Anthony Freda Art

By Jon Rappoport

California Senate Bill 277 has passed through the Judiciary Committee, and needs another Committee’s rubber stamp before it arrives on the Senate floor for debate—and what looks like a ride into law.

Governor Brown will sign the Bill. Brown has become a standard fool. He’s worn out. Whatever interesting ideas he may have entertained in his former “moonbeam” incarnation are gone in the wind.

Bill277 eliminates the personal belief and religious exemptions from vaccination. It also states that children cannot attend public or private school unless they are vaccinated according to the State’s schedule.

Medical exemptions are still allowed, but these won’t be easy to come by, because physicians who grant them will be scrutinized and harassed.

In Committee, before the vote, the Bill was changed to offer two compromises. Personal belief exemptions will be permitted for all future vaccines, beyond the current 10 mandated shots. And children who are now in school will be allowed to forego vaccination (with some limitations).

Eventually, in years to come, you can expect these two “gifts” to be rescinded.

All in all, personal freedom and choice are gone.

Vaccine manufacturers are popping the champagne corks.

For those California parents who are looking for a way out, there is home-schooling. But you can be sure that, at some point up the road, those children will be falsely blamed for “an outbreak,” and pressure will build to force them to take shots.

This Bill is going to become law, unless there is huge uprising of parents between now and the final legislative vote.

Seen in a larger context, the Bill is one element in a thousand-element program that standardly proclaims: if you want security and protection, you must give up your freedom.

Of course, as I’ve pointed out before, this program always overstates the threat from which one needs protection. In fact, quite often, the same agents of the State who offer that protection manufactured the threat in the first place.

In the case of vaccines, the preposterous notion that vaccinated children (who are purported to be immune) need shielding from unvaccinated children is a contradiction on its face.

So is the idea that children who live in poverty, lack nutritious food, and consequently function on grossly weakened immune systems can gain substitute-protection via vaccines. The reverse is true: vaccinations attack their already-compromised level of health.

In any event, parents seeking their own information about vaccines becomes a useless fantasy under this new California Bill. Everything is decided for them by the State.

In case you want to place all the blame on Big Pharma and its undue influence, keep in mind that government is where the buck is supposed to stop. This is the place where officials can say no if they want to.

Letting them off the hook as helpless victims of corporate power is absurd. They aren’t helpless. They go to the slaughter willingly. Sometimes, with deeper pockets.

Vaccination=protection is the equation that has been shoved down the throats of the population. And to back it up, we have the ever-popular, “This is science. Only crazy people oppose science.”

Ever since 9/11, protection has risen as the most important government theme: “Let us protect you, let us do our jobs, keep your mouths shut and everything will turn out well.”

People buy it. Their minds are vacuums, and they need something to fill it. Might as well be “protection.” Seems important. Seems right.

Brave - The Browser Built for Privacy

Seems like the sort of thing a parent is supposed to provide.

“Yes, I remember as a child that Daddy told me (or I wish he had) that everything would be all right. When the government tells me that now, it feels good.”

So does an endless supply of tranquilizers. Until it doesn’t.

Until the brain turns to mush.

Jon Rappoport is the author of two explosive collections, The Matrix Revealed and Exit From the Matrix, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Dees Illustration

Jon Rappoport
Activist Post

These days, we are witnessing an acceleration in the use of psychiatry to target Americans, to label them as dangerous, to take away guns they own, to blame gun violence in the US on mentally ill people. (see also this story by Dan Roberts).

It’s a winning strategy, because most Americans don’t have a clue about the way psychiatry actually works or its pose of being a science.

The public hears techno-speak and nods and surrenders.

If psychiatrists are experts on the human mind, mice can navigate the Arctic in canoes. But psychiatrists are educated to be able to talk a good game.

And politicians are more than happy to mouth vagaries, and consign the problems of society to “mental-health professionals.”

It turns out that the phrase “mental health” was invented by psyops specialists, who needed to create an analogy to physical well-being.

The needed to, because the mind was (and is) a mystery to psychiatrists.

An open secret has been slowly bleeding out into public consciousness for the past ten years.

THERE ARE NO DEFINITIVE LABORATORY TESTS FOR ANY SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDER.

And along with that:

ALL SO-CALLED MENTAL DISORDERS ARE CONCOCTED, NAMED, LABELED, DESCRIBED, AND CATEGORIZED by a committee of psychiatrists, from menus of human behaviors.

Their findings are published in periodically updated editions of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), printed by the American Psychiatric Association.

For years, even psychiatrists have been blowing the whistle on this hazy crazy process of “research.”

Of course, pharmaceutical companies, who manufacture highly toxic drugs to treat every one of these “disorders,” are leading the charge to invent more and more mental-health categories, so they can sell more drugs and make more money.

But we have a mind-boggling twist. Under the radar, one of the great psychiatric stars, who has been out in front inventing mental disorders, went public. He blew the whistle on himself and his colleagues. And for 2 years, almost no one noticed.

His name is Dr. Allen Frances, and he made VERY interesting statements to Gary Greenberg, author of a Wired article: “Inside the Battle to Define Mental Illness.” (Dec.27, 2010).

Major media never picked up on the interview in any serious way. It never became a scandal.

Dr. Allen Frances is the man who, in 1994, headed up the project to write the latest edition of the psychiatric bible, the DSM-IV. This tome defines and labels and describes every official mental disorder. The DSM-IV eventually listed 297 of them.

In an April 19, 1994, New York Times piece, “Scientist At Work,” Daniel Goleman called Frances “Perhaps the most powerful psychiatrist in America at the moment…”

Well, sure. If you’re sculpting the entire canon of diagnosable mental disorders for your colleagues, for insurers, for the government, for Pharma (who will sell the drugs matched up to the 297 DSM-IV diagnoses), you’re right up there in the pantheon.

Long after the DSM-IV had been put into print, Dr. Frances talked to Wired’s Greenberg and said the following:

“There is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.”

BANG.

That’s on the order of the designer of the Hindenburg, looking at the burned rubble on the ground, remarking, “Well, I knew there would be a problem.”

After a suitable pause, Dr. Frances remarked to Greenberg, “These concepts [of distinct mental disorders] are virtually impossible to define precisely with bright lines at the borders.”

