The significance of a forgotten CIA document: MKULTRA

The significance of a forgotten CIA document: MKULTRA

by Jon Rappoport

July 23, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

This June 27, 1994, document is stored at the National Security Archive at The George Washington University.

It was written by a CIA advisory committee, and forwarded to the Presidential Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, which was preparing public hearings at the time.

The document has many interesting implications. In this article, I want to focus on two. The first point concerns the CIA mind control program, MKULTRA.

Here is a key quote:

“In the 1950s and 60s, the CIA engaged in an extensive program of human experimentation [MKULTRA], using drugs, psychological, and other means, in search of techniques to control human behavior for counterintelligence and covert action purposes… Most of the MKULTRA records were deliberately destroyed in 1973 by the order of then DCI Richard Helms, who waived the internal CIA regulation (CSI-7O-l0) governing retirement of inactive records… Helms testified that he agreed to destroy the records because ‘there had been relationships with outsiders in government agencies and other organizations and that these would be sensitive in this kind of a thing but that since the program was over and finished and done with, we thought we would just get rid of files as well, so that anybody who assisted us in the past would not be subject to follow-up questions, embarrassment, if you will.’”

Helms was not only admitting he destroyed the records, he was stating that the MKULTRA program deployed, through contracts, “outsiders” to carry out mind control experiments. He was determined to protect them, to keep their identity and work secret. He was also dedicated to prevent these people from exposing the nature of their mind-control work. And finally, Helms knew that some of these outside researchers had no idea they were involved in MKULTRA—in other words, the CIA had tricked them into thinking their work was designed for other purposes.

Subsequently, some of these “outsiders” have been revealed. But no one really knows how deep, far, and wide the CIA penetrated into academic and research communities to enable MKULTRA.


The second point I want to cover is made clear by this quote from the 1994 CIA document: “The Church Committee [investigating the CIA] reports that one of the three principal functions of the Special Operations Division (SOD) of the U.S. Army Biological Center at Camp Detrick, Maryland was to conduct ‘biological research for the CIA.’ Church Committee, Book I, at 395. In early 1952, SOD agreed ‘to assist CIA in developing, testing, and maintaining biological agents and delivery systems. By this agreement, CIA acquired the knowledge, skill, and facilities of the Army to develop biological weapons suited for CIA use.’”

In other words, biowarfare research wasn’t limited to the Army and the Pentagon. The CIA actually became a second center for developing biological agents they could use for covert actions.


The Matrix Revealed


It’s important to note that the assumed termination point of MKULTRA, 1962, is false. In or around that year, the CIA shifted its entire mind control operation to its Office of Research and Development.

John Marks, who wrote the breakthrough book on MKULTRA, “The Search for the Manchurian Candidate,” told me that his access to CIA documents was abruptly cut off after the publication of his book. A CIA employee told him he’d never see another document, from a cache of 100 boxes, that described MKULTRA projects when they went super-dark after 1962.

The 1994 document I’m quoting in this article was part of preparation for 1995 Presidential hearings on secret human radiation experiments. The CIA stated that, after extensive searching of its files, it found no evidence that radiation was used in MKULTRA projects.

However, at the 1995 hearings, two women, Claudia Mullin and Chris De Nicola, testified that, indeed radiation had been used on them (as torture), in a wide-ranging program of mind control to which they were subjected, starting when they were young children.

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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Secret Space

Secret Space

by Jon Rappoport

June 25, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

“Space can be mapped and crossed and occupied without definable limit; but it can never be conquered.” — Arthur C Clarke

“I dream with open eyes,” he answered, looking around at the door, “and others see my dreams. That is all.” — David Lindsay, A Voyage to Arcturus

“That night, at the northern end of Italy, perhaps because I was in a foreign town, when I looked up at the black sky and the stars, it occurred to me I might be looking at several universes. They all pretended to be parts of one, but underneath the masquerade, they were quite different, and I only saw the one that was familiar.” — Jon Rappoport, The Underground

Space is real. The consensus space we all perceive and operate in is real. The space an individual discovers for himself is real. And the space an artist, or anyone living a creative life, invents is real.

Space does not start from a material place. It doesn’t start from the brain. The brain and the rest of the body follow suit once space is in the process of coming into being.

Space is, in that sense, a spiritual quality.

Everyone wants more space….this is the urge of the individual soul.

Plato was, on the other hand, a space program. He reasoned that there must be a separate realm where all meanings were final and perfect. Proprietary space. The Vatican has been a space program. Its cosmology is a final description of space. Closed, not open. All of Western metaphysical philosophy is a space program….it shrinks what can be contained in space. The history of priest classes on this planet is a space program: the description of what is in space and what isn’t. Exclusive space, owned by the privileged few.

Key precepts of physics compose a space program: energy cannot be created or destroyed; unused energy falls into a special bullpen—entropy. These are massively insane ideas.

Modern psychiatry is a space program—defining states of mind as disorders without evidence…attempting to tell us what “spatial” states of mind we tend to inhabit. Another priest class.

