Category: “Jon Rappoport Blog”

Matrix Revealed: Why logic disappeared

http://ift.tt/1hOeXuJ

Matrix Revealed: Why logic disappeared

by Jon Rappoport

October 21, 2017

Over the past year, I’ve been in communication with several teachers who are telling me about the descent into more social programming in school classrooms.

From so-called environmental agendas, to discussions about gender orientation and choice of gender identity, to sex education, to teaching about “liberalism,” the indoctrination is getting thicker and deeper.

This whole mind-engineering approach would suffer a devastating blow if logic were introduced into the curriculum, particularly at an early age.

One prime factor becomes clear the moment a student explores logic as a formal subject. That factor is THE PREMISE.

Deductive arguments begin from premises, also known as assumptions or givens.

Although logic focuses on the process of reasoning launched from the premises, there is no way to avoid looking at these basic assumptions, once the student learns how to find them.

“Is this premise true?” “Does it make sense?”

And then all bets are off, because social programming is short on reasoning and long on givens.

That’s how mind-programming is done—by pouring assumptions into the student.

Once he begins to look at them, study them, consider them, assess them, he is SEPARATE FROM THEM.

He can then gauge their truth or falsity.

He can decide whether they’re grounded in fact, or are merely arbitrary notions designed to forward an ideology.

At that point, the roof caves in on the programmers.

This is one reason I designed a basic introductory logic course for high-school students and included it in my collection, The Matrix Revealed.

Students should have the opportunity to experience analyzing passages of text. They should learn what that process does for them, how it wakes them up and eventually makes them independent.

Educators are aware that treading on the path of logic endangers what they are covertly putting into students’ heads.

That’s why logic has disappeared.

That’s why it needs to come back.

Shepherded by parents.

Every home is a civilization.


The Matrix Revealed

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


Here are the contents of my collection, The Matrix Revealed:

* 250 megabytes of information.

* Over 1100 pages of text.

* Ten and a half hours of audio.

The 2 bonuses alone are rather extraordinary:

* My complete 18-lesson course, LOGIC AND ANALYSIS, which includes the teacher’s manual and audio to guide you. I was previously selling the course for $375. This is a new way to teach logic, the subject that has been missing from schools for decades.

* The complete text (331 pages) of AIDS INC., the book that exposed a conspiracy of scientific fraud deep within the medical research establishment. The book has become a sought-after item, since its publication in 1988. It contains material about viruses, medical testing, and the invention of disease that is, now and in the future, vital to our understanding of phony epidemics arising in our midst. I assure you, the revelations in the book will surprise you; they cut much deeper and are more subtle than “virus made in a lab” scenarios.

The heart and soul of this product are the text interviews I conducted with Matrix-insiders, who have first-hand knowledge of how the major illusions of our world are put together:

* ELLIS MEDAVOY, master of PR, propaganda, and deception, who worked for key controllers in the medical and political arenas. 28 interviews, 290 pages.

* RICHARD BELL, financial analyst and trader, whose profound grasp of market manipulation and economic-rigging is formidable, to say the least. 16 interviews, 132 pages.

* JACK TRUE, the most creative hypnotherapist on the face of the planet. Jack’s anti-Matrix understanding of the mind and how to liberate it is unparalleled. His insights are unique, staggering. 43 interviews, 320 pages.

Also included:

* Several more interviews with brilliant analysts of the Matrix. 53 pages.

* The ten and a half hours of mp3 audio are my solo presentation, based on these interviews and my own research. Title: The Multi-Dimensional Planetary Chessboard—The Matrix vs. the Un-Conditioning of the Individual.

(All the material is digital. Upon ordering it, you’ll receive an email with a link to it.)

Understanding Matrix is also understanding your capacity and power, and that is the way to approach this subject. Because liberation is the goal. And liberation has no limit.

I invite you to a new exploration and a great adventure.

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.

Filed under: Logic Course, Matrix Revealed

Vía Jon Rappoport’s Blog http://ift.tt/2xVZsVN

Advertisements

The stage play of Self and the global mystery

http://ift.tt/2yFdWZh

The stage-play of Self and the global mystery

By Jon Rappoport

Consider that everything happening on planet Earth is an enormous stage play.

The mystery is: what is the theme? What is the payoff? What is the climax?

And even more deeply, what is the role of Self, the individual, in this play?

The key phrase is “in this play.” Because most people are, indeed, inside the play. They have roles. They may not be aware of the parts they’re playing, but that doesn’t change the situation or the dilemma.

How unusual would it be if, in a theater, in a city, citizens were led on to a stage to audition for parts—and the director said, “Well, we want you in this production, but we can’t show you the script. We can’t tell you your role. You’ll just have to feel your way along. Trust us, we know what we’re doing. And by the way, you’ll be playing your part for the rest of your life…”

Self doesn’t want this arrangement. Self wants something else, a way to see what the play is, a way to climb out of it.

Where to start? How to begin? What is the exit strategy?

That strategy depends on imagination. It can’t go anywhere without it.

The long-running Earth stage-play has severe limits. It tries to impose its energy-depleting plot-lines on Self.

But with imagination, a person can conceive of a new play, and create it, and centrally participate in it.

In fact, Self has been waiting for just such an opportunity. The cells of his body and brain, his thoughts, his energies have been waiting.

However, waiting doesn’t do it.

Connecting with one’s own imagination does do it. It initiates a cascade of ideas and emotions, which in turn feed back into imagination, making it even more powerful.

A new stage-play can come into being.

This is why I developed many imagination exercises and techniques for my collection, Exit From The Matrix.

Imagination is the source of possibilities which don’t yet exist, but could.

Imagination makes the as-yet unborn future real.

Imagination doesn’t feel hemmed in by what already exists.

A person, inspired by his own imagination, looks beyond his own present circumstances to inventing a larger future.

Imagination doesn’t ask for lengthy explanations. It just asks for a vision based on the desire for a great adventure.

The present becomes a platform from which to change reality.

Imagination says, “I understand you’re looking for different circumstances, and also looking for a different scope of operation. All that is possible.”