Frances might have been referring to the fact that his baby, the DSM-IV, had rearranged earlier definitions of ADHD and Bipolar to permit many MORE diagnoses, leading to a vast acceleration of drug-dosing with highly powerful and toxic compounds.

Finally, at the end of the Wired interview, Frances flew off into a bizarre fantasy:

“Diagnosis [as spelled out in the DSM-IV] is part of the magic…you know those medieval maps? In the places where they didn’t know what was going on, they wrote ‘Dragons live here’…we have a dragon’s world here. But you wouldn’t want to be without the map.”

Translation: Patients need hope for the healing of their troubles; so even if we psychiatrists are shooting blanks and pretending to know one kind of mental disorder from another, even if we’re inventing these mental-disorder definitions based on no biological or chemical diagnostic tests—it’s a good thing, because patients will then believe and have hope; they’ll believe it because psychiatrists place a name on their problems…

Needless to say, this has nothing to do with science.

If I were an editor at one of the big national newspapers, and one of my reporters walked in and told me, “The most powerful psychiatrist in America just said the DSM is sheer b.s. but it’s still important,” I think I’d make room on the front page.

If the reporter then added, “This shrink was in charge of creating the DSM-IV,” I’d clear more room above the fold.

If the reporter went on to explain that the whole profession of psychiatry would collapse overnight if the DSM was discredited, I’d call for a special section of the paper to be printed.

I’d tell the reporter to get ready to pound on this story day after day for months. I’d tell him to track down all the implications of Dr. Frances’ statements.

I’d open a bottle of champagne to toast the soon-to-be-soaring sales of my newspaper.

And then, of course, the next day I’d be fired.

Because there are powerful multi-billion-dollar interests at stake, and those people don’t like their deepest secrets exposed in the press.

And as I walked out of my job, I’d see a bevy of blank-eyed pharmaceutical executives marching into the office of the paper’s publisher, ready to read the riot act to him.

Dr. Frances’ work on the DSM-IV allowed for MORE toxic drugs to be prescribed, because the definition of Bipolar was expanded to include more people.

Adverse effects of Valproate (given for a Bipolar diagnosis) include:

• acute, life-threatening, and even fatal liver toxicity;


• life-threatening inflammation of the pancreas;


• brain damage.


• Adverse effects of Lithium (also given for a Bipolar diagnosis) include:


• intercranial pressure leading to blindness;


• peripheral circulatory collapse;


• stupor and coma.

Adverse effects of Risperdal (given for “Bipolar” and “irritability stemming from autism”) include:

• serious impairment of cognitive function;


• fainting;


• restless muscles in neck or face, tremors (may be indicative of motor brain damage).

Dr. Frances’ label-juggling act also permitted the definition of ADHD to expand, thereby opening the door for greater and greater use of toxic Ritalin (and other similar compounds) as the treatment of choice.

So what about Ritalin?

In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published a most important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was called “An Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate)” [v.21(7), pp. 837-841].

Scarnati listed a large number of adverse affects of Ritalin and cited published journal articles which reported each of these symptoms.

For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:

• Paranoid delusions


• Paranoid psychosis


• Hypomanic and manic symptoms, amphetamine-like psychosis


• Activation of psychotic symptoms


• Toxic psychosis


• Visual hallucinations


• Auditory hallucinations


• Can surpass LSD in producing bizarre experiences


• Effects pathological thought processes


• Extreme withdrawal


• Terrified affect


• Started screaming


• Aggressiveness


• Insomnia


• Since Ritalin is considered an amphetamine-type drug, expect amphetamine-like effects


• Psychic dependence


• High-abuse potential DEA Schedule II Drug


• Decreased REM sleep


• When used with antidepressants one may see dangerous reactions including hypertension, seizures and hypothermia


• Convulsions


• Brain damage may be seen with amphetamine abuse.

A recent survey revealed that a high percentage of children diagnosed with bipolar had first received a diagnosis of ADHD. This is informative, because Ritalin and other speed-type drugs are given to kids who are slapped with the ADHD label. Speed, sooner or later, produces a crash. This is easy to call “clinical depression.”

Then comes Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft. These drugs can produce temporary highs, followed by more crashes. The psychiatrist notices the up and down pattern—and then produces a new diagnosis of Bipolar (manic-depression) and other drugs, including Valproate and Lithium.

In the US alone, there are at least 300,000 cases of motor brain damage incurred by people who have been prescribed so-called anti-psychotic drugs (aka “major tranquilizers”). Risperdal (mentioned above as a drug given to people diagnosed with Bipolar) is one of those major tranquilizers. (source: Toxic Psychiatry, Dr. Peter Breggin, St. Martin’s Press, 1991)

This psychiatric drug plague is accelerating across the land.

Where are the mainstream reporters and editors and newspapers and TV anchors who should be breaking this story and mercilessly hammering on it week after week? They are in harness.

And Dr. Frances is somehow let off the hook. He’s admitted in print that the whole basis of his profession is throwing darts at labels on a wall, and implies the “effort” is rather heroic—when, in fact, the effort leads to more and more poisonous drugs being dispensed to adults and children, to say nothing of the effect of being diagnosed with “a mental disorder.”

I’m not talking about “the mental-disease stigma,” the removal of which is one of Hillary Clinton’s missions in life. No, I’m talking about MOVING A HUMAN INTO THE SYSTEM, the medical apparatus, where the essence of the game is trapping that person to harvest his money, his time, his energy, and of course his health—as one new diagnosis follows on another, and one new toxic treatment after another is undertaken, from cradle to grave.

The result is a severely debilitated human being (if he survives), whose major claim to fame is his list of diseases and disorders.

Thank you, Dr. Frances.

Secret $1.8 Million Cryptocurrency Script

Here is a smoking-gun statement made by another prominent psychiatrist, on an episode of PBS’ Frontline series. The episode was: “Does ADHD Exist?”

PBS FRONTLINE INTERVIEWER: Skeptics say that there’s no biological marker—that it [ADHD] is the one condition out there where there is no blood test, and that no one knows what causes it.

BARKLEY (Dr. Russell Barkley, professor of psychiatry and neurology at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center): That’s tremendously naïve, and it shows a great deal of illiteracy about science and about the mental health professions. A disorder doesn’t have to have a blood test to be valid. If that were the case, all mental disorders would be invalid…There is no lab test for any mental disorder right now in our science. That doesn’t make them invalid. [Emphasis added]

Without intending to, Dr. Barkley blows the whistle on his own profession.

