Category Archives: jon rappoport articles today

Dispatches from the War: COVID trauma-based mind control

Yes, it’s real; yes, it’s contagious; yes, you can die:

I get that.

(JAF, ed.)

~   _________________________   ~

Dispatches from the War: COVID trauma-based mind control

THE GREAT JON RAPPOPORT
THE GREAT JON RAPPOPORT

July 27, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

“Can we get control of an individual to the point where he will do our bidding against his will and even against fundamental laws of nature, such as self preservation?”(CIA interdepartmental memo, Project ARTICHOKE, January 1952)

The covert operation called COVID, which has been planned for years, is all about trauma-based mind control.

The trauma combines fear of a germ with the sudden psychic shock of the lockdowns, the masks, the social distancing, the economic destruction.

For many people, this trauma is paralyzing on a subconscious level.

As in: HOW CAN THIS BE? AM I LIVING IN A DREAM?

The government and media messaging about the “pandemic” was immediate, and it was launched as a wall-to-wall campaign. News reports, ads, public service announcements, talk shows, newspaper articles, press conferences, etc. No room was permitted for counter-opinion and evidence or intelligent discussion and debate. The messaging flood plays a major role in the trauma effect.

In a state of subconscious paralysis, people obey. They follow orders. They sleep-walk. They even, on top of the layer of paralysis, actively defend the powers-that-be.

A nation asleep. A world asleep.

—This would be the time for a political leader to step forward and address the people, in order to wake them up—first, by directing them to look around and see the unconscionable economic and, therefore, human wreckage.

This leader, this president, would describe in sufficient detail the horrendous situation: job loss, business closures, bankruptcies, suicides, murders, broken families. The national engine of production, shut down. The “cure worse than the disease.” Far worse.

Then the leader would rally the nation with a plan for recovery. This would be a further wake-up call. For example, for a start, the creation of a million jobs, to repair the crumbling national infrastructure. Roads, highways, bridges, canals.

Trauma and paralysis need “a reverse vector.” Supplied with great energy and conviction.

We see none of that. Political leaders are mainly timid and brainless—when they aren’t forcing more restrictive measures on the people.

Perhaps the political leader with the most swagger and counter-consensus attitude—in the still most powerful nation in the world—is Donald Trump. Is he waking up the country? Is he stepping to the podium and laying bare the economic devastation that has been leveled at the people? Is he voicing a plan for recovery?

No.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT PICTURE?

Most people see, in his maddening and conspicuous lack of real leadership, nothing unusual, because they are still in the middle of the trauma and the shock.

But there is “plenty of unusual.” A leader who doesn’t lead. A leader who, in a time of crisis, when leadership means so much, doesn’t step up.

THAT is unusual. That is madness.

Now, add this: the Stockholm Syndrome. People under rule by edict and force will often develop an attachment to their oppressors. Loyalty. Even a perverse love.

Why? Because they see no other option.

And because, on a subconscious level, the whole surreal world they are now living in makes no sense at all unless their rulers are doing the right thing.

Therefore, their leaders must be right. They have to be right.

The governors and mayors have to be right. Even the president, in doing nothing substantial, is right.

Of course, the loss of job and business and money is also paralyzing in the extreme. The government prescription seems to be: WAIT. Keep living on Welfare and bailout until the money runs out or until the crisis is declared over.

All in all, many people are subconsciously asking this question: would I rather wake up and therefore see the mass insanity all around me, or would I prefer to stay asleep and follow orders and pretend that is the best course of action? They choose the second option.

Waking up means the individual is living life at a new and different level. It means seeing the truth. It’s the first step to coming up with a strategy for dealing with the reality that has been imposed.

Not waking up means living in a state of conformity, accepting official statements and orders, following those orders, fitting in, acting normal, adjusting, behaving according to stimulus-response.

Re quarantine, isolation, social distancing, wearing masks: “We did not know what the Russian [brainwashing] procedures were, but it seemed that they were producing some peculiar changes of attitude. How? One possible factor was perceptual isolation and we concentrated on that.” (Donald Hebb, Sensory Deprivation: A Symposium Held at Harvard Medical School. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1961)

John Q Citizen would say: “But I have to believe the quarantines, the isolation, the lockdowns, the distancing, the masks…they’re all happening so we can contain the virus. If I stop believing that, things would look very different. And I don’t want thing to look very different.”

Re the use of fake official science as mind control: “Brainwashing is a system of befogging the brain so a person can be seduced into acceptance of what otherwise would be abhorrent to him. He loses touch with reality…However, in order to prevent people from recognizing the inherent evils in brainwashing, the Reds [Communists] pretend that it is only another name for something already very familiar and of unquestioned respect, such as education or reform.” (Edward Hunter, Brainwashing. New York: Pyramid Books. 1956)

Re the recruitment of citizens to operate as contact tracers in a wide-ranging program: “Brainwashing is defined as an observable set of transactions between a charismatically-structured collectivity and an isolated agent of the collectivity with the goal of transforming the agent into a deployable agent.” (Thomas Robbins, ‎Benjamin David Zablocki, Misunderstanding Cults, 2001)

COVID IS A MASS MIND CONTROL PROGRAM.


(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 29thDistrict 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 hereor his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Dispatches from the War: the Dershowitz con, and the Florida covid hustle

Jon Rappoport
Jon Rappoport

 

EXCERPT:

Big-time public health agencies make sure news networks are fed properly.  That’s how the CDC, for example, has survived all these years.  The CDC tells lies that would make this COVID screw-up of yours look like a spilled ice-cream cone at a sweet sixteen party.

The CDC lives on lies.  So they cultivate reporters and editors at all the major news outlets.  They pass reporters tons of stories.  It’s a long-term operation.  Therefore, they can tell CBS to shut down a piece about tens of thousands of fake flu test samples without even telling them.  Get it?  There’s an understanding.

There’s a culture of mutual respect among thieves.  Both sides are basically in the same business, and they know it.  You don’t know much of anything.