The individual has the capacity to re-energize his life by inventing a new future, and imagination is the key.

The permanence of the “ongoing stage play” and a person’s enduring role in it is an illusion.

Imagination proves that and proves that the beginning of liberation is just a moment away.

Filed under: Uncategorized

Vía Jon Rappoport’s Blog http://ift.tt/2yFdRor

Why you should consider ordering Exit From The Matrix

http://ift.tt/1rSRHEf

Why you should consider ordering Exit From The Matrix

by Jon Rappoport

October 19, 2017

Two aspects of my research I could write about for years involved: brilliant hypnotherapist Jack True, and the ancient Tibetan “magicians.”

Out of this research came my collection, Exit From The Matrix. It contains many exercises that increase the power and range of imagination.

Before the priest class moved in and took over in Tibet, there was an entire “school” of practice that focused on creative power. These hardy practitioners were artists of reality.

They knew, with unshakable certainty, that an individual had the unlimited capacity to invent reality at every level. They assembled their own exercises for that purpose. These Tibetans were unique in the history of the planet.

Jack True and I, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, worked over these exercises and adapted them for the modern student. After Jack passed away in the 1990s, I continued to develop the exercises and eventually included them in Exit From The Matrix.

As my readers know, I write much on the importance of the individual, and his power, in a world whose self-appointed leaders hail the primary status of The Group.

Exit From The Matrix is my ultimate antidote to that trend.


Exit From the Matrix

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


Here are the contents of Exit From The Matrix:

First, my new audio presentations:

* INTRODUCTION: HOW TO USE THE MATERIALS IN EXIT FROM THE MATRIX

* EXIT FROM THE MATRIX

* 50 IMAGINATION EXERCISES

* FURTHER IMAGINATION EXERCISES

* ANESTHESIA, BOREDOM, EXCITEMENT, ECSTASY

* ANCIENT TIBET AND THE UNIVERSE AS A PRODUCT OF MIND

* YOU THE INVENTOR, MINDSET, AND FREEDOM FROM “THE EXISTENCE PROGRAM”

* PARANORMAL EXPERIMENTS AND EXERCISES

* CHILDREN AND IMAGINATION

* THE CREATIVE LIFE AND THE MATRIX/IMAGINATION

* PICTURES OF REALITY AND ESCAPE VELOCITY FROM THE MATRIX

* THIS WOULD BE A VERY DIFFERENT FUTURE

* MODERN ZEN

* THE GREAT PASSIONS AND THE GREAT ANDROIDS

Then you will receive the following audio seminars I have previously done:

* Mind Control, Mind Freedom

* The Transformations

* Desire, Manifestation and Fulfillment

* Altered States, Consciousness, and Magic

* Beyond Structures

* The Mystery and Magic of Dialogue

* The Voyage of Merlin

* Modern Alchemy and Imagination

* Imagination and Spiritual Enlightenment

* Dissolving Stress

* The Paranormal Project

* Zen Painting for Everyone Now

* Past Lives, Archetypes, and Hidden Sources of Human Energy

* Expression of Self

* Imagination Exercises for a Lifetime

* Old Planet, New Planet, New Mind

* The Era of Magic Returns

* Your Power Revealed

* Universes Without End

* Relationships

* Building a Business for Success

I have included an additional bonus section:

* My book, The Secret Behind Secret Societies (pdf document)

* My book, The Ownership of All Life (pdf document)

* A long excerpt from my briefly published book, Full Power (pdf document)

* My 24 articles in the series, “Coaching the Coaches” (pdf document)

And these audio seminars:

* The Role of Medical Drugs in Human Illness

* Longevity One: The Mind-Body Connection

* Longevity Two: The Nutritional Factors

(All the audio presentations are mp3 files and the documents and books are pdf files. You download the files upon purchase. There is no physical ship.)

What has been called The Matrix is a series of layers. These layers compose what we call Reality. Reality is not merely the consensus people accept in their daily lives. It is also a personal and individual conception of limits. It is a perception that these limits are somehow built into existence. But this is not true.

What I’ve done here is remove the lid on those perceived limits. This isn’t an intellectual undertaking. It’s a way to open up space and step on to a new road, with new power.

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.

Filed under: Exit From the Matrix

Vía Jon Rappoport’s Blog http://ift.tt/2xQR0Hs

The Individual, his freedom, and victory

http://ift.tt/2x5yIO4

The Individual, his freedom, and victory

By Jon Rappoport

We are in a war.

The State, as now constituted, pretends it favors giving away the farm for nothing “to those in need.” What they really means is: they steal the farm, and then they give it away on their terms.

Genuine entrepreneurs know what it’s like to get up in the morning and re-create their enterprises and make them work every day. They know how much energy it takes. They know it isn’t the easiest thing in the world, but they value the FREEDOM it brings. They know how it feels to follow their own desires. These people are real. They exist.

They experience frustrating days when their business isn’t going well. On those days, they feel trapped in the very universe they created. They wonder how it might be to give up and go to work for someone else. They even wonder how it might be to get a desk job in government and feel the protection of government. But they don’t give in.

They’re too stubborn to give in. They show up every day and they push their enterprise forward.

And these are the people about whom Obama said: “If you’ve got a business—you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

Sure, Mr. President. We weren’t there at all. We’re fictions. We don’t exist. Other people are always standing in for us. It’s not our sweat, it’s not our power, it’s not our imagination, it’s not our commitment that invented and sustained our businesses. It’s all done by remote control from Washington. I’m glad you finally clarified this mystery for us. You’re a genius.

People who’ve never started and run their own enterprises don’t understand. They don’t know what the sweat means and the struggle means and the vision means and the power to keep doing it every day means, and they don’t know what the joy of earning their own way means and what deeper victory means.

There are people who don’t understand what a FREE INDIVIDUAL is. They want a world of Central Planning. They feel a welter of emotions, all negative, when they contemplate THE FREE INDIVIDUAL.

Newsflash: Money is not inherently evil. Profit is not inherently evil.

What is evil is trying to melt the individual into the collective. That has always been evil.