GMO crops are a space program—protected patents on the insertion of genes into plants, randomly…that is a controlled and owned space.

Transhumanism is a space program. It wants to create a collective territory in which all human brains are linked to a super-computer, where all knowledge is defined and downloaded.

Collectivism, overt and covert, is a space program, in which some vague syrupy notion of togetherness is placed ahead of the individual and his uniqueness, “for the good of all.”

These are all space programs, because they define what is in those spaces and rule out what cannot be there.

The Surveillance State is, of course, a space program, because it seeks to limit what can happen in thoughts and in speech. Less space. Constricted space.

The individual wants more and freer space. This is a basic urge that is, at bottom, a creative impulse.

Painters understand that in their bones, because they are always inventing new spaces.


Exit From the Matrix


(I’ll be speaking at the Secret Space Program Conference 2014, in San Mateo, California, the weekend of June 28-29. I hope to see some of you there. For information and tickets: secretspaceprogram.org. For a synopsis of my talk, click here.)


When I started painting in 1962, my life changed overnight. Every aspect of it changed. I finally decided I would invent space and imbue it with my own thoughts, ideas, feelings, come hell or high water. And no one would have the right to dictate terms—the very idea of that happening was the height of absurdity. I obtained the dose of a tonic that could come in no other way. There was no need to compromise, adjust, or pay special homage.

If every individual shoved in his chips on a creative declaration of independence, we would have a different world. It wouldn’t be a single world. It would proliferate spaces into an open society unprecedented in the history of this planet.

At the root, this is why, historically, various leaders and groups determined they needed a “space program.” They wanted to enclose, limit, and shut down creative force, which is to say, authentic spiritual force.

Space is a fundamental aspect of the soul….free, open. The history of life on this planet is about limiting space and defining it and claiming it is owned by the few.

These are not trivial factors. They are incursions on the soul’s desire to have space and define it and create it.

So it is no surprise that a shadow government would try to own outer space and populate it with weapons and use it for mind control. I have no doubt that frequencies beamed from space would be used in an attempt to lock down consciousness on this world and eliminate private spaces.

The creative individual brushes this off like a few flies at a picnic, because he is not subscribing to any program. The commercial concentrate of humanity’s obsessions is meaningless to him, because it is reduced down to senseless remorse.

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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

The use of racial and religious slurs as mind control

The use of racial and religious slurs as mind control

by Jon Rappoport

June 6, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

Call it programming, operant conditioning, entrainment, thought control, mind control, emotion control.

The war of back-and-forth competing racial and religious slurs has a planned aspect. It’s a form of propaganda, and it begins with a heavy overemphasis on politically correct speech.

This sets the stage. It establishes an “official level” of sensitivity to language, and promotes the notion that words which exceed this level are uniformly damaging to defined groups.

The program has two goals: inflame feelings to create discord and animosity, and limit, in wide-ranging ways, what a person will permit himself to say or think.

Create an overall sense of caution that goes beyond the racial and religious.

Notice that this objective is the also Surveillance State’s objective. The two programs work hand in glove.

“We’re watching you all the time.” “There are many things you shouldn’t think or say.”

The engendered and encouraged discord between races and religions is ramped up to split society, split it into major groups—not individuals.

We live in an increasingly collectivist nation, and to guide its devolution, leading it into deeper levels of slavery, clearly defined groups must work off their frustrations by attacking each other.

The eventual goal is enlisting everyone in groups, up to their eyeballs.

Thus, an individual’s sense of himself as independent is lost.

This is the program.

It seeks to erase the individual.

Of course, this operation is not merely top-down. People buy in. They identify completely with their groups.

This identification has been the way of the world since the dawn of time.

In recent history, to see government’s role in defining groups and exacerbating tensions among them, consider the blizzard of US hate-crime laws.

The Violent Crimes Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994; the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crime Prevention Act of 2009; two laws (1990 and 1997) that established requirements for reporting hate-crime statistics, at the federal level and on college campuses; and the 45 state laws defining hate crimes.

These laws create and enforce “protected groups” and attempt to elevate penalties for crimes committed against them. They are “special circumstance” laws.

They officially harden barriers between groups of Americans and set the stage for acrimonious arguments about what criminal suspects were thinking at the time they attacked their victims.

However, the whole import and basis of law in society is: a crime is a crime is a crime. Reading a defendant’s intention is no part of that. Laws apply to everyone, perpetrator and victim, across the board. “Equal protection under the law.”

The above hate-crime legislation did not introduce “new crimes.” They were already on the books. They already existed. They already could be prosecuted.

Hate-crime laws did create greater distance and new conflicts between groups. Society was further fractured. That goal was achieved.

These laws highlighted “bad intentions” toward race, nationality, religion, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and disability.

Could any program of legislation invent more disharmony?