So let’s take Dr. Barkley to school. Medical science, and disease-research in particular, rests on the notion that you can make a diagnosis backed up by lab tests. If you can’t produce lab tests, you’re spinning fantasies.

These fantasies might be hopeful, they might be “educated guesses,” they might be launched from traditional centers of learning, they might be backed up by billions of dollars of grant money…but they’re still fantasies.

If I said the moon was made of green cheese, even if I were a Harvard professor, sooner or later someone would ask me to produce a sample of moon rock to be tested for “cheese qualities.” I might begin to feel nervous, I might want to tap dance around the issue, but I would have to submit the rock to a lab.

Dr. Barkley employs a version of logical analysis in his statement to the PBS Frontline interviewer. Barkley is essentially saying, “There is no lab test for any mental disorder. But if a test were the standard of proof, we wouldn’t have science at all, and that would mean our whole profession rests on nothing—and that is absurd, so therefore a test doesn’t matter.”

That logic is no logic at all. Barkley is proving the case against himself. He just doesn’t want to admit it.

Close to 50 years ago, psychiatry was dying out as a profession. Fewer and fewer people wanted to see a psychiatrist for help, for talk therapy. All sorts of new therapies were popping up. The competition was leaving medical psychiatry in the dust.

As Dr. Peter Breggin describes it in his landmark book, Toxic Psychiatry, a deal was struck. Drug companies would bankroll psychiatry and rescue it. These companies would pour money into professional conferences, journals, research. In return, they wanted “science” that would promote mental disease as a biological fact, a gateway into the drugs. Everyone would win—except the patient.

So the studies were rolled out, and the list of mental disorders expanded. The FDA was in on the deal as well, as evidenced by their drug “safety” approvals, in the face of the obvious damage these drugs were doing.

So this is how we arrived at where we are. This was the plan, and it worked.

Under the cover story, it was all fraud all the time. Without much of a stretch, you could say psychiatry has been the most widespread profiling operation in the history of the human race. Its goal has been to bring humans everywhere into its system. It hardly matters which label a person is painted with, as long as it adds up to a diagnosis and a prescription of drugs.

And now, in the wake of the Aurora and Sandy Hook shootings, it matters even less who or how many people are labeled with mental disorders. The more the better, as far as government is concerned.

Just as in the old USSR, psychiatry becomes an instrument of oppression, a way to discredit any person the State wants to silence and destroy.

…in the disputes between the East and West concerning the Russian opponents of the Soviet regime… [m]any dissidents went to lunatic asylums and were treated as mentally sick. Western doctors and the press accused Soviet doctors of being blind instruments of the regime and of having broken the solemn oath of their calling. The Russian doctors thought the West had gone mad in reproaching their behavior. For them, anyone who opposed such an efficient police power must be mentally disturbed. In their view, only those who had what Seneca called Libido morienti (the death wish) would dare to provoke the State. The Russian doctors were convinced that they were undertaking a humanitarian mission by placing the opponents of the regime in asylums and thereby reducing their aggression–the only hope for their survival. To reduce the outstanding to mediocrity was always a medical and human duty in a state where mediocrity had the better chance of survival. — “Man: The Fallen Ape” by Branko Bokun

Jon Rappoport is the author of two explosive collections, The Matrix Revealed and Exit From the Matrix, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

var linkwithin_site_id = 557381;

linkwithin_text=’Related Articles:’

Jon Rappoport
Activist Post

If you control the use of words and numbers, you can make trillions of dollars, and you can hide scandals that would otherwise take you down into infamy and prison.

You can pretty much operate a whole sector of society and remain untouched.

Nowhere is this more clear than in the criminal work of the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

The real name of that agency should be: Centers for Disease Information Control. That’s what they do. They manipulate words and numbers to present fictional images to the public.

They’re a tax-funded PR front for the medical cartel. A 24/7 psyop.

“Yes, of course I’m a criminal. I work for the CDC.”

Here is the latest blockbuster.

After writing about fake vaccine science since 1988, I thought I’d seen it all:

Wild falsehoods about vaccines creating immunity; suppressed information about toxic ingredients in the shots; the absence of proper controlled studies proving vaccines are safe and effective.

But now Peter Doshi, PhD, writing in the online BMJ (British Medical Journal), reveals a new monstrosity. It’s all based on the revelation that most “flu” is not the flu.

Follow this closely. If you blink, you might miss it.

You see, as Doshi states, every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory samples are taken from flu patients in the US and tested in labs. Here is the kicker: only a small percentage of these samples show the presence of a flu virus.

This means: most of the people in America who are diagnosed by doctors with the flu have no flu virus in their bodies.

So they don’t have the flu.

Therefore, even if you assume the flu vaccine is useful and safe, it couldn’t possibly prevent all those “flu cases” that aren’t flu cases. The vaccine couldn’t possibly work.

The vaccine isn’t designed to prevent fake flu, unless pigs can fly.

Actually, most flu cases are “bacteria cases,” “fungal cases,” or “pollution cases,” or “tainted food” cases, or “eating GMO cases,” or something else. But they aren’t the flu.

Here’s the exact quote from Peter Doshi’s BMJ review, “ Influenza: marketing vaccines by marketing disease” (BMJ 2013; 346:f3037):

But perhaps the cleverest aspect of the influenza marketing strategy surrounds the claim that ‘flu’ and ‘influenza’ are the same. The distinction seems subtle, and purely semantic. But general lack of awareness of the difference might be the primary reason few people realize that even the ideal influenza vaccine, matched perfectly to circulating strains of wild influenza and capable of stopping all influenza viruses, can only deal with a small part of the ‘flu’ problem because most ‘flu’ appears to have nothing to do with influenza. Every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory specimens are tested across the US. Of those tested, on average 16% are found to be influenza positive. 

…It’s no wonder so many people feel that ‘flu shots’ don’t work: for most flus, they can’t.

Because most diagnosed cases of the flu aren’t the flu.

So even if you’re a true believer in mainstream vaccine theory, you’re on the short end of the stick here. They’re conning your socks off.