ARTICLE:

Dispatches from the War: Dershowitz con, Florida covid hustle

by Jon Rappoport

July 21, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

ONE: ALAN DERSHOWITZ

This is about what the State is permitted to do to citizens under a State of Emergency. For example, the Lockdown Emergency which has driven the national economy over a cliff. The economic ruination Trump refuses to face up to; refuses to talk directly to the American people about; refuses to address with a specific plan for recovery. If a president has any vital function at all, it is to lead in a time of crisis. As in: THIS IS WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE COUNTRY RIGHT NOW, AND THIS IS WHAT I’M GOING TO DO ABOUT IT. Striding down a hallway wearing a black mask for a photo op doesn’t cut it. Standing with corporate hot shots who are ready to go into production of breathing ventilators isn’t a recovery plan. Empowering the military to give COVID vaccinations isn’t a recovery plan. But I digress. This piece is about Alan Dershowitz, who famously said:

“Let me put it very clearly: you have no constitutional right to endanger the public and spread the disease, even if you disagree. You have no right not to be vaccinated…And if you refuse to be vaccinated, the state has the power to literally take you to a doctor’s office and plunge a needle into your arm.”

If that were true, every declared State of Emergency would be equal.

A president could say, “My favorite pagan goddess from Spokane came to me in a dream last night and told me to order every citizen to cut off a pinky finger to avert the danger of infection…”

Nothing in the Constitution forbids a court from judging a particular State of Emergency on its merits. In fact, the Constitution would demand such judgement. Otherwise, the entire basis of limited federal government would be undermined.

And once you open THAT door and argue a State of Emergency on the merits, evidence about vaccines can be presented. Are vaccines truly safe and effective? Are severe adverse effects rare or widespread?

What are the unvarnished facts?

Dershowitz blithely assumes he understands vaccination. He doesn’t. He’s clueless. He simply thinks vaccinations are a standard public safety measure, on the level of hand-washing.

Would he argue that orders to wear masks during a declared State of Emergency are constitutionally impossible to challenge? If non-government experts assert masks are useless?

The “merits of the case,” Mr. Dershowitz. That is the key.

Suppose a government task force reports that 1 out of every 1.5 Americans is developing cancer during his/her life? And then, a moronic president declares a national State of Emergency and orders universal prophylactic chemotherapy for all citizens?

That would be mandatory? That would be constitutionally ironclad?

No court could consider that order on its merits? No one could stand before a judge and argue that the devastating treatment is toxic in the extreme, or that the so-called War on Cancer has been a failure?

If the COVID-19 vaccine turns out to be based on new DNA technology, meaning every vaccine recipient’s genetic makeup would be permanently altered, a legal objection would be ruled out of bounds, because the vaccine is coming on board during a State of Emergency? Really?

To use a highly technical legal term, insisting a State of Emergency overrules the protection of life and the meaning of liberty is bullshit.

The blood and sacrifice of centuries, which led to the writing and ratification of the Constitution, were not made so lawyers or judges could undermine its entire spirit by defending States of Emergency, as if they came from higher and wiser heads protecting the Public Good.

In this case, a mandated vaccine would be a protection RACKET, launched by a remorseless pharmaceutical mafia.

Case closed, Mr. Dershowitz. Meaning the door is wide open to debate the facts and the principles and the truth.

You followed up your famous statement by remarking that you and your family could refuse a COVID vaccine through an act of civil disobedience; but then you would have to accept the penalty.

I wonder how you’d react if that penalty meant your family would be sent to a moldy room in a fleabag hotel in a dangerous neighborhood, to serve out your period of isolation; after which officials would approach you again to take the vaccine.

I think you might reformulate your constitutional opinion about States of Emergency. You might suddenly see a new legal option. You might decide that freedom and liberty are incontrovertible.

You might decide that arguing from past case precedents, when those cases distort the Constitution, is an academic exercise unworthy of an honest lawyer’s time and energy.

You might decide that whatever personal bias actually motivated you to issue your famous statement in the first place was irrelevant.

When trouble visits your own door, when your public pronouncements come around to bite you, you might find a reason to change your tune.

What is legally obvious on the mountain top is not always obvious in the foothills.

In the foothills, people are eating fruit of the poisonous tree, long ago planted in the middle of the Constitution. If you were down there, you would be put on that diet. I think you would then miraculously spot a new legal angle on States of Emergency.

TWO: FLORIDA HUSTLE

Breitbart, July 14: “A FOX 35 investigation released on Monday discovered an inflation of coronavirus cases by the Florida Department of Health. The Sunshine State’s health authorities misreported the number of persons testing positive for coronavirus in its aggregation and publication of test results from laboratories.”

“Twenty-two labs reported 100-percent positivity rates. Two labs reported 91.18-percent positivity rates.”

So…it was a massive coincidence that all 22 labs happened to make the same mistake at the same time.

—On the level of, say, two dozen planes landing five runways to the left of their designated lanes at two dozen different airports on the same day.

Sure.

Toss a coin. Heads, all the tests kits were rigged to read positive for COVID. Tails, all the labs lied.

In either event, the fake COVID monster is fed. It needs case numbers. Desperately. In order to present a false picture of danger.

Thus, justifying the lockdowns, the masks, the distancing, the economic destruction.

Dear Florida Health Department—you’ve done it. I thought real estate cons were the state’s most valuable product. But now I don’t know. You might have jumped to the top of the charts.

If you want to challenge for the national title, or the global gold medal, though, you might have to tap dance even harder.

Italy, as I reported months ago, was heading along a track of fakery at hundreds of miles an hour. The whole country was on lockdown.

But their National Institute of Health, working to uncover actual facts, dug into patient records of people who had died.

Their initial finding: the average age of so-called COVID deaths was 79.5. The vast majority of these elderly patients had serious prior medical conditions. In other words, there was no reason to suspect they died because of a new virus (which had never been isolated and discovered in the first place).

Then the Institute decided there were only three people under the age of 40 in the whole country who could be said to have died as a result of the virus (which had never been isolated and discovered in the first place).

Of course, since then, the Italian National Institute of Health has gone dark. Obviously, they’ve been censored and choked off.

So, Florida, you have a way to go, if you want to play in the big-time.

It appears the 22 labs in your state are going to play the number-mistake game to account for their fake reports. “We meant to say 5 percent positive, but our equipment spit out 99 percent. We’re checking to find out why.”