For the free individual, “the highest work possible” doesn’t involve leaving one’s desires behind, in order to become the abject servant of a Cause. He doesn’t suddenly develop an egoless and empty personality in order to “connect” with a goal that floats in an abstract realm.

The free individual isn’t shaped. He shapes.

He doesn’t fall on his knees and grovel to seek public acceptance.

The mob, the herd operates on debt, obligation, guilt, and the pretense of admiration for idols. These are its currencies.

The herd, seeking some reflection of its unformed desire, constructs a social order based on need—and the substance of that need will be extracted through coercion, if necessary, from those who already have More.

This need, and the proposition that the mob deserves its satisfaction, creates a worldwide industry.

Among the industry’s most passionate and venal supporters are those who are quite certain that the human being is a tainted vile creature. Such supporters, of course, are sensing their own reflections.

The great psychological factor in any life is THE DESERTION OF INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM. Afterward, the individual creates shadows and monsters and fears around that crossroad.

Freedom is the space and the setting, from which the individual can generate the thought and the energy-pulse of a great self-chosen objective.

In that place, there is no crowding or oppressive necessity. There is choice. There is desire. There is thought.

“Being absorbed in a greater whole” isn’t an ambition or philosophical prospect for the free individual. He sees that fixation as a surrender of self.

The Collective, whether envisioned as a down-to-earth or mystical group, promises a release from self. This grand solution to problems is a ruse designed to keep humans in a corral, a prison. After all, how are you going to control and eventually enslave people if you promote the notion that each individual has freedom and free choice? The abnegation of self is a workable tactic, as long as it is dressed up with false idols and perverted ideals.

Self is fundamentally creative, dynamic, forward-looking, energetic, powerful, engaged. The Collective looks for shadows of those qualities in the government as its source of survival.

The free individual isn’t opposed to helping others, but he is against a culture that is so preoccupied with “raising up the lowest” that it nurtures a hatred of liberty. And this is a crux, because growing millions of people are all too eager to shed the last fragments of their Selves to join in a fantasy of “everybody gets everything.”

The fantasy doesn’t work. The melting down of all of humanity into a mystical goo is an illusion that can’t stand the test of time. Eventually, a person falls out of that construct and remembers he must depend, to an alarming degree, on his own inner resources.

The free individual doesn’t act in ways that limit the freedom of others.

Self-sufficiency is both an essence and outcome for the free individual.

If America had pursued a path of making the nation self-sufficient, without relying on entangling foreign political and business relationships, it would have avoided the corruption that naturally flows from those relationships, and it would have become living proof that freedom and the principles of the Republic work. It would have become a shining example to the rest of the world, a new standard to emulate.

Far from committing the “sin of isolationism,” it would have provoked others to try the experiment of freedom.

The free individual discovers his way through imagination and creative power, because that is the answer to the question: what is freedom for?

Without exercising imagination and creative power, freedom withers and dies. It becomes an empty slogan. It becomes an empty stage.

We are told, in a thousand ways, that the free individual is the personification of greed and theft and crime. That is false.

The free individual imagines and creates on a scale that supersedes and ignores the Collective. His work naturally spills over and benefits others.

Advocates of the Collective falsely claim the free individual is cold and uncaring and remote and “without humanity.” Meanwhile, their picture of a society based on need is a poisonous affectation; it is constructed because these advocates are walled off from their own power. Therefore, they substitute endless entitlement.

Their only nod of acknowledgment to the individual has been to propagandize him as an outsider, a potential danger, a lurking menace, a person waiting to be diagnosed with a mental disorder.

These days, it is the Group that is elevated. We must absorb the individual in the system so the Group is protected and safe. We must omit mention of the individual in teaching children. We must say that now the nation is nothing more than an interconnected Whole. We must promote interdependency as the highest ideal. We must declare it is obvious that all actions must be judged on the basis of how they will affect the well-being of the Collective.

Even accepting Mill’s specious pronouncement that society should be organized on the basis of the greatest good for greatest number, the questions remains: what is the greatest good? Is it that which makes us, more and more, into a Group? Or is it that which liberates the individual to pursue his highest aspirations?

The greatest good liberates the individual, and then the door is open. Who will walk through it? Every person who has divested himself of collective consciousness.

Then perhaps historians and scholars will be forced to change their stories. Perhaps, some day, they will admit that history, before it was hijacked, revealed a progression away from the Group and toward the individual. Perhaps they will be forced to admit their affected fetish about “primitive societies” was a ruse to convince us that, once upon a time, we lost our way, when we disentangled ourselves from group consciousness.

Oh, there will be screams. There will be many screams. There will be accusations that we are deserting the human race, that we are leaving others behind, that we are refusing to help those who need it.

Eventually, those screams will die on the wind. As many wake up and realize they had sacrificed their lives on the altar of the Group, the protests will fade out.

Because many will see, as if for the first time, what freedom means and how it feels.

And against that, there is no argument.

The titanic myths that have been foisted on humanity and the titanic acceptance of those myths by humanity are all focused on one lie: the individual cannot stand on his own; he must subjugate himself to a system.

I don’t care what form that higher system takes. It’s all a lie. It’s all geared to promoting slavery. It’s all geared to allowing the few to control the many.

And the few WILL control the many, until the day comes when enough individuals throw off ALL the deceptions that permitted them to think The Individual was less than he is.

The day will dawn when the individual knows he is greater than any and all groups and collectives by any name flying under any flag, espousing any gibberish, elevating any fairy tale, seducing with any promise, hypnotizing with any idol or misbegotten legend.

That day will dawn.

But why wait?

Filed under: Uncategorized

Vía Jon Rappoport’s Blog http://ift.tt/2yvKwdP

The mind game designed to produce losers

http://ift.tt/2zk7ggq

The mind game designed to produce losers

Separating logic from propaganda. Separating illusion from reality.

An individual has the capacity to think independently. A group does not have that capacity.

By Jon Rappoport

“My friends, here is the game. On the table before you, you see many stones. Some are expensive gems, and some are worthless fakes. But you must decide they’re all fake or they’re or real. That’s the game.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Crazy choices. Untenable choices. A ridiculous game. But many people fall for it. Why?