Doshi points out the wordplay distinction between “flu” and “influenza.” But let’s go even simpler and say: most of the time, diagnosed flu isn’t flu. Period.

In an ethical world, medical researchers and bureaucrats would blow the whistle. They’d say, “Hey, we’re diagnosing huge numbers of people with the flu, but that turns out to be a meaningless term, because they don’t have an influenza virus. So they couldn’t have the flu. These fake ‘flu cases’ couldn’t have benefited from any flu vaccine under the sun BECAUSE THE PATIENTS DON’T HAVE THE FLU.”

But the whistle isn’t blown. Too much money and too many reputations are riding on ignoring the obvious truth.

A patient walks into a doctor’s office. He’s sick. He’s coughing. He has a fever. His muscles ache. The doctor says, “You have the flu. Did you get your flu shot this year?”

“No,” the patient says.

The doctor gives him a stern look. “Well, you should have. See? You’re sick now. The vaccine would have prevented that.”

Wrong.

Again, even by conventional standards, the odds are very high the vaccine would have made no difference at all. Because the odds are very high this patient doesn’t have an influenza virus.

Overwhelmingly, doctors diagnose the flu with a casual eyeball glance. The patient has a familiar cluster of symptoms? It’s flu season? Okay, it’s the flu. Period.

With an ongoing blizzard of psyop-marketing, people accept “flu” and react emotionally to the propaganda about it.

Another branch of that propaganda is delivered to frighten Americans into getting a flu shot: the CDC persistently claims that, every year in the US, 36,000 people die of the flu. We’ve all read and heard that figure, over and over.

It’s a “necessary” statistic for the CDC. They need to promote it. They need to convince the population that seasonal flu is dangerous.

The American people don’t understand that it’s a lie, a grossly manufactured delusion that bears no resemblance to reality.

In December of 2005, the British Medical Journal (online) published another shocking report by Peter Doshi, which spelled out the delusion, and created tremors throughout the halls of the CDC.

Here is a quote from Doshi’s report:

[According to CDC statistics], ‘influenza and pneumonia’ took 62,034 lives in 2001—61,777 of which were attributable to pneumonia and 257 to flu, and in only 18 cases was the flu virus positively identified.

You see, the CDC has created one category that combines flu and pneumonia deaths. Why do they do this? Because they disingenuously assume that the pneumonia deaths are complications stemming from the flu.

This is an absurd assumption. Pneumonia has a number of causes.

But even worse, in all the flu and pneumonia deaths, only 18 revealed the presence of an influenza virus.

Therefore, the CDC could not say, with assurance, that more than 18 people died of influenza in 2001. Not 36,000 deaths. 18 deaths.

Doshi continues his assessment of published CDC flu-death statistics: “Between 1979 and 2001, [CDC] data show an average of 1348 [flu] deaths per year (range 257 to 3006).” These figures refer to flu separated out from pneumonia.

Secret $1.8 Million Cryptocurrency Script

This death toll is obviously far lower than the parroted 36,000 figure. However, when you add the sensible condition that lab tests have to actually find the flu virus in patients, the numbers of flu deaths plummet even further.

In other words, it’s all promotion and hype.

“Well, uh, we say that 36,000 people die from the flu every year in the US. But actually, it’s closer to 20. However, we can’t admit that, because if we did, we’d be exposing our gigantic psyop. The whole campaign to scare people into getting a flu shot would have about the same effect as warning people to carry iron umbrellas, in case toasters fall out of upper-story windows…and, by the way, we’d be put in prison for fraud.”

In 2009, as the heralded Level 6 global pandemic, Swine Flu, was proving to be a bust and a trickle, Sharyl Attkisson (CBS News) discovered that the CDC had stopped counting the number of Swine Flu cases in America.

The CDC had stopped counting, because their tests on diagnosed flu patients showed so many who didn’t have the flu virus, who didn’t have the flu at all.

Atkisson’s reporting was explosive. It was threatening to expose the whole flu psyop. What would happen if it became common knowledge that most people diagnosed with the flu don’t have the flu? What would happened to the campaigns to get people to take flu vaccines?

What would happen if it became common knowledge that absurdly few people die from the flu?

Attkisson was muzzled. And the CDC doubled down and suddenly claimed there were undoubtedly TENS OF MILLIONS cases of Swine Flu in the US. This, after only several thousand cases had been reported.

This is on the order of saying a a dry creek-bed in the woods is actually the Mississippi River.

Twisting words and numbers and painting false pictures is the CDC’s job.

Finally, remember that the CDC is organized under the Department of Health and Human Services, which is a cabinet post in the executive branch.

So everything the CDC does, every pysop it launches and maintains, is ultimately at the pleasure of the president.

The president may plead ignorance, he may plead many things. But in the chain of command, he is responsible for the vast crimes the CDC commits.

In other words, if the whole flu psyop were broadly exposed, the scandal could travel all the up into the White House.

Jon Rappoport is the author of two explosive collections, The Matrix Revealed and Exit From the Matrix, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

var linkwithin_site_id = 557381;

linkwithin_text=’Related Articles:’

Anthony Freda Art

Jon Rappoport
Activist Post

File this one in the ever-burgeoning category of: how insane can legislators get?

Congress is now debating an update to the 1986 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

Turns out it’s already a misdemeanor to “exceed authorized use” of a computer, but the DOJ wants to make it a felony.

Of course, what does “exceeds authorized use” mean? Well, it means, for instance, an employee sending emails to pals while he’s at the office—because his employer has a rule against that.

In other words, the feds want to back up employers’ rules and turn them into felonies. Splendid.

“Yeah, you remember Jack, don’t you? Used to work here? One day he made an online reservation at the Wynn in Vegas, and now he’s in jail. Life is tough, keep your eyes straight ahead and don’t mess with the boss.”

“And Betty? She ordered three lipsticks on a slow Thursday and she’s now upstate. I hear the shrinks got hold of her. Dosing her with an anti-psychotic. Hope she has three live brain cells to rub together when she gets out.”

Then there’s the Facebook issue. The company, originally bankrolled by a CIA front, has a rule against users setting up accounts with fake names. Does the DOJ want to go after Facebook users who break the rules?

The Surveillance State, aided by Facebook, wants to know who you are at all times. They want you to be your name and no other name.