I would advise against that strategy. When 22 labs all chime in with the same basic explanation, they can’t sell the story. I think you, the Florida Public Health Department, are going to have to take the fall. You say, “All the labs were correct, but when their numbers reached us, we had a software glitch, and the numbers were scrambled. For a few days, before we caught the error, everything was coming up a hundred percent. COVID, meningitis, whooping cough, mumps, measles, leprosy. Even our paychecks were doubled.”

The only thing is, as far as I can tell, you didn’t catch the “error.” Neither did the labs. FOX did. Oops. In other words, you never would have reported a problem unless you’d been found out.

In the future, whenever a press outlet contacts your PR people with a damaging finding, have the PR flacks say, “We’re working on it.” Doesn’t matter what it is. Give some sort of impression you’re aware. Don’t say: WE’RE DOING WHAT? WE FAILED TO NOTICE WHAT?

Frankly, you’re idiots. You know how to work part of a con. You just don’t know how to work the most important part: deniability.

I take back what I said earlier. You’re not on the level of Florida real estate hustles. When a company sells suckers homes that, three years later, sink into marsh, that company is already gone. They’re operating under another name; or at the very least, their sales contracts have ironclad built-in protections in the small print.

You know what your real problem is? Basic media relations. Over the years, you people at the Florida Health Department haven’t been feeding FOX good news stories. You haven’t fostered a dependency at FOX. They don’t need you. So they don’t mind exposing you.

Big-time public health agencies make sure news networks are fed properly. That’s how the CDC, for example, has survived all these years. The CDC tells lies that would make this COVID screw-up of yours look like a spilled ice-cream cone at a sweet sixteen party.

The CDC lives on lies. So they cultivate reporters and editors at all the major news outlets. They pass reporters tons of stories. It’s a long-term operation. Therefore, they can tell CBS to shut down a piece about tens of thousands of fake flu test samples without even telling them. Get it? There’s an understanding.

There’s a culture of mutual respect among thieves. Both sides are basically in the same business, and they know it. You don’t know much of anything.

Where are your heavy pharmaceutical connections? They’re the number-one advertiser at all significant news networks. If they’d been clued in on your little problem, early on, they would have fixed it overnight for you. Before anyone knew about it.

The CDC is a front group for Pharma vaccine companies. The CDC is a whore and the relationship is perfectly clear.

I assume you people at the Florida Public Health Department want to be a whore, you just don’t know how to find a good pimp.

It’s all a matter of education.

Most things are.


 

(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.

Dispatches from the war: Mr. Trump, you’re not Tom Paine

 

Idiotfreezone.com
Idiotfreezone.com

* _________________*

Dispatches from the war: Mr. Trump, you’re not Tom Paine

Tom Paine
Tom Paine

* _________________*

No guts, no glory

July 13, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

Note to the reader: Don’t blithely assume the economy is reopening and things will continue to improve. The nation is under the control of public health traitors. They can declare “new waves” of cases. They can invent pretexts at the drop of a hat, and governors and mayors can declare lockdowns again. This is not over. The economic war against the people is being waged to destroy America.

You’ll see this week, as my controversial series of dispatches tries to reach out to the president, I’m suggesting that he break with hallowed tradition and send in troops (or the FBI) to the states and force open the economy, once and for all. Permanently.

I fully realize the dangers of such a move. I also realize what this economic war against the people and the country is doing to America. The news media are covering up the full effects. The nation is being driven off a cliff into chaos. That is the heinous plan. COVID is a pumped up lie and a gross exaggeration, formulated to enable the plan.


It’s a long night in the White House and a long night in America.

It’s a folded newspaper on a silver tray, and the headline screams: WAR, AND AMERICA IS LOSING.

You’re the president and you read it. You can’t not read it.

It’s 3AM and the moon is sitting in the sky. Lopsided. A blood moon.

The enemy hasn’t just landed on our shore. He’s in every community in the country. He’s inside the inside:

Every mom and pop store, every small and medium business in the nation is signaling frantically to you: WRECKAGE. WRECKAGE. WRECKAGE. WRECKAGE.

Is no one hearing those voices? Is it a silent movie? Just because the traitorous press refuses to cover it?

Mr. Trump, when are you going to fight the enemy? When are you going to declare the real state of emergency?

Millions of people who voted for you are on hold. They’re waiting.

They’re waiting for the cavalry to come over the hill.

You’re paralyzed.

In a state of war with the country fully invaded, with the economic devastation that has been visited on the land…

You’re surrendering to the likes of those two-bit vampires, De Blasio and Cuomo, to that blown-dry idiot, Newsom. The governors and mayors are taking you out.

That’s your destiny?

Who are you?

What’s the watchword and the battle cry in this crisis?

Is it Tom Paine? “THESE are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.”

Or is it, “Order a contactless pizza from Domino’s”?

That once great city, New York, your city, lies in ruins.

Who, Mr. Trump, is the enemy? Who has stormed the beaches and swarmed into the cities and towns of this country? Who has taken down the engines of business?

Do you know?

You swaggered into the White House in 2017 like a two-gun cowboy, backhanding the press, talking fast, talking hard, promising to lift up the economy to soaring heights…and now you’re sitting in the Oval signing away trillions of dollars for a Welfare operation the likes of which the world has never seen. Trillions of air-guitar dollars, lunar dollars, out-of-the-sleeve stage magic dollars, Fed Reserve high-on-speed dream dollars, boiling frog dollars, Wizard of Oz rainbow dollars.

Dollars for a smoking wreckage of an economy, for the people who were working every day in that economy. Some of those checks are going out to people who have already committed suicide, who are now solidly addicted to booze and drugs, who are smashing apart their families, who are standing inside the empty dusty rooms and offices of their former small businesses, wondering what shuck and jive con leveled their survival and their legacy.

They’re being told by bright-eyed android news heads that “the reopening is proceeding.” What do you think their unedited response is?

Do you really think it’s “we’re all in this together”? Do you think they’re happily gnawing on that bone a gaggle of grinning PR devils tossed out the window of their cruising limos on the way to summer vacation houses?

You can’t worm out of this one, Mr. President. You’re no Tom Paine and no George Washington. You stood down and watched this storm hit. This dismantling. This economic invasion. This wrecking ball.

Do you know who the enemy is?

What are you going to do?

Millions of your supporters are waiting for your answer and your action. They’ve eaten as many of your tweet-calories as they can possibly handle.