If propaganda didn’t stimulate the way people’s minds already work, propaganda would be abandoned and thrown on the junk heap.

I need to repeat that: If propaganda didn’t stimulate the way people’s minds already work, propaganda would be abandoned and thrown on the junk heap.

Propaganda isn’t shaping minds to think in a way that is utterly alien. No. Propaganda taps into ways of thinking that are already there, in a latent or active state.

For example, propaganda feeds off the tendency of the mind to assert: It’s either A or B. It’s either all-A or all-B.

By design, let’s say an event under consideration happens to be BOTH A AND B.

However, the mind isn’t prepared to see that. At the “either-or” level of thinking, BOTH is impossible. It doesn’t show up as a choice on the radar screen.

So for that event, X number of people will say, “It’s all-A.”

And Y number of people will say, “It’s all-B.”

And then those two groups will oppose each other. Which is a hidden purpose of the propaganda in the first place.

Take the Vegas shooting as an example. Assume for the moment that it was designed to contain both real and fake elements. There were real bullets flying (no matter how many shooters held the weapons) and real people were hit by those bullets. And then there were “crisis actors” who were faking scenes of being hit and wounded by bullets.

And let’s say there is propaganda on top of the Vegas shooting, and the propaganda says, “Stephen Paddock was the LONE GUNMAN and he killed 58 people and wounded 500 people.”

The propaganda is a lie. Whatever did or didn’t happen at the concert, the propaganda is not the correct account.

The propagandists know that AS SOON AS THEY SAY “LONE GUNMAN,” there are going to be many people who think “LEE OSWALD AND CONVERUP AND CONSPIRACY” and then independently examine and analyze and offer opinion about what really happened in the shooting. By telling that central lie, the propagandists also know many of these independent researchers and reporters are going to be stimulated to react in the following way:

They’re either going to say all-A or all-B. They’re going to say the shooting was entirely real, or they’re going to say the shooting was entirely fake.

Tell that lie and then stand back and watch people break up into two opposing groups.

Which is exactly what propagandists want.

The central lie about the shooting has two purposes. First, cover up what really happened. And second, get independent-minded people to split into two opposing groups, vis-à-vis what really happened at the shooting.

This is all understood and planned for by the groups who design mass events and also design the propaganda lies about those events.

The fake planted elements of these events (crisis actors, pretended wounding, etc.) are put there to make sure there will be opposing groups of researchers, in the aftermath.

“Sow confusion; sow opposition.”

And the success of these plans depends entirely on the level of thinking that is compelled to choose all-A or all-B. A person who restricts himself to deploy this level of thinking will always deny anything exists beyond all-A or all-B, whichever side he chooses. Why? Because his level of thinking determines WHAT HE CAN SEE AND WHAT HE CAN’T SEE.

Obviously, we’re talking about much more than the Vegas shooting or any mass event. We’re talking about a pattern that bleeds into every area of life and perception.

“If you think Trump has done anything seriously wrong, you’re a traitor to the President and an enemy of America.”

“If you think Hillary has committed a serious crime, you’re a traitor to America.”

There are two sides, and you must choose all-A or all-B.

Now, of course, there are other levels of more intelligent thinking. But those who control education and major media want to minimize the more intelligent levels and maximize the “either-or” brand. This is their mission in life. They take it seriously.

Decades ago, when I taught school, I ran across many students who were the all-A or all-B type. Trying to break through that barrier was like using a nail file to cut a big hole in a brick wall.

Eventually, I found I could teach them logic at a basic level. And I watched the students change. They began to offload their blunt either-or approach. They began to SEE MORE. The lights were going on.

It was quite gratifying.

Let me give you another example: police brutality toward black people in America.

Let’s say we have two groups. One group claims there is absolutely no problem involving police brutality. The other group claims police brutality is THE problem.

All-A or all-B.

Now, imagine there are 20,000 black and white people, armed with the tools of analysis and logic, who take neither position. Instead, they separately and independently investigate a number of factors that plague black inner cities:

Drugs; gang shootings and other gang crimes; the Globalist theft of jobs, which are exported to other countries; the absence of fathers in homes; grossly sub-standard nutrition; the dumping of industrial pollutants into poor neighborhoods; toxic heavy metals in water systems; the diversion and theft of enormous amounts of money that have been poured into the so-called War on Poverty; police brutality; multiple problems honest police have in trying to keep neighborhoods safe.

This intelligent analysis points toward solutions. For instance (I’ve previously written about this at length), a vast spreading of urban farms in inner cities where residents grow their own fresh clean food, trade it among themselves, and sell the excess for profit.

Now imagine those 20,000 black and white people who are doing this analysis speak up and write, independently and separately, about what they’ve discovered.

Suppose THOSE voices rise and are heard.

Suppose THAT tide rises above the all-A and all-B crowds.

What might happen then?

In an educated society, this tide is supposed to rise.

However, education isn’t pointed in the direction of logic and analysis. It’s pointed away from it, on purpose.

Which means the task falls to individuals.

This may seem like an enormous hill to climb.

It is. But so what?

After more than a hundred years of sub-standard mind-numbing education, what else would you expect?

The overriding principle here is: if you see people all around you dividing into opposing camps, because they’re all-A or all-B, that doesn’t mean you have to follow their lead.

Filed under: Uncategorized

Vía Jon Rappoport’s Blog http://ift.tt/2zk42Jx

No More Fake News Exclusive: insider reveals how the opioid crime network operates!

http://ift.tt/2hMn58o

No More Fake News Exclusive: insider reveals how the opioid crime network operates!

Opioid drugs: morphine, hydrocodone, oxycodone, fentanyl, naloxone, Percocet, etc.

By Jon Rappoport

PBS Frontline, 2016: “The opioid epidemic has been called the worst drug crisis in American history…with overdoses from heroin and other opioids now killing more than 27,000 people a year…” (Note: prescription opioids are now a very significant gateway-drug leading addicts into heroin.)

CBS News: “Nearly 92 million U.S. adults, or about 38 percent of the population, took a legitimately prescribed opioid like OxyContin or Percocet in 2015, according to results from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health.”