It’s a technical issue, see? It’s a lot easier to spy on you if you’re Mary Jones all the time when you’re online. As opposed to Mary Jones and Dragon Lady and HiHat and Ben Franklin and The Beast From 40 Fathoms…

The joke is, most people lead lives that are fictional already. The NSA and its allied partners spy on those lives.

Here’s the same thing from another angle. John Smith, citizen, follows the straight and narrow. He, like every other John Smith, is a target of the Surveillance State. He hasn’t committed any crimes. He isn’t a threat. But that doesn’t matter. He’s there. He’s a unit. Therefore, he’s on the radar.

But John Smith is a fiction. He’s a convenient, solid, average, normal persona/role in the stage play called Society cooked up by the Real John Smith, who is hiding. Inside himself. You rarely see him. Once in a blue moon, he pokes his head out and says something off-key. Then he retreats behind his facade.

There are millions and John Smiths, and the NSA is spying on all of them. The fake ones. The fictions.

What if every John Smith invented six or seven new personae?

“Sir, are you pretending to be somebody else?”

“Yes, and the pretending is now more intense. It’s ongoing.”

“But you see, sir, that introduces confusion, when we spy on you.”

“I used to believe I was a John Smith android forever. Wow, was I kidding myself. I used to go to one church service on Sunday. Now I go to three different churches. And I’m also an atheist.”

“Excuse me?”

“I campaigned for Democrats only. Now I campaign for Democrats, Republican, Libertarians, Communists, and Anarchists. Of course I don’t vote for anyone. I’m exploring monarchy as well. I think the divine right of kings could make a comeback.”

“But who do you actually worship?”

“The NSA, of course. And the CIA and DIA, Interpol, MI-5, the old GRU, and the Chinese Secret Service.”

“Sir, we have you on the record talking about eight different wives.”

“Only eight? I must have misplaced a couple.”

Some people will assume I mean they should actually marry a dozen women. Those people are the literalists. They always go for the lowest-common-denominator reading. They think if they have a little fun, do a little acting, a little pretending, it might infect their minds. It might take them over. They’re the John Smiths. They live inside walls of fear.

Reality is one fiction among a limitless number of possible realities.

The basic problem with Reality is that it’s only one.

Any baby can teach you that. Play with the kid in just one way, over and over, and he’ll develop an itch he can’t scratch. He’ll cry and go off on you. Play with him a hundred different ways and he’ll gurgle and laugh and wriggle and decide coming into this life was a good idea after all.

Every kid needs an uncle and an aunt and a few cousins and a brother or sister. Parents tend to repeat themselves. Their repertoire wears thin. The kid needs a boost, a change, a different face, a new joke, a shift of rhythm.

People who can make you laugh take you out. They take you out of the one, forever, exhausting IS. Reality is the fiction of one and only one IS.

There are two types of laughs. One blows up reality. The other, which is the android laugh, comes across like tranquilized mule with a hernia.

The NSA is super-serious about the one persona that is supposed to be the super-serious you. That’s what they’re spying on.

The internet thrives on anonymity. This causes a lot of nonsense and crap to surface. That’s the price we pay. But the Surveillance State doesn’t want anonymity. It wants “just the facts.”

It wants to scare people into being their android-selves and nothing more, nothing else. It wants The One Reality. If they can make that happen, they win. Afterward, it really doesn’t matter what people do.

I remember watching the very first episode of the original CSI. At the murder scene, the techs were going over an apartment, collecting evidence, bagging it. Then we were back in the lab. More analysis.

I thought, are they kidding? They believe people want to watch this stuff?

Well, people did. They wanted to watch the lab, the fine-tuning of hair, blood, DNA. The categorization, the tracking, the accessing of the data banks.

The first cousin to Surveillance.

Secret $1.8 Million Cryptocurrency Script

You want to talk about operant conditioning? The whole CSI franchise is one giant psyop. For more than a decade. Getting people used to ubiquitous looking and spying and tracking, on behalf of justice.

That’s what NSA wants to be. That’s how NSA wants the public to view it.

Super-serious-android-NSA spying on super-serious-android-us. In the one and only Reality. That’s the op.

So…step back and calculate our chances if we continue to live in the one and only Reality and try to fight them from that position.

Of course, entering and inventing other realities takes imagination. That’s the catch. It always was.

Ever since the first elite priest class on Earth cooked up some crazy spiritual Ponzi scheme to suck in the rubes, imagination has been the nemesis of the State.

Paraphrasing Groucho Marx: “In the 1930s, you could make a movie in which a woman fell down a flight of stairs, and people would laugh. But eventually it couldn’t be a movie. It had to be a real woman falling down a real flight of stairs.”

People are trained like dogs to appreciate and accept only one IS. The “real” IS. They convince themselves this is a good idea. These people are unconscious allies of the Surveillance State.

What’s that? People are into all sorts of multiple virtual realities? Yes, for a while, but they keep coming back to believing in The One and Only Just-the-Facts Reality. If they actually wanted new realities, they’d be cooking them up themselves, they wouldn’t be dreaming inside somebody else’s.

In light of all of the above, the universe of propaganda becomes more vivid. Its aim is reduction. Reduction of the way we see ourselves. We’re given bound images of human beings as citizens living in a walled fortress, where our every thought and action needs to be boiled down and made transparent, so our leaders can make threat assessments.

This is the fiction we’re being fed. Over and over.

“It’s not asking too much, is it? It’s too hard to seek out and find terrorists. We need to collect everything on everybody, and then with suitable algorithms established, we can select out the dangerous ones.

“In fact, it’s better if we consider everybody dangerous and track and limit their movements. That works.”

Yes, the NSA is looking at you. They’re looking at you as if you’re an android. Well, naturally. They’re androids. Wherever they look, they see androids.

Jon Rappoport is the author of two explosive collections, The Matrix Revealed and Exit From the Matrix, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

var linkwithin_site_id = 557381;

linkwithin_text=’Related Articles:’

image source

Jon Rappoport
Activist Post

The reference here is a January 2013 report funded by the Greenwall Foundation titled: “Enhanced Warfighters: Risk, Ethics, and Policy.”

The report utilized military consultants, and reflects what the National Security State is promoting as “the wave of the future.”

Of course, this is a done deal. Enhancement is already an overall experiment.