They’re ready to sign on for the war and back you up, and but they can’t find an enlistment office.

Ten years from now, with the economy nationalized, with wage and price controls, with a permanent dole, with the hideous face of Pelosi or Hillary or Biden stamped on every digital dollar, where will you be?

And 50 years from now, when the history of this nation is buried under multiple layers of scrambled-egg obfuscation, some addled historian will write: “Donald Trump was once thought to have been the president of the United States, but he was actually a composer of a song, BACK IN THE USSR.

Unless you fight the war now, Mr. Trump. No holds barred.

These are times that try men’s souls. Who’s got your soul in a box?

Are you so dumb you can’t see it? He’s the gnome standing right next to you at press conferences.

He’s the front man for the blood moon.

 

(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.

“Murder by lockdown: details from a dozen countries.” – THE *MURDERS OF GRANDMA AND GRANDPA*, AND WHY?

WHY, JON RAPPOPORT,

WHY?

I (JAF, editor) SUBMIT: it’s because Older People tend to vote conservatively, and they vote more than the younger demographic.

…only 46% of people18-34 years old voted in the last election. So the elderly have a disproportionate influence on our politics and our country. And a lot of them would like to keep it that way.

.   __________________________   .

Older voters tend to be more conservative than the population, meaning that the conservative agenda is disproportionately weighted on the national political stage. Whether this is good or bad depends on your political attitude, but it seems to be anti-democratic in practice, if not in intent.

.   __________________________   .

Also because Old People are obviously (self-evidently)  a drain on socialized medicine, such as that existing worldwide, in the UK, Canada, France, etc., and In the USA.

http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-2013-anxiety-meter.html
http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-2013-anxiety-meter.html

Some photos and ramblings by Jeffrey A. Friedberg

.   __________________________   .

Jon Rappoport’s Original Article:

Jon Rappoport
Jon Rappoport

ARTICLE: Murder by lockdown: details from a dozen countries

Make that 13, plus one city, New York

by Jon Rappoport

July 1, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

 

The reference here is a stunning May 23 article by John Pospichal, “Questions for lockdown apologists,” posted at medium.com.

(This is part-4 in the series, “Killing Old People”. For part-3, click here.)

Pospichal examined overall mortality numbers for Austria, Belgium, Denmark, England and Wales, France, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Ecuador, and New York City.

Supported by charts, here are excerpts from his article:

“We now have mortality data for the first few months of 2020 for many countries, and, as you might expect, there were steep increases associated with the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in each one.”

“Surprisingly, however, these increases did not begin before the lockdowns were imposed, but after. Moreover, in almost every case, they began immediately after. Often, mortality numbers were on a downward trend before suddenly reversing course after lockdowns were decreed.”

“This is an astonishing finding…”

“You will notice that only after each country (or city) was locked down did the increases begin. Moreover, they began immediately, and in nearly every case, precipitously.”

“All this leads us to the following questions, which we pose to all those who continue to defend the use of lockdowns as an effective means to prevent excess deaths.”

“Q: Why was there no significant increase in overall mortality, in any country we have good data for, before the start of lockdowns?”

“Q: Why does a precise and exact correlation exist between the start of lockdowns and significant rises in overall mortality?”

“Q: How is it that governments in every country imposed lockdowns at precisely the same time relative to the future precipitous rise in their populations’ overall mortality rate?”

“Q: How is it, moreover, that this moment in time [i.e., the imposition of lockdowns] happened to fall immediately before that precipitous rise?”

“Q: If health authorities vastly underestimated the prevalence of the virus at the beginning of the pandemic, why did the virus nevertheless wait until lockdowns were imposed to suddenly start killing at levels which exceeded normal deaths?”

—To that last question, I would respond: No virus would wait. We’re not talking about a virus at all. We’re talking about the sudden effects of the lockdowns.

And those sudden death-effects would come crashing down, first, and immediately, on the most vulnerable people in these countries:

The elderly, who were already ill for years.

THE LOCKDOWNS FORCED THE PREMATURE DEATHS OF OLD PEOPLE.

PEOPLE WHO HAD BEEN SUFFERING FROM MULTIPLE HEALTH CONDITIONS FOR YEARS, WHO HAD BEEN TREATED WITH TOXIC MEDICAL DRUGS, WHOSE IMMUNE SYSTEMS WERE ALREADY SEVERELY COMPROMISED…

AND WHO ARE SUDDENLY TERRIFIED BY TWO MORE FACTORS—THE POSSIBILITY OF A COVID-19 DIAGNOSIS, AND ISOLATION FROM FRIENDS AND FAMILY. THESE TWO FACTORS PUSH THEM OVER THE EDGE AND THEY DIE.

Especially in nursing homes; but also in hospitals, and in their homes.

This is the true face of “COVID.”

This is how the case numbers and the death numbers are being propped up all over the world, to yield the impression of a virus on the loose.

Without those huge numbers, the whole vicious charade of a pandemic would be exposed and rejected at once.

The lockdowns are a method of killing.

The governors and mayors and presidents and prime ministers who imposed the lockdowns—and behind them, the planners of “COVID”— have been killing old people.


(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.

Death by killing old people, not [BY] COVID—the basic deception

Death by killing old people, not [BY] COVID—the basic deception

Jon Rappoport
Jon Rappoport

[BREAKING—UPDATE: The New York Times (June 27) is reporting that 43 percent of all US COVID deaths are occurring in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities for the elderly. In at least 24 states, more than 50 percent of all COVID deaths are occurring in these facilities. The Times fails to mention deaths of the elderly at hospitals or, at home, cut off from family and friends. The situation is far worse than the Times makes it out to be.]

by Jon Rappoport

June 30, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

Continuing my series of articles on the killing of the elderly—which IS what “COVID” IS.

(This is part-3 in the series, “Killing Old People”. For part-2, click here.)

The medical establishment is facing the embarrassing and devastating fact that a huge percentage of so-called COVID deaths are occurring in nursing homes. The elderly are dying prematurely.

And not only in nursing homes. In hospitals, and alone in their apartments.

All told, huge numbers of old people are dying premature deaths.

It’s obvious these patients have many serious and long-standing health conditions that have NOTHING to do with a virus. They’ve been treated for decades with toxic medical drugs. Their immune systems are severely compromised.