On the condition of anonymity, an insider with intimate knowledge of the opioid crime network spoke with me. He is not a participant or a criminal. He has spent years exposing the network.

My initial question to him was prompted by the current Washington Post series on collusion between members of Congress and the drug industry. The collusion has produced a new law that makes it much harder for the US DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) to shut down major opioid traffickers. (That law is the Ensuring Patient Access and Effective Drug Enforcement Act, signed by President Obama on 4/9/16.)

My question was: how could a corrupt little pharmacy or medical clinic in a small town, in the middle of nowhere, sell, as reported, a MILLION opioid pills a year?

Here is the answer my source confirmed: a criminal doctor or doctors are writing 75-100 opioid prescriptions a day like clockwork; “patients” are flooding in from all over the country (many of them flying in once a month); they are sold the opioid prescriptions, and either fill them right there in the clinic, or take them to a friendly pharmacy.

These patients are actually dealers. They return home and sell the pills to addicts.

Where do the small clinics and pharmacies obtain the huge number of opioid pills? From distributors. These are legitimate companies. They may distribute all sorts of medicines. It’s their business. They know they are committing egregious crimes.

Where do these big distributors obtain their opioid pills? From pharmaceutical companies who manufacture them.

The manufacturers and the distributors have an ongoing relationship. They know exactly what they’re doing. They know the bulk of the product is going into “street sales.”

The distributors and the manufacturers are drug traffickers.

There is no doubt about this. No one is “making a mistake.” No one is in the dark. No one is being fooled.

When the DEA tries to clamp down on opioid manufacturers, this is not a sudden action, as some manufacturers try to claim. The DEA has already made several prior visits and has tried to convince the manufacturers to stop what they’re doing—to no avail.

I suggested to my source that the opioid distributors and their suppliers, the manufacturers, have a “nudge and a wink” relationship. He quickly told me it was far more than that. He left no doubt in my mind that these relationships are undertaken and maintained with full knowledge about the trafficking enterprise these partners are engaged in.

He pointed out that the 2016 law referenced above, passed by Congress—with most of the members completely unware of what they were voting for—radically changed the conditions under which the DEA could immediately freeze huge and obviously criminal shipments of opioids. It’s not a slam-dunk anymore. Far from it.

Before imposing a freeze, instead of simply showing that the (criminal) shipment poses an IMMINENT threat of death or grave harm to users, the Agency now has to demonstrate there is an IMMEDIATE threat.

This word game means the DEA must establish that people could die, not next week or next month (imminent), but “right now” (immediate). If this seems logically absurd and intentionally perverse, it is. Obviously, “immediate” is designed to give rise to back and forth debate, legalistic challenges, long postponements—and ultimately a straitjacket preventing decisive actions against opioid distributors and manufacturers.

The Washington Post reached out to Obama, who signed the 2016 law, and his then Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, the highest law-enforcement officer in the nation. The DEA is organized under the Attorney General and the Dept. of Justice.

Both Obama and Lynch “declined” to discuss the law. Naturally.

Who played a central role in crafting the law and pushing it through Congress?

The Post: “Deeply involved in the effort to help the [drug] industry was the DEA’s former associate chief counsel, D. Linden Barber. While at the DEA, he helped design and carry out the early stages of the agency’s tough enforcement campaign, which targeted drug companies that were failing to report suspicious orders of narcotics.”

What?

Barber worked against the drug industry while employed by the DEA, and then he left the Agency and turned around and attacked it.

The Post: “When Barber went to work for the drug industry [he now works for Cardinal Health], in 2011, he brought an intimate knowledge of the DEA’s strategy and how it could be attacked to protect the [drug] companies. He was one of dozens of DEA officials recruited by the drug industry during the past decade.”

“Barber played a key role in crafting an early version of the legislation [the 2016 law] that would eventually curtail the DEA’s power, according to an internal email written by a Justice Department official to a colleague. ‘He [Barber] wrote the…bill,” the official wrote in 2014.”

The opioid crime network extends to Congress, former (if not present) DEA employees, medical-drug distribution companies, and pharmaceutical manufacturers.

It then includes medical clinics and pharmacies and prescription-writing doctors.

The murderous network is addicting, maiming, and killing Americans in huge numbers.

Filed under: Uncategorized

Vía Jon Rappoport’s Blog http://ift.tt/2yQXYfH

The Individual vs. the fake Collective

http://ift.tt/2hMriIX

The Individual vs. the Staged Collective

by Jon Rappoport

Trumpets blare. In the night sky, spotlights roam. A great confusion of smoke and dust and fog, and emerging banners, carrying the single message:

WE.

The great meltdown of all consciousness into a glob of utopian simplicity…//

There are denizens among us.

They present themselves as the Normals.

Beyond all political objectives, there is a simple fact: those group-mind addicts who have given up their souls will rage against the faintest appearance of one who tries to keep his. And in this rage, the soulless ones will try to pull the other down to where they live.

And somehow, it all looks normal and proper and rational.

In the 1950s, before television had numbed minds and turned them into jelly, there was a growing sense of: the Individual versus the Corporate State.

Something needed to be done. People were fitting into slots. They were surrendering their lives in increasing numbers. They were carving away their own idiosyncrasies and their independent ideas.

But television, under the control of psyops experts, became, as the 1950s droned on, the facile barrel of a weapon:

“What’s important is the group. Conform. Give in. Bathe in the great belonging…”

Recognize that every message television imparts is a proxy, a fabrication, a simulacrum, an imitation of life one step removed.

When this medium also broadcasts words and images of belonging and the need to belong, it’s engaged in revolutionary social engineering.

Whether it’s the happy-happy suburban-lawn family in an ad for the wonders of a toxic pesticide, or the mob family going to the mattresses to fend off a rival, it’s fantasy time in the land of mind control.

Television has carried its mission forward. The consciousness of the Individual versus the State has turned into: love the State. Love the State as family.

In the only study I have been able to find, Wictionary partially surveys the scripts of all television shows from the year 2006, to analyze the words most frequently broadcast to viewers in America.