Here is a key quote from the report: “…cognitive and physical enhancements aim to create a super-soldier from a biomedical direction, such as with drugs and bionics.”

This indicates pharmaceutical attempts to increase endurance, focus, and pain threshold, but also to alter states of mind: mood, emotional range (restricted), attitude (controlled, stepped up aggression).

Whatever mad chemists can fantasize about—for instance, the boosting of leadership traits—they’ll try to induce it in the lab.

Bionics, of course, means the replacement of body parts with machines. This would function as repair, in the case of wounds, but robotic devices would be installed simply because they work better than flesh. In which case, we can look forward to replacement as a general strategy—without the prior need for wounds.

“Listen, soldier, if we give you a new eye, you’ll be able to spot an enemy combatant at five hundred yards…and this miniaturized transmitter can be joined to your brain so you can receive commands directly from headquarters.”

With utter frankness, the Greenwall report continues: “For battle, we want our soft organic bodies to perform more like machines.”

This statement leaves no doubts about intentions. It also suggests that the number of bionic replacements per soldier isn’t limited. The goal is effective performance, come hell or high water, whatever it takes.

There’s more: “Somewhere in between robotics and biomedical research, we might arrive at the perfect future warfighter: one that is part machine and part human, striking a formidable balance between technology and our frailties.”

Why not call these soldiers human drones? Launched from command central, mission orders stored in their brains, operated remotely, their capabilities completely understood as elements of a program, the soldiers would fulfill the military meaning of war: complete victory as a function of underlying algorithms, regardless of the human cost.

This is the eternal wet dream of the war-makers.

It also happens to be the environment of video games. Therefore, volunteers should be plentiful.

“You’re only giving me one new arm and an enhanced ear? I was hoping for more. What about my brain? What can you do for me there?”

For those who still wonder whether the famed CIA MKULTRA mind control program of the 1950s continued after the announced cut-off date, your question is answered. Coerced brain and behavioral conditioning is at the core of creating the super-soldier.

Secret $1.8 Million Cryptocurrency Script

Think about the money. The military can’t afford to risk trillions of dollars on pharmaceutical enhancement and body-part replacement, without also controlling the thoughts, responses, and actions of its high-priced personnel.

Technocrats are surely lining up, at the Pentagon, to provide this all-important MKULTRA element of warfare.

“Hi Mom. I’m home from the theater of operations. Don’t worry, I may look different with all these new enhancements, but I’m still your son. By the way, the girls love the new parts! And the Army spent $30 million on me! I’m very valuable! Oh…one little thing. If while we’re talking, I suddenly shut down or begin talking to someone who isn’t in the room, it’s okay. It’s business. What’s for supper?”

Finally, consider this. An all-out operation to transhumanize the military could not take place unless there is absolute dedication to fighting wars without end.

You don’t re-build humans for a future of skirmishes or peace treaties.

Jon Rappoport is the author of two explosive collections, The Matrix Revealed and Exit From the Matrix, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

var linkwithin_site_id = 557381;

linkwithin_text=’Related Articles:’

Dees Illustration

Jon Rappoport
Activist Post

I want my Obamacare! I want my Obamacare!

It’s vital to look at the real meaning of this sinister plan. It’s all about the toxic effects of mainstream medicine. That’s what the sold-out press is refusing to examine.

A year ago, I discussed the case of a young Michigan boy, whose parents had been taken to court three times to force them to submit their child to intensely toxic chemo treatments—despite these facts:

The boy’s latest scans revealed no sign of cancer; the drugs that would be forced on him can cause cancer; the drugs have not been approved to treat children.

And I warned: this is what waits for you and your children, up the line.

The “share and care” humanitarian mask will be peeled away. The US Dept. of Health and Human Services will create, as ordered, a complete list of approved treatments for every disease-label under the sun. And everyone in the insurance plan will be forced to take what the doctor tells them to take.

For a bonus, unapproved treatments will be banned. People and practitioners who try to use alternative treatments will find themselves in trouble.

This is the hidden agenda of Obamacare. This is what it will morph into in the future.

I’m not dreaming or fantasizing. I’ve been following and reporting on the medical cartel for 30 years, and I know the mindset of these people, these doctors, these bureaucrats, these pharmaceutical string-pullers behind the scenes. Obamacare is right up their alley. It’s about control, so it’s an answer to their prayers.

So what do we know about their mainstream medicine, the hospital-based drug-addled modern version?

On July 26, 2000, the Journal of the American Medical Association published a landmark paper by Dr. Barbara Starfield (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), “Is US health really the best in the world?” In it, Starfield revealed what many people inside the medical establishment already knew: every year, like clockwork, the medical system was killing huge numbers of people.

Each year in the US, as Dr. Starfield reported, there are:

12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;

7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;

20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;

80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;

106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.

The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000. (a conservative estimate)

This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in America, behind heart disease and cancer.

In the wake of Starfield’s devastating report, other facts came to light: 2.1 million people in America, every year, are hospitalized as a result of reactions to FDA-approved medicines. Annually, 36 million serious adverse reactions to those drugs occur.

So, inclusive health coverage for many more Americans under the Obama Plan means these horrendous figures will rise.

This is the dirty secret.

Obama and his allies are promoting a medical system that is the third leading cause of death in America. It’s that stark and it’s that simple.

The Obama Plan involves appointing an “expert panel” to decide what treatments Americans should be given for what diseases, under the new regime.

Only a certified idiot would assume that, over time, alternative non-mainstream therapies would survive such an ongoing vetting. Hope may spring eternal, but common sense makes it easy to grasp the realities on the ground.

In the long run, alternative therapies will be edged out. Those that remain will be permitted for a narrow range of conditions, or as adjuncts to standard drug treatments and surgery.

Chiropractors and acupuncturists, who are temporarily basking in the notion that Obama “really cares,” are in for a very rude awakening. Their careers and practices will be significantly reduced. Not today, not tomorrow, but it will happen.

Doctors, under the Plan, will be telling patients they may not take nutritional supplements while in treatment. This will assume the status of an irreversible edict. In many cases, “while in treatment” will mean years.

What happens to a person, conscripted into the mandated Insurance Plan, who is told by his doctor that he should/must receive a vaccine? Suppose this person says no? What are the consequences? Will he then be labeled a defector? What penalties will he suffer?