THEN they’re terrified when they’re handed a diagnosis of COVID-19 based on fraudulent tests, or no tests at all. They’re shut off completely from the outside world. No family or friends are permitted to see them. So the elderly die.

You want to see some astonishing numbers? Let’s go to the “epicenter.” New York City.

Using worldometers.info for data, I looked at the latest figures available.

As of May 13, take these two age groups—65 to 74, and 75 and older—and together they account for a staggering 73.6 percent of all COVID deaths in the city.

The 75 and older group accounts, all on its own, for 48.7 percent of all COVID deaths in the city.

For THIS, New York is on lockdown. Boarded up. Imprisoned. Economically torpedoed and devastated. With two ignoramus-vampires—Governor Cuomo and Mayor De Blasio—hovering over its shoulders.

If you subtracted the premature and forced deaths of the elderly, the fiction of New York as “the epicenter of COVID” would blow away in the wind in five minutes.

In case you missed it, in a piece I wrote a few days ago, I added yet one more factor to the murderous New York formula:

The Hill, undated (late April 2020), reporting on “data…gathered at Northwell Health, New York state’s largest hospital system. The study, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) examines 5,700 patients hospitalized with coronavirus infections in the New York City region, with final outcomes recorded for 2,634 patients. The average patient age was 63 years old… For the next oldest age group, ages 66 years and older, patients receiving mechanical [breathing] ventilation recorded a 97.2 percent mortality rate.”

Just in case all the other obvious factors failed to produce premature death in the elderly, ventilators provided the method.

Don’t even think of saying, “Well, you see, those old people put on ventilators were already very sick and close to dying.” NO medical treatment that kills 97.2 percent of patients in a well-defined group is continued, unless there are orders mandating it. Unless there is added insurance money to be made from it. Unless the doctors are willing to keep using the treatment, despite the results.

New York—the “epicenter of the pandemic”—is an epicenter of killing old people.

Public health agencies think: “How can we falsely explain all these old people dying, in terms that will operate as a diversion and a cover story?”

And they come up with: “Well, of course these elderly people already had medical problems before the COVID virus came along, and yes, these problems contributed to their demise. But in the end, the cause of death was the VIRUS…”

A convenient and false statement.

So let’s look at this VIRUS. Again.

For the fourth or fifth time since I started writing about the “pandemic,” I’ll go back to the beginning. To the claim that a new virus was discovered in China. The one that is supposedly causing the global catastrophe.

Instead of blithely accepting the claim that the virus was “sequenced” and its genetic makeup was laid out, I offer the following—

Do the study you never did. Do something coherent. Since you announced a global pandemic affecting billions of lives, do a real study.

Gather together a thousand people you claim are suffering from the “epidemic disease,” and take tissue samples from them. In the real world. Now, under proper supervision, with independent observers recording on video every single step of the process, CORRECTLY put these samples through a purifying procedure that involves centrifuging them, and extracting the relevant material—and place small bits of this material under an electron microscope. Take photos (EMs) of what you see.

Now place these thousand photos side by side. In each photo, do you see many, many particles of what is unmistakably a virus? Is it a virus you’ve never seen before? From photo to photo, are the many particles of this new virus all the same?

When you’ve done that, let another set of technicians follow the same procedure, and see what they come up with.

If by THESE standards, you really think you’ve found a new virus, call me.

I’m not interested in what you’re “genetically sequencing” in the lab. It could be a partial virus of no concern, a decaying irrelevant virus, a piece of random genetic material, cellular debris, exosomes, a common-cold coronavirus, who knows what? And if a hundred labs start with the same who-knows-what sample, and all the labs come up with the same genetic sequence, this proves nothing.

There is no procedure that can climb inside a person’s body and record what is happening in real time at the level of a virus—but the closest you can come is the electron microscope procedure I’ve described above.

You didn’t do that procedure. Don’t come at me with a few random anecdotal cases from here and there, in which you did take electron microscope photos. Don’t tap dance.

The planet went on lockdown as a result of what you claim you discovered—so do the coherent study I outlined. Go the whole distance. That’s what science is supposed to do. And then other teams of researchers can weigh in with their own large electron microscope studies and confirm or deny your findings.

Meanwhile, do you know what you have? An unproven virus. A fake. A story about a virus.

Therefore, all your diagnostic tests “for the new virus” are a sham. They’re based on something you never demonstrated in the first place.

—Therefore, all those people, those elderly people dying for obvious reasons in nursing homes, and in their lonely apartments, and in hospitals all over the world? You obviously have no proof they’re dying from a virus. How could you? You never properly discovered a new virus. You have dust in your hands. Saying these elderly people died as a result of the COVID virus is meaningless.

Actually you have murder. You have blood on your hands. Your death-dealing COVID diagnosis of these old people is the final straw that drives them into terror and over the edge into death. You have that to answer for.

In this article I decided to lift the cover on the whole sordid mess—going to the root. It was necessary, because the medical “experts” keep falling back on THE VIRUS to explain away all objections. The truth is right in front of their eyes—it’s obvious why all these old people are dying, and why fake scientists and medical fraudsters must count their deaths as COVID cases.

Without those gigantic death numbers, the illusion of a pandemic would fall apart in an hour.

THE OLD PEOPLE ARE DYING FROM TERROR AND LONELINESS ON TOP OF ALL THEIR LONG-STANDING HEALTH CONDITIONS AND THE TOXIC TREATMENTS THEY RECEIVED FOR YEARS. Period. No virus needed.

They’re dying in nursing homes, in isolated apartments and houses all over the world, and in hospitals. And on their bodies is built this vicious war against the population of the planet.


 

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

SOURCES:

* nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-nursing-homes.html

* worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

* thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/medical-advances/494274-nearly-half-of-all-patients-placed-on


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.

Elite television news rescued by COVID

Jon Rappoport
THE GREAT AND TRUTHFUL, Jon Rappoport

 

AP Photo/Alex Brandon
LYING BASTARD, FAUCI:AP Photo/Alex Brandon

 

 

Adolph Hitler - "Gestures: Poses of a dangerous populist fantasist." - https://www.hist-chron.com/eu/3R/propaganda-2wk-ENGL.html
LYING BASTARD, Adolph Hitler – “Gestures: Poses of a dangerous populist fantasist.” – https://www.hist-chron.com/eu/3R/propaganda-2wk-ENGL.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Elite television news rescued by COVID
(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)
Yet another consequence of the fake pandemic is the propping up of that doddering old fool, elite television news.