Out of 29,713,800 words, including the massively used “a,” “an,” “the,” “you,” “me,” and the like, the word “home” ranks 179 from the top. “Mom” is 218. “Together” is 222. “Family” is 250.

This usage reflects an unending psyop.

Are you with the family or not? Are you with the group, the collective, or not? Those are the blunt parameters.

“When you get right down to it, all you have is family.” “Our team is really a family.” “You’re deserting the family.” “You fight for the guy next to you.” “Our department is like a family.” “Here at Corporation X, we’re a family.”

The committee, the group, the company, the sector, the planet.

The goal? Submerge the individual.

Individual achievement, imagination, creative power? Not on the agenda. Something for the dustbin of history.

Aldous Huxley, Brave New World: “‘Ninety-six identical twins working ninety-six identical machines’! The voice was almost tremulous with enthusiasm. ‘You really know where you are. For the first time in history.’”

George Orwell, 1984: “The two aims of the Party are to conquer the whole surface of the earth and to extinguish once and for all the possibility of independent thought.”

The soap opera is the apotheosis of television. The long-running characters in Anytown are irreversibly enmeshed in one another’s lives. There’s no escape. There is only mind-numbing meddling.

“I’m just trying to help you realize we all love you (in chains).”

“Your father, rest his soul, would never have wanted you to do this to yourself…”

“How dare you set yourself apart from us. Who do you think you are?”

For some people, the collective “WE” has a fragrant scent—until they get down in the trenches with it. There they discover odd odors and postures and mutations. There they discover self-distorted creatures scurrying around celebrating their twistedness.

The night becomes long. The ideals melt. The level of intelligence required to inhabit this cave-like realm is lower than expected, much lower.

Hypnotic perceptions, which are the glue that holds the territory together, begin to crack and fall apart, and all that is left is a grim determination to see things through.

As the night moves into its latter stages, some participants come to know that all their activity is taking place in a chimerical universe.

It is as if reality has been constructed to yield up gibberish.

Whose idea was it to become deaf, dumb, and blind in the first place?

And then perhaps one person in the cave suddenly says: I EXIST.

That starts a cacophony of howling.

In the aftermath of the 1963 assassination of JFK and the 1995 bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, the covert theme was the same: a lone individual did this.

A lone individual, detached from the group, did this. “Lone individuals are people who left the fold. They wandered from the communal hearth. Therefore, they inevitably became killers.”

In 1995, after the Oklahoma City Bombing, President Bill Clinton made a speech to the nation. He rescued his presidency by essentially saying, “Come home to the government. We will protect you and save you.”

He framed the crime in those terms. The individual versus the collective.

The history of human struggle on this planet is about the individual emerging FROM the group, from the tribe, from the clan. The history of struggle is not about the individual surrendering and going back INTO group identity.

Going back is the psyop.

The intended psyop.

//As the trumpets blare in the night sky, as the fog-ridden spotlights roam, as the banners emerge carrying the single message, WE, as people below are magnetically drawn to this show, a unpredicted thing happens:

Someone shouts: WHAT IS WE?

Other pick up the shout.

And the banners begin to catch fire and melt. They drip steel and wax and the false grinding of hypnotic dreams breaks its rhythm.

The whole sky-scene stutters like a great weapon losing its capacity to contain heat. The sky itself drips and caves inward and collapses, and the trumpets tail off and there is a new fresh silence.

The delusion, in pieces, is drifting away…

The cover: gone.

Behind it is The Individual.

What will he do now?

Will he seek to find his inherent power, the power he cast aside in his eagerness to join the collective?

Will he?

Or will he search for another staged melodrama designed to absorb him in an all-embracing WE?

Filed under: Uncategorized

Vía Jon Rappoport’s Blog http://ift.tt/2hLqft4

Australia: jail young children without charges; they wouldn’t do that; oh yes they would

http://ift.tt/2xJcyR6

Australia: jail young children without charges; they wouldn’t do that; oh yes they would

And it’s a perfect “bait and switch”

By Jon Rappoport

It’s still labeled a proposal, but it has widespread support among Australia’s political leaders.

The BBC: “…proposals that could see children as young as 10 held for two weeks without charge under new terror legislation.”

“State and territorial leaders approved the plans with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull at a Coalition of Australian Governments (COAG) meeting…”

The public hasn’t seen any details of the plan.

It’s obviously aimed at children who are suspected of preparing to commit terrorist acts, or children who are suspected of already committing those acts. Evidence would be lacking, formal charges wouldn’t be filed, but the children would still be arrested and held.

Let’s cut to the bottom lines. There are already laws which cover arresting children-terrorists. Yes, there needs to be evidence of some kind, but why is that a problem? For example, if federal police found a compound where children were being trained to handle weapons, and it was clear the intention was terrorism, those children could be taken into custody and investigated.

To understand the deeper point, however, you need to recognize that a new law restricting freedom for one reason can and will be expanded to include more reasons—all in the name of public safety and protection, of course. What creeps along the ground today stands up and runs wild tomorrow.

In this case, simply refer to the merciless Australian crackdown on parents and doctors who question the wisdom of vaccination and offer proof that vaccines are harmful, who are willing the buck the tide of official liars who insist that vaccines are miracles.

A year from now, two years from now, someone in government circles will come up with the bright idea that unvaccinated children, innocent victims of their parents’ madness, should be taken in, quarantined, held, because they are little walking time-bombs of contagion—and they must receive treatment. Which will be vaccination. Which will be “psychological intervention,” to “liberate them” from their parents’ delusions.

“Well you see, when we arrest little children on suspicion of being terrorists, we’re not really blaming the children. They’re victims. We need to sequester them away from the general population and find a way to re-educate them. In a similar fashion, when unvaccinated children are allowed to roam the streets and shops and schools, they too must be sequestered by the government…”

What’s that? You say children suspected of being terrorists and children suspected of being unvaccinated are not equivalent? So what? What leads you to believe the government is operating on a rational or logical basis?

The overriding issue here is control. That is the motive. The government feels a permanent need for more control over the citizenry.

It will seek it out and find it wherever it can, no matter how thin its justification.