Does a diagnosis of cancer imply a patient must submit to chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery? Can these treatments be forced upon him?

Perhaps, in the early days of the Plan, nothing untoward will happen. But then, as time passes, and the system assumes tighter and tighter controls, the hand of government will close around the recalcitrant patient’s neck.

“Take this vaccine. Take this chemo drug. If you don’t, you’re in violation of the rules.”

Doctors, who are an integral part of the Plan, will surely be punished if they give unapproved (alternative) treatments to patients.

And in order to make the Plan operate on a day-to-day basis, the records and bookkeeping data of every health-care practitioner in America will eventually be tracked on government computer networks.

Every person in America will have a traceable and trackable medical ID package. Government-issued. There is no way around it. The monitoring apparatus can’t work without it.

Orwellian consequences lie up the road in the field of psychiatric practice. In case you hadn’t noticed, the invention of “disorders” by committee is the preferred method for “discovering” more and more mental illnesses.

Yet, the science is completely fraudulent. For evidence, consult the many works of psychiatrist Peter Breggin, who has done more than any other person to expose the guts of his own profession. (www.breggin.com) Breggin establishes that mental disorders are not authoritatively diagnosed by a chemical or biological test. Conclusive tests do not exist. And worse, in this undefined and arbitrary territory, the drugs that follow diagnoses are killers: for example, 300,000 cases of motor brain damage, as a result of the administration of major tranquilizers.

Under the Obama Plan, you can bet your bottom dollar that psychiatric care will eventually become mandatory. A patient suddenly diagnosed with clinical depression or bipolar disease will be told he must take the drugs—and suffer their adverse effects.

Very young children will be given more and more debilitating and dangerous brain drugs.

Under the Obama Plan, it will be very convenient to declare new pandemics every few seasons, because these phony non-epidemics provide an opportunity to herd the sheep into clinics and remind them who is running the show. Go here, take this vaccine; go there, take that drug; the epidemic is endangering the herd, and you must help your brothers and sisters.

Secret $1.8 Million Cryptocurrency Script

These are the figures on the last several “epidemics.” They are not yearly; they are grand totals, to date; global totals, except in the case of West Nile (US only):

SARS: 774 deaths.

WEST NILE: 1159 deaths.

BIRD FLU: 262 deaths.

SMALLPOX: (terrorist threat): 0 deaths.

SWINE FLU: 18,500 deaths.

To give perspective, globally, 250 thousand to 500 thousand people die of ordinary flu-like illness every year. Yet this higher death rate accrues no interest as an epidemic. It is only the “teaching (brainwashing) moments” of the phony epidemics that are promoted by health agencies (e.g., CDC and WHO) and their pharmaceutical allies, who rake in billions by manufacturing new vaccines.

Yes, under the Obama Plan, there will be more declared health emergencies, and they will serve to cement the citizen to his new role as eternal patient in the medical march along bleak streets of the future.

Can you perceive the loss of individual freedom implicit in this universal system of health control?

The widespread (and false) assumption is that more medical care for more people is a good thing. That’s what the politicians and the press tell us. That’s what the medical bureaucrats and the drug companies tell us. This is the central piece of brainwashing.

It’s a baldfaced lie. It’s a death-dealing lie.

And now the American people are saddled with it.

Unless the current rebellion against Obamacare expands all over the country.

Jon Rappoport is the author of two explosive collections, The Matrix Revealed and Exit From the Matrix, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

image source

Jon Rappoport
Activist Post

In yesterday’s article about Obamacare, I pointed out a simple fact:

If you have a system that is already killing a huge number of people, and you make that system bigger and bring millions more people under the same umbrella, the death toll will accelerate.

The key journal paper on medical destruction is: Dr. Barbara Starfield, Journal of the American Medical Association, July 26, 2000, “Is US Health Really the Best in the World?”

I laid out the statistics yesterday. Every year in the US, the medical system kills 225,000 people. 106,000 die as a result of FDA-approved medical drugs. The other 119,000 die as a result of mistreatment in hospitals.

I use the Starfield report because it is right down the middle of mainstream medicine. Before her death, Starfield was a widely respected public health expert. For many years, she worked at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. The Journal of the American Medical Association is as mainstream and prestigious as you can get.

I’m fully aware that independent researchers have pegged the death toll from the US medical system at a much higher number. But I wanted to show that, even in “The Club,” the statistics are known to be horrendous.

Think about it. The US medical system kills 225,000 Americans per year. That adds up to well over 2 MILLION deaths per decade.

Not long before her death, I interviewed Dr. Starfield. I asked her whether anyone from the federal government had ever asked her to consult, to help fix the medical system. Her answer was a stark No.

I asked her whether she was aware of any significant government program directed at fixing the system. Again, she answered No.

Try this imaginary fictional analogy. You work for the government in auto safety. You know two things. Every tenth car in America contains a fatal flaw that will cause a crash at speeds in excess of 40mph. And, as a result of new legislation, millions more Americans will be on the road driving cars. What would you do?

US politics lives and thrives on PR, and PR makes its money from empty generalizations and promises. In the medical arena, it’s all about “better care for all,” “humane concern for everyone,” “breakthroughs coming soon,” “money for more research,” etc.

This has nothing to do with the actual effects of the system. It has nothing to do with reality.

Well, here is the reality. By the most conservative estimate, the US medical system kills 2,250,000 people per decade.

That’s the system that’s heading for massive expansion under Obamacare.

You have a choice. You can go with the empty PR, or you can face the facts and realize what’s going to happen.

Secret $1.8 Million Cryptocurrency Script

“Well,” some people have told me, “the politicians in charge don’t really understand what the medical system is doing to people. It’s just ignorance. Their hearts are in the right place.”

And that matters? That argument is meant to exonerate the flavor of the week inside the Beltway. It has nothing to do with ongoing death stemming from standard medical practice.

The death statistics I’m citing in this article aren’t a state secret.

Doctors chopping off women’s breasts for no reason. Medical drugs putting people into the grave. Vaccines causing neurological damage. Psychiatric drugs blasting brains and pushing people over into violence, including suicide and murder…no problem. The politicians’ hearts are in the right place.

Walk through a cemetery and try that defense.