The COVID story doesn’t need Walter Cronkite.  It only needs wall to wall.  From 5AM to midnight, pandemic updates (mixed now with riot coverage), and the network ratings get well.  The ratings jump out of the dumpster and rumble on the studio set and do cartwheels.

I’ve written a number of articles about network television news.  Here are excerpts—

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Excerpt:

NEWS ABOUT THE NEWS.

The elite anchor is not a person filled with passion or curiosity. Therefore, the audience doesn’t have to be passionate or filled with curiosity, either.

The anchor is not a demanding voice on the air; therefore, the audience doesn’t have to be demanding.

The anchor isn’t hell-bent on uncovering the truth. For this he substitutes a false dignity. Therefore, the audience can surrender its need to wrestle with the truth and replace that with a false dignity of its own.

The anchor takes propriety to an extreme: it’s unmannerly to look below the surface of things. Therefore, the audience adopts those manners.

On air, the anchor is neutral, a castratus, a eunuch.

This is a time-honored ancient tradition. The eunuch, by his diminished condition, has the trust of the ruler. He guards the emperor’s inner sanctum. He acts as a buffer between his master and the people. He applies the royal seal to official documents.

Essentially, the television anchor is saying, “See, I’m ascetic in the service of truth. Why would I hamstring myself this way unless my mission is sincere objectivity?”

All expressed shades of emotion occur and are managed within that persona of the dependable court eunuch. The anchor who can move the closest to the line of being human without actually arriving there is the champion. In recent times, it was Brian Williams—until his “conflations” and “misremembrances” surfaced, and he was exiled to the wasteland of MSNBC.

The vibrating string between eunuch and human is the frequency that makes an anchor “great.” Think Cronkite, Chet Huntley, Edward R Murrow. Huntley was just a touch too masculine, so they teamed him up with David Brinkley, a medium-boiled egg. Brinkley supplied twinkles of comic relief.

The cable news networks don’t have anyone who qualifies as an elite anchor. Wolf Blitzer of CNN made his bones during the first Iraq war only because his name fit the bombing action so well. Brit Hume of FOX has more anchor authority than anyone now working in network television, but he’s semi-retired, content to play the role of contributor, because he knows the news is a scam on wheels.

There are other reasons for “voice-neutrality” of the anchor. Neutrality conveys a sense of science. “We did the experiment in the lab and this is how it turned out.”

Neutrality implies: we, the news division, don’t have to make money (a lie); we’re not like the cop shows; we’re on a higher plane; we’re performing a public service; we’re a responsible charity.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Excerpt:

From the early days of television, there has been a parade of anchors/actors with know-how—intonation, edge of authority, parental feel, the ability to execute seamless blends from one piece of deception to the next:

John Daly, Douglas Edwards, Ed Murrow, Chet Huntley, David Brinkley, Harry Reasoner, Walter Cronkite, Dan Rather, and more recently, second-stringers—Brian Williams, Diane Sawyer, Scott Pelley.

They’re all gone.

Now we have Lester Holt, David Muir, and the newly appointed Norah O’Donnell.  They couldn’t sell water in the desert.

Lester Holt is a cadaverous presence on-air, whose major journalistic achievement thus far is interrupting Donald Trump 41 times during a presidential debate; David Muir has the gravitas of a Sears underwear model; Norah O’Donnell, long-term, will have the energy needed to illuminate a miniature Xmas-tree light bulb.

The networks have no authoritative anchor-fathers waiting in the wings.  They don’t breed them and bring them up through the minor leagues anymore.

Instead, armies of little Globalists, and ideologues who don’t realize they’re working for Globalists, have been infiltrating the news business.  At best, they’re incompetent.

Thus, news-production techniques that enable an ongoing illusion of oceanic authority collapse like magnetic fields that have been suddenly switched off.

The selective mood lighting, the restful blue colors on the set, the inter-cutting of graphics and B-roll footage, the flawless shifts to reporters in far-flung places…it’s as if all these supporting features have suddenly been overcome by actors in a stage play who are abruptly stepping out of character.  The spell is broken.

Elite mainstream news, in a fatuous attempt to save itself, is trying a democratic approach.  Anchors are sharing more on-air minutes with gaggles of other reporters.  But this is counter-productive in the extreme.  The News has always meant one face and one authority and one voice and one tying-together of all broadcast elements.  It’s as if, in a hypnotherapist’s office, the therapist decides to bring in colleagues to help render the patient into an alpha-state.

If by some miracle, the news bosses could raise Walter Cronkite, “the father of our country,” from the dead and put him back in the chair… but too many years have gone by; years of unaccomplished anchors.  The horse is out of the barn, the cat is out of the bag.

This is why major news outlets have been appealing to social media/big tech for help, AKA censorship of independent voices.

One veteran news director told me several years ago, “We don’t have the stars [elite anchors] anymore.  The star system is dead.  You could comb all the local news outlets in America, and you wouldn’t find one face and voice who could really carry the freight.  They’ve vanished.  The up and coming people are lame.  We’ve made them that way.  It’s some cockeyed standard of equality we’ve internalized.  And now we’re paying the price.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Excerpt:

The news is all about manipulating the context of stories.  The thinner the context, the thinner the mind must become to accept it.

Imagine a rectangular solid.  The news covers the top surface.  Therefore, the viewer’s 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.

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 easily 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.  We want the government to get something done, but they won’t.”

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: “Flu.  Dangerous.  Epidemic.  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: “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 and 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 give meaning to pictures.

Staged news.

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.

For “intelligent” viewers, there is a 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 reports 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.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Excerpt:

When network television news was created in the late 1940s, no one in charge knew how to do it.  It was a new creature.

Sponsors?  Yes.  A studio with a desk and an anchor?  Yes.  A list of top stories?  Yes.  Important information for the public?  Yes.

Of course, “important information” could have several definitions—and the CIA already had a few claws into news, so there would be boundaries and fake stories within those boundaries.

The producers knew the anchor was the main event; his voice, his manner, his face.  He was the actor in a one-man show.  But what should he project to the audience at home?

