their file. No one who is a serial abuser simply shrugs off the CIA and blithely walks away.

In other words, the Clintons may have nine lives precisely BECAUSE they made a deal with the devil…


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.