“We do this for the children” can eventually mean anything the government wants it to mean.

Right now, Australia’s political leaders are worried about the people they call the “anti-vaxxers.” Why? Because the anti-vaxxers’ message is resonating with the public. Mothers whose babies’ lives have been destroyed by vaccinations are speaking up. Mothers who have raised happy and healthy children without vaccinations are speaking up. The fake medical cover story about the wonders of vaccination is being blown wide open.

What can be done? Whatever will shift control of children from parents to the State.

This new proposal to detain children suspected of terrorism is the planting of a seed that can and will sprout poisonous fruit. Today, terrorism. Tomorrow, vaccination.

To cite an egregious example: in the wake of the 9/11/01 attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush declared a new and improved War on Terror. He said America would seek out and destroy terrorists wherever they could be found; and states who refused to cooperate while they harbored terrorists would be considered enemies. Then…

What country did Bush choose to attack, for one? Iraq. There was no evidence Iraq was a center of terrorism. But that didn’t matter. American neocons wanted a war and they got one, along with a rationale: “Look what happened on 9/11.”

What started as a “reasonable” proclamation led to sheer insanity.

Wake up and smell the bait-and-switch and the con job. It’s coming up over the horizon.

Filed under: Uncategorized

Vía Jon Rappoport’s Blog http://ift.tt/2yrGDs0

Is Brexit dying on the vine along with England?

http://ift.tt/2yp8jfy

Is Brexit dying on the vine along with England?

By Jon Rappoport

—The cradle of individual liberty became the cradle of the nanny State—

The deep sickness that infects England infects every large government in the world: once a people’s decision (like Brexit) is made, the leaders who carry out its provisions are the people who rule from the top, along with their sleazy, slime-ridden bureaucratic underlings.

These obstructive underlings, in a free and open market, would be selling sand in the desert, if they were lucky. They certainly wouldn’t be sitting in desks in government offices staring out of windows.

So now we have soft Brexit and hard Brexit, terms used to describe how the Brit vote to leave the European Union could be modified or adhered to. It’s a farce.

Here is soft Brexit: “Well, maybe England will keep all its trade connections with the EU, as before, while pretending to be independent; and oh yes, many waves of immigrants will still be let into the country, even though that was the key issue that swung voters to say LEAVE the EU (EU wants to erase all national borders and flood Europe with migrants)…”

In other words, England would say it’s left the EU, but in every measurable way it hasn’t.

Well, here is my hard Brexit. No matter what crimes the rulers of a nation and their underlings have committed in the past, if that nation once spawned the concept of INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY, rebuilding itself means reinstituting that liberty, piece by piece, and person by person, with the full meaning of freedom and responsibility embraced. Otherwise, no dice. All national movement will be fakes and pretenders.

Of course England should desert that clap-trap unelected monstrosity called the EU. Of course, it should offload that burden. The elite and self-entitled Globalists who run the fascist EU are your run of the mill totalitarians.

But to make Brexit work in England, far more has to happen than withdrawal: A revival, a renewal, a rebirth, a throwing off of the sticky web of socialism and everything it means. There has to be an international Brexit and a national internal Brexit.

All this insanity began when the nation of the Magna Carta morphed into the welfare nation of “share and care” socialism. Freedom turned into “here’s how you can get all the government freebies you ever dreamed of.”

The individualism that birthed limited government (instead of a grotesque hydra issuing edicts to the populace in double-speak) died out.

It has to be put back.

Leave the EU and leave socialism.

No one said it would be easy.

But there are individuals in England who want freedom and liberty again. They know what freedom is.

If they don’t lead the way, the only Brexit will be the drone-hum of “we are all disabled, fix us.”

Leaving the EU, while keeping full-blown socialism at home, is like walking away from a rattlesnake toward a nest of rattlesnakes.

To the people of Europe who still believe in freedom:

You can say all you want to about the history of Europe, but you also have to say that Europe was the cradle of liberty for the whole world.

The main struggle was held there. And finally, the clear idea of individual freedom emerged.

Then, gradually, in the wake of two World Wars, a new theme took hold. You could call it comfort, or security, peace for all, share and care, the good life.

Under a dominating tax rate, citizens had “services” provided by their governments. Many pleasant services.

Why not? All was well.

Even when these governments were placed under the umbrella of the European Union, most citizens of member countries perceived no real problems—as long as the services continued to flow.

But there was an addendum to the basic contract. The national governments, and their superiors at the EU…they were the Providers, and they could, at their whim, turn the screw and apply new oppressive rules to the citizenry. And they could, if resistance appeared, drop their pose of benevolence and take on the role of Enforcer.

And if they did, where would liberty and individual freedom go?

It would go away.

Escalating floods of migrants entered Europe. This was a turning of the screw. Brought about by “upper management” of the Providers. The crimes and disruptions of these migrants have been well documented in independent media. The people of Europe had no say about the invasion. In fact, it soon became an offense to write about it or speak about it in a public forum.

The lords of government would brook no opposition.

The basic liberty—speaking freely—was on the line and under the boot heel.

For years, a campaign of political correctness in speech had been waged all over Europe. It covered many areas. The EU had been aiding and abetting it.

The “good life” was cracking at the seams. It wasn’t all good anymore.

The Provider was becoming the Enforcer.

Looking back on the change, it was always obvious that it was waiting in the wings. The Providers weren’t messiahs of a socialist utopia. That pretense was merely an intermediate phase in a much larger operation.

Mollify the citizenry for a time, “give them services,” and then when they were lulled into complacency, when they felt safe and secure, when they’d traded liberty for something that looks like liberty, start the chaos.

And clamp down. Assert overt control.

The EU structure was never extreme enough for the overlords. After all, it was a confederation of separate nations. The covert operation was One Nation of Europe, drained of separate traditions, with all former, distinguishing, national characteristics removed. The goal was one continental entity, seeded with enough migrants to eliminate visible differences, and roiled in conflicts.

To make a stew, heat and stir.

Eventually, eliminate the memory that, at one time, individual freedom was birthed in those countries. And one step further: eliminate the knowledge of what individual freedom is.