The first few anchors were dry sandpaper.  John Cameron Swayze at NBC, and Douglas Edwards at CBS.  But Swayze, also a quiz show host, broke out of the mold and imparted a bit of “cheery” to his broadcasts.  A no-no.  So he was eventually dumped.

In came a duo.  Chet Huntley and David Brinkley.  NBC co-anchors from 1956 to 1970.  Chet was the heavy, with a somber baritone, and David was “twinkly,” as he was called by network insiders.  He lightened the mood with a touch of sarcasm and an occasional grin.  It worked.  Ratings climbed.  Television news as show biz started to take off.  At the end of every broadcast, there was: “Good night, Chet.”  “Good night, David.” The audience ate it up.  They loved that tag.

However, rival CBS wasn’t standing still.  They offloaded their anchor, Douglas Edwards, a bland egg, and brought in Walter Cronkite, who would go on to do 19 years in the chair (1962-1981).  Walter was Chet Huntley with a difference.  As he grew older, he emerged as a father, a favorite uncle, with an authoritative hills-and-valleys baritone that created instant trust.  Magic.  A news god was born.

Despite many efforts at the three major networks, no anchor over the past 40 years has been able to pull off the full Cronkite effect.

The closest recent competitor—until he was fired for lying and exiled to the waste dump at MSNBC—was Brian Williams.  Williams artfully executed a reversal of tradition.  He portrayed the youthful prodigy, a gradually maturing version of a newsboy who once bicycled along country roads, threw folded up papers on front porches, and knew all his customers by name.  A good boy.  A local boy.  Your neighbor under the maple trees of an idyllic town.  Cue the memories.

By the time Williams took over the helm at NBC, television news was decidedly a team operation.  There were reporters in the field.  The technology enabled the anchor to go live to these bit players, who tried to exude the impression they were actually running down leads and interviewing key sources on the spot—when in fact they could just as easily be doing their stand-ups from a hot dog cart outside 30 Rockefeller Plaza, the home studio of the network—because most of their information was really coming from inside that studio.

Nevertheless, the team was everything.  The anchor was a manager, and his job was to impart an authentic feel to every look-in, from the White House to Paris to Berlin to Jerusalem to Beijing to a polar bear on an iceberg.

And local television news was blowing up to gargantuan proportions.  Every city and town and village and hamlet seemed to have its own gaggle of hearty faces delivering vital info of interest to the citizenry.  Branding and shaping this local phenomenon evolved into: FAMILY.  Yes, that was the ticket.  These bubbly, blown-dry, enthused, manic news and weather and sports hawks were really “part of the community.”  Local News was no longer shoveled high and deep with an air of objectivity.  “Aloof” was out.  Share and care was in.  What that had to do with actual news was anyone’s guess, but there it was.  “Hi, we’re your team at KX6, and we feel what you feel and we live here with you and we know when the roads are icy and the wrecks pile up on the I-15 and the cops arrest someone for cocaine possession and when the charity bake sale is coming up to pay for [toxic] meds for seniors and when your cousin Judy passes away we mourn as you do…”

News for and by a fictional collective.

Disney news.

A caricature of a simulacrum of an imitation.

The discovery was: the viewing audience wanted news as a cartoon.

The problem is: this model deteriorates.  The descending IQ of the news producers and anchors and reporters undergoes a grotesque revolution.  Year by year, broadcasts make less sense.  Even on the national scene, NBC hands its prime anchor spot to Lester Holt, who plays the old Addams Family living corpse, Lurch.

ABC, always looking for a new face, goes all in with David Muir, a Sears underwear-model type.

CBS counters with a youngish cipher, Jeff Glor, after ridding itself of Scott Pelley, who, true to his on-camera persona, might show up on The Young and the Restless as a lunatic surgeon doing operations without anesthetic.

The networks are losing it.

It’s a sight to behold.

Cable news is even worse.  The longest surviving anchor is Wolf Blitzer at CNN.  Wolf’s energy level tops out as a man in a tattered bathrobe, in his kitchen, chatting with his cousin while they play checkers.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Excerpt:

When professionals broadcast one absurdity after another, they begin to see the effects are actually strengthening their own position of authority.

It’s a revelation.  It’s also a continuation of the tradition of the Trickster archetype.  For example, with just a few minor adjustments, Brian Williams can be seen as the sly Reynard the Fox…

From the viewpoint of elite television news, controlling the minds of its audience depends on what’s politely called “cognitive dissonance”:

As the anchor recites a news story, the viewer sees an obvious hole through which he could drive a truck.

The story makes no sense, yet it’s being presented as bland fact.  The trusted anchor clearly has no problem with it.

What’s the viewer to do?  He experiences a contradiction, a “dissonance.”

For example, this year’s flu vaccine.  The US government has admitted the vaccine is geared to a flu virus that isn’t circulating in the population.  Therefore, even by conventional standards, the vaccine is useless.  But the kicker is, the CDC says people should take the vaccine anyway.

The anchor relays all this information—and never seriously questions the situation, never torpedoes the government for recommending the vaccine.

The average viewer feels a tug, a pulse of discomfort, a push-pull.  The vaccine story is idiocy (side one), but the trusted anchor accepts it (side two).

Dissonance.

The top chiefs of news—and top propaganda operatives—anticipate cognitive dissonance.  In a real sense, they want it to happen.  They make it happen.  Over and over.

Why?

Because it throws the viewer into a tailspin.  And in that mental state, in his effort to resolve the contradiction, he will normally choose to…give in.  Surrender.  Believe in the anchor.  It’s the easier path.

The viewer will even doubt his own perception.  “I see no good reason for Building 7 to collapse, but the news doesn’t bring that up, so…it must be me.”

This is the power of the news.  It presents absurdities and then moves right along, as if nothing has happened.

The introduction of contradiction, dissonance, and absurdity parading as ordinary reality is an intentional feature of brainwashing.

On the nightly news, the anchor reports that US government debt has risen by another three trillion dollars.  He then cuts to a statement from a Federal Reserve spokesman: the new debt level isn’t a problem; in fact, it’s sound monetary policy; it strengthens the economy.

The viewer, caught up in this absurdity, tries to make sense of it, then gives up and passively accepts it.  Brainwashing.