Jon Rappoport is the author of two explosive collections, The Matrix Revealed and Exit From the Matrix, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

image source

Jon Rappoport
Activist Post

Here are four smoking guns that substantiate the title of this article.

Smoking gun #1: As I detailed in my two previous articles (click here and here), Dr. Barbara Starfield’s article in the July 26, 2000, Journal of the American Medical Association, “Is US Health Really the Best in the World?”, spelled out the damage:

The US medical system kills 225,000 Americans per year. That’s well over two MILLION deaths per decade.

The US government supports, in numerous ways, this system. And now, through the implementation of Obamacare, many more previously uninsured Americans will enter the killing fields.

Dr. Starfield’s data are not classified. They’re not a state secret. Any doctor or medical bureaucrat has access to them.

Yet nothing of note is being done to remedy the ongoing crime.

Smoking gun #2: Starfield’s report indicated that, every year in the US, 106,000 Americans die as a result of FDA-approved medical drugs.

The FDA is the only agency tasked with certifying these drugs as safe and effective. With such certification, the drugs enter the public pipeline.

On the FDA’s own website, under the heading, “Why Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions,” appears the following text: “Over 2 MILLION ADRs [Adverse Drug Reactions] yearly; 100,000 DEATHS yearly; ADRs 4th leading cause of death…”

Astonishingly, the FDA takes no responsibility for any of this. They, and only they, can approve the drugs as safe and effective. They list the numbers of deaths and maimings, and they never admit culpability.

Smoking gun #3: It’s common knowledge that there is a revolving door between the FDA and drug companies. Employees come and go from one organization/agency to another. The FDA and the pharmaceutical industry are, in significant respects, partners.

For years, there were reports of payoffs and pressure, at the FDA, to grant approval to drugs that were, in fact, harmful and dangerous.

Then, in 2009 and again in July 2012, a scandal erupted. As Truthout reported, it focused on “an institutionalized FDA spying program on its own scientists, law makers, reporters and academics that included an enemies list…”

At the heart of the scandal: FDA pressure on its own people to approve medical devices that were dangerous.

Truthout took a further step. It interviewed Ronald Cavanagh, a former drug reviewer for the FDA. (July 29, 2012, “Former FDA Reviewer Speaks Out About Intimidation and Marginalizing of Safety”)

In a stunning interview with Truthout’s Martha Rosenberg, Cavanagh, exposed the FDA as a relentless criminal mafia protecting its client, Big Pharma, with a host of mob strategies.

Cavanagh: “…widespread racketeering, including witness tampering and witness retaliation.”

“I was threatened with prison.”

“One [FDA] manager threatened my children…I was afraid that I could be killed for talking to Congress and criminal investigators.”

Cavanagh reviewed new drug applications made to the FDA by pharmaceutical companies. He was one of the holdouts at the Agency, who insisted that the drugs had to be safe and effective before being released to the public. That’s why he was under the gun.

Honest appraisal wasn’t part of the FDA culture, and Cavanagh swam against the tide, until he realized his life and the life of his children might be on the line.

What was his secret and unofficial task at the FDA supposed to be? “Drug reviewers were clearly told not to question drug companies and that our job was to approve drugs.” In other words, rubber stamp them. Say the drugs were safe and effective when they were not.

Cavanagh’s revelations are astonishing. He recalls a meeting where a drug-company representative flat-out stated that his company had paid the FDA for a new-drug approval. Paid for it. As in bribe.

Cavanagh remarks that the drug pyridostigmine, given to US troops to prevent the later effects of nerve gas, “actually increased the lethality” of certain nerve agents.

Cavanagh recalls being given records of safety data on a drug that was up for approval—and then his bosses told him which sections not to read. Obviously, they knew the drug was dangerous and they knew exactly where, in the reports, that fact would be revealed.

The FDA is an ongoing criminal enterprise, and any government official, serving in any capacity, who has become aware of it and has not taken action, is an accessory to mass poisoning of the population.

Smoking gun #4: Before the FDA considers approving a new drug, studies and clinical trials have to be done. The drug companies do those clinical trials and submit the results to the FDA.

Obviously, the results look good; otherwise the FDA wouldn’t be able to certify the drugs as safe and effective.

This raises the specter of research fraud—because, since the drugs kill 106,000 Americans every year, how can published studies praising these drugs be authentic and credible?

On January 15, 2009, the NY Review of Books published a devastating quote from a woman who, for 20 years, edited the most prestigious medical journal in the world:

Secret $1.8 Million Cryptocurrency Script

It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.

(Marcia Angell, MD, “Drug Companies and Doctors: A story of Corruption.” NY Review of Books, Jan. 15, 2009.)

Here is another quote of a similar nature, also published in the NY Review of Books (May 12, 2001, Helen Epstein, “Flu Warning: Beware of Drug Companies”):

Six years ago, John Ioannidis, a professor of epidemiology at the University of Ioannina School of Medicine in Greece, found that nearly half of published articles in scientific journals contained findings that were false.

Here’s another quote from the same

Last year, GlaxoSmithKline’s diabetes drug Avandia was linked to thousands of heart attacks, and earlier in the decade, the company’s antidepressant Paxil was discovered to exacerbate the risk of suicide in young people. Merck’s painkiller Vioxx was also linked to thousands of heart disease deaths. In each case, the scientific literature gave little hint of these dangers.

And finally, here is yet another statement from Marcia Angell, former editor of The New England Journal of Medicine:

A review of seventy-four clinical trials of antidepressants, for example, found that thirty-seven of thirty-eight positive studies [that praised the drugs] were published. But of the thirty-six negative studies, thirty-three were either not published or published in a form that conveyed a positive outcome.

It turns out that the informational pipeline that feeds the entire perception of pharmaceutical medicine is a rank fraud.

Could any major newspaper add up these quotes and launch an all-out attack on the massive crimes surrounding medical studies? Of course. And that attack, if carried out long enough, would shake the pillars of the Church of Modern Medicine. But it doesn’t happen.

Neither do we see extensive Congressional hearings on the horrendous effects of the US medical system. The Dept. of Justice does nothing, when they should be making mass arrests and laying on criminal prosecutions.

They know the scope of the medical killings and maimings. They choose to do nothing.

And now, into the maw of this dragon of death, will step millions of previously uninsured Americans, glad recipients of Obamacare.

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

/* */




/* */