Bring in immigrants from cultures where authentic freedom, with its attendant responsibilities, means nothing.

The operation is well underway.

The lords of government never wanted utopia. They wanted, and want, submission. They achieved the soft version. Now they’re aiming for the hard.

This is modern European history not taught in schools. Schools would ban even a hint of it.

So the struggle begins again.

It has many faces—some of them ideological, which is to say, embedded in groups for whom national and ethnic identity is the foremost concern.

How long will it take before The Individual, defined by HIS OWN choice and vision, APART FROM SUCH IDENTITY, reemerges?

That was the original battle of the ages: the liberation of each individual.

It wasn’t easy then, and it won’t be easy now.

But it begins in the mind.

And not the group mind.

Not in any group.

In 1859, John Stuart Mill wrote: “If it were felt that the free development of individuality is one of the leading essentials of well-being…there would be no danger that liberty should be undervalued.”

Escaping from, and dissolving the trap that is now Europe may be the work of cooperating groups; but the reason for the escape will ultimately come back to the individual, his power, and his independent self-chosen destiny.

He carries the torch.

Though it may not seem so, his flame vaporizes collectivism.

It was always so, and it is now.

Europe’s great thinkers and writers were the very people who made this clear: freedom exists and it pertains to the individual, not the group, not some shadowy entity, not a collective; freedom is not simply a word or a floating ideal waving its banner in the air; it is the soul’s platform, from which all good things become possible; it is the starting point of a life; it is the blood that runs through a dream of a created future, a better future; it is the brother of the individual’s accountability for his own actions.

Throw a blanket over freedom, and no one is accountable.

This is why so many people now deny freedom. They want to remain unaccountable.

They want everything for nothing, and they want the right to spend that everything, or burn it, tear it up, destroy it. And then ask for more.

For them, the countries of Europe are just places. Easy places to exploit.

But no matter the circumstances, the inner core of the struggle is the same: the liberation of the individual from all the forlorn hopes that lead him back to searching for the utopia he once believed was coming.

That painted illusion is going away.

The individual, falling back on his own resources, will need to relearn half-forgotten lessons. He will have to ignite his own energy.

The challenge can be bracing, and much more. It can awaken sleeping corridors of the spirit, where he once walked in power.

And can walk again.

Profound dissatisfaction and resistance can breed joy.

Once upon a time, he knew that, and then he abandoned the knowledge for a syrupy potion of a New Age; now the bottle is dry.

Now, he is the creator of his own enterprises; his own destiny.

I say Europe will live again.

Filed under: Uncategorized

Vía Jon Rappoport’s Blog http://ift.tt/2zdTCLM

Harvey Clinton, I mean Bill Weinstein

http://ift.tt/2ie7UbZ

Harvey Clinton, I mean Bill Weinstein

By Jon Rappoport

Now that everyone in Hollywood is taking such a brave stance after 20 years and pointing an accusing finger at Harvey Weinstein (cue massive applause and bravos), perhaps we should review Hillary Clinton’s attitude toward women who claim they were abused, attacked, and raped.

Hillary, too, was “disgusted” to learn about Weinstein’s outrageous crimes. Of course, thinking she is still on the campaign trail, she took the opportunity to equate Weinstein and Donald Trump. She somehow forgot about her own hubby Bill. When reminded, she says all that is in the past and it’s “already been litigated.” Which is lawyer talk for “we got away with it.”

Let’s see. Here are a few choice bits culled from dailywire.com:

In 1992, Hillary describes one of Bill’s women, Gennifer Flowers, as “some failed cabaret singer who doesn’t even have much of a résumé to fall back on.” She says, if given the chance to cross-examine Flowers in court, “I mean, I would crucify her.”

Hillary on Monica Lewinsky: “narcissistic loony toon.”

Hillary, while practicing as a lawyer, defends a man accused of raping a 12-year-old girl. She wins the case. Then on tape, she’s caught saying, “He [her client] took a lie detector test. I had him take a polygraph, which he passed, which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs.” Then she breaks up laughing.

Hillary talking about Weinstein has the moral high ground of a dump truck unloading toxic chemicals in a landfill.

Lest we forget, there is this, from Zero Hedge (1/25/17, via Disobedient Media): “…the shocking discovery that Hillary and Bill Clinton provided assistance to convicted child trafficker, Laura Silsby, resulting in a reduced sentence for child trafficking.”

“Silsby was arrested at the Haitian border attempting to smuggle 33 children out of Haiti without documentation. Her sentence and charges were reduced after an intervention by Bill Clinton.”

“Hillary and Bill Clinton took an extraordinary interest in Silsby’s case from the moment she was arrested and almost immediately stepped in on her behalf. The Harvard Human Rights Journal stated that one of Bill Clinton’s first acts as special envoy for the United Nations in Haiti ‘was to put out the fire of a child abduction scandal involving American citizens.’ On February 7th, 2010, The Sunday Times reported that Bill Clinton had intervened to strike a deal with the Haitian government, securing the release of all co-conspirators except for Silsby. Prosecutors ultimately sought a six-month sentence in Silsby’s case, reducing charges for conspiracy and child abduction to mere ‘arranging irregular travel.’ A shockingly light penalty given the circumstances of her arrest, which would likely not have been possible but for the intervention of the Clintons in Silsby’s case.”

Even assuming Hillary did not directly intervene in the case, what about her husband Bill? What does Hillary have to say about him?

I believe it would be: It’s all in the past, it’s already been litigated—we got away with it.

For the Clintons, the present has a magical way of dissolving into the past.

After all, Bill, when questioned about sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinsky, defended his “I did not do it” answer with, “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”

“Is,” as in right now, as opposed to “was,” in the recent past.

I’m not committing a crime right now, so “What difference, at this point, does it make?” That’s what Hillary said when she was grilled about the Benghazi attack and how she lied about the cause.

The present magically vanishes into the past.

The Clinton way.

And when the past is brought up—that’s already been litigated.

The Clintons—pure as the driven snow.

Filed under: Uncategorized

Vía Jon Rappoport’s Blog http://ift.tt/2gGZCWd