Smoothly transitioning from this story, the anchor relays information from the CDC: vaccination rates must achieve 90% in the population, in order to protect people from dangerous viruses.  The viewer thinks, “Well, my daughter is already vaccinated, so if she comes into contact with a child who isn’t vaccinated, why would there be a problem?  Why does 90% of the population have to be vaccinated to keep her safe?  She’s already vaccinated.”

The viewer wrestles with this craziness for a moment, then gives in and accepts what the CDC and the anchor are saying.  More passivity.  More brainwashing.

The anchor moves right along to the next story: “The US is experiencing one of the coldest winters in history, further evidence of the effects of global warming, according to scientists at the United Nations.”

The viewer shakes his head, tries to deal with this dissonance, surrenders, and accepts what he is hearing.  Deeper passivity is the result.  Deeper brainwashing.

On and on it goes, day after day, month after month, year after year, on the news.

Contradiction, absurdity, dissonance; acceptance, surrender, passivity.

The same general formula is used in interrogations and formal mind control.  It adds up to disorientation of the target.

Most disoriented people opt for the lowest- common-denominator solution: give in; accept the power of the person of authority.

Among the many supporters of conventional news is the education system.  Most teachers never learn logic, and they don’t teach it.  The result?  Their students never gain the ability or the courage to reject the news and its dissonances.

What little these students gain from 12 or 16 years of schooling they eventually sacrifice on the altar of consensus reality—as broadcast every night on the screen before them.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Excerpt:

Salvador Dali, surrealist, was one of the most reviled painters of the 20th century.

He disturbed Conventional Folk who just wanted to see an apple in a bowl on a table.

Dali’s apples and bowls were executed with a technical skill few artists could match—except the apples were coming out of a woman’s nose while she was ironing the back of a giraffe, who was on fire.

“It doesn’t go together!  It doesn’t make sense!  He’s Satan!”

Yet, these same Folk sit in front of the television screen every night and watch the entirely surreal network news.  Elite anchors seamlessly and quickly move from blood running in the streets of a distant land to a hairdryer product-recall to an unseasonal hail storm in Michigan to a debate about public policy on pedophiles to genetically engineered mosquitoes in Florida to a possible breakthrough in storing computer simulations of human brains for later recapture to squirrels gathering nuts in New Jersey.

Nothing surreal about this??

When the elite anchor goes on air and digs in, he’s paid to be seamless.  He could be transitioning from mass killings in East Asia to sub-standard air conditioners, and he makes the audience track through the absurd curve in the road.

The elite anchor should have a voice that soothes just a bit but brooks no resistance.  It’s authoritative but not demanding.

Scott Pelley (CBS) was careful to watch himself on this count, because his tendency was to shove the message down the viewer’s throat like a surgeon making an incision with an icepick.  Pelley was a high-IQ android who was training himself to be human.

Diane Sawyer wandered into sloppiness, like a housewife who’s still wearing her bathrobe at 4 in the afternoon.  She exuded sympathetic syrup, as if she’d had a few cocktails for lunch.  And she affected a pose of “caring too much.”

Brian Williams was head and shoulders above his two competitors.  You had to look and listen hard to spot a speck of confusion in his delivery.  He knew how to believe his act was real.  He could also flick a little aw-shucks apple-pie at the viewer.  Country boy who moved to the big city.

Segues, blends are absolutely vital.  These are the transitions between one story and another.  “Earlier today, in Boston.”  “Meanwhile, in New York, the police are reporting.”  “But on the Hill, the news was somewhat disappointing for supporters of the president.”

Doing excellent blends can earn an anchor millions of dollars.  The audience doesn’t wobble or falter or make distinctions between what went before and what’s coming now.  It’s all one script.  It’s one winding weirdness of story every night.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And NOW, we have COVID, and we have riots.  The current stories— the lies are egregious and relentless, the editorializing is cheesy.  The omissions are Grand Canyons.

Surreal, cognitively dissonant, smoothly blended, outrageous:

The News Business.  As Usual.

But with the junior varsity anchors, and their lack of skill, the networks need overwhelming stories to sell their act.  They need COVID and riots.  They have to have government manufacturing chaos and destruction and tighter control, in order to keep viewers coming back night after night.

You’ve got elite Globalists and elite government on one edge, and elite news on the other edge.  They feed into each other.  They bolster each other.

So why must they spend so much time censoring dissent?

Because freedom exists.

Because, no matter what, it always will.

And underestimating its power, time and time again, has proven to be a colossal mistake.

Use this link to order Jon’s Matrix Collections.

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 find this article and more at NoMoreFakeNews.

“…taken from the house and put in a facility….”

By The Great Jon Rappaport:

 

Excerpt:

…Here, from the CDC, are a few statements about contact tracing.

“Based on our current knowledge, a close contact is someone who was within 6 feet of an infected person for at least 15 minutes starting from 48 hours before illness onset until the time the patient is isolated. They should stay home, maintain social distancing, and self-monitor until 14 days from the last date of exposure.”

The precision is breathtaking, isn’t it? And they’re talking about “close contacts.” Do the same rules apply to “ordinary contacts?” They’re really going to try to estimate the “48 hours before” and the “15 minutes?” Does the contact who maintains social distancing at home stay at least six feet away from other family members at all times for 14 days? The answer: yes. Are you kidding?

“Contacts are encouraged to stay home and maintain social distance from others (at least 6 feet) until 14 days after their last exposure, in case they also become ill. They should monitor themselves by checking their temperature twice daily and watching for cough or shortness of breath [hopefully inducing fear and consequent illness]. To the extent possible, public health staff should check in with contacts to make sure they are self-monitoring and have not developed symptoms. Contacts who develop symptoms should promptly isolate themselves and notify public health staff. They should be promptly evaluated for infection and for the need for medical care.”

So, again…just because you came in contact with someone who is “infected,” you need to self-isolate at home, more than six feet apart from family members, for 14 days? Yes.

“If possible, contacts should be asked to voluntarily stay home, monitor themselves, and maintain social distancing from others. However, health departments have the authority to issue legal orders of quarantine, should the situation warrant that measure….”

Wait. What’s the difference between self-isolating at home and quarantine? Well, quarantine must mean everyone except “the contact” clears out of the house and stays elsewhere; or the contact is taken from the house and put in a “facility.”

See full original article here