Hate-crime laws, filtering down, have had major cultural implications: “Well, I’m part of a federally protected group. So now I can be on the lookout for any slight, slur, sign of intimidation against my group. And when I see one, I can demand redress of wrongs. To make sure I remain protected, I can even invent imaginary slights and actions. The ends (protection) justify the means. I can commit crimes and avoid prosecution…”


The Matrix Revealed


In the homogenized every-day culture, “wrong thought and wrong intent” become divorced from violent crime. People pick up the clue: they need to police themselves, their thoughts, their ideas, their emotions.

There is a difference between decentralized political power (for example, state nullification of unconstitutional federal actions) and racial, ethnic, and religious groups walling themselves off from the rest of society and claiming special status. The melting pot doesn’t melt anymore. It devolves into collectives hating other collectives.

And ultimately, the individual is on the outside looking in at a nightmare. The best ideas of the original flawed Republic go begging. The ideal of the free and independent individual drowns in cultural propaganda, aimed at dragging us back to an earlier time, when George Washington found it necessary to warn Americans to stay clear of entangling foreign alliances.

Well, those words now have new and strange meaning. America is now being recreated as a series of separate enclaves, in which all competing groups are psychologically foreign to each other, on domestic soil.

A Republic limits the power of government, and what power government legitimately possesses is supposed to be in service of freeing the individual to pursue his goals.

That agenda has been attacked since its inception.

Group consciousness=group separation=mutual group hostility is a major aspect of the attack.

Governments favor this equation. They use it every day:

“We are the peacemakers. We will resolve these differences…as we encourage and stimulate them.”

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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Secret Space Program Conference 2014

Secret Space Program Conference 2014

by Jon Rappoport

June 1, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

I’ll be speaking at the Secret Space Program Conference 2014, in San Mateo, California, the weekend of June 28-29.

I hope to see some of you there. The speaker list: Joseph Farrell, Catherine Austin Fitts, Richard Dolan, Carol Rosin, Michael Schratt, Robert Morningstar, and Mark McCandlish.

For information and tickets: secretspaceprogram.org.

In the mid-1980s, I interviewed Ted Clark, who was the manager of NASA’s Galileo Science Data System for the Jupiter Probe.

Ted’s personal vision of the future included orbiting hotels and domed space colonies, each colony with its own evolving civilization. These “vessels” would travel enormous distances and eventually rendezvous, to compare notes on their histories.

“Now that’s a real space program,” Ted said.

We talked for a few hours, discussing high points in Western civilization (ancient Athens, the European Renaissance). For Ted, the present moment was another Renaissance, if we could but see it and use technology for the next great mission: space.

Full employment, Ted agreed, would be one of the benefits of his real space program.


[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QUuXaVRTJU&w=560&h=315]

Henrik Palmgren


Compare such a vision with weaponizing space, utilizing satellites for universal surveillance on Earth, geoengineering, and other more secret black-budget projects.

How a pure and open and vast optimism about space, starting in the 1940s, was eventually derailed and perverted is a subject of great importance.

The nature of the present space program and its secrets is the subject of the Conference.

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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Official magic for the walking dead soul

Official magic for the walking dead soul

by Jon Rappoport

May 29, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

“The State, with all its people, all its bureaucracies, is working a kind of magic. It’s a desolate magic. It actively conjures up blank spaces and blank minds to convince people that Blank is the meaning of Normal. It’s a ceremony of emptiness. A ritual of nothing and nowhere. And then, out of the void, it brings into being a salvation Machine that will do the right thing. It hails the Machine that can only do the right thing.” — (The Magician Awakes, Jon Rappoport)

The State’s magic is by reduction. Reduce all live fertile thought and feeling, and keep reducing until you arrive at a tiny point of gray dead light. Then pass that light from hand to hand, until all the workers inside the fortress possess it and cherish it.

The State’s obsession is with systems. It dreams of building a Control Center and hooking the whole population up to it.

This is the triumph of the prosaic. This is non-personality at the apex of its performance.

If you have a bigger and bigger class of people who only do the protecting, you eventually have to think of everyone else as the enemy. That becomes a closed system. And the minds operating that system, the managers, have to color their thoughts with constant, invented, official paranoia. So you get television shows and movies that reflect this state of mind. Enemies everywhere. It’s a self-feeding cafeteria.

Society and civilization are based on a limited range of emotions, which is the glue that builds the consensus and holds things together. What is held together is a smaller and smaller space, in which people operate. They come to see this space as The Central Space. That’s a lie. It’s an illusion.

You isolate 15 emotions. You label them and you describe them. You claim this is the full human range. You see that, if people accept these 15 as ‘all there is,’ you can manipulate those 15, you can focus on them, you can play them like an orchestra. It becomes a game. You develop various strategies to make that music. The goal is control. But the whole program and its success rely on the underlying assumption that there is this limited range and that’s all there is. If people were experiencing 150 emotions on a regular basis, and you tried to manipulate them by focusing on 15, what would happen? You would fail.


power outside the matrix


Society has initiation rituals, which are designed to bring people into Organization and Function. The counter-initiation, which is supposed to act as the resistance, champions better organization and better function. The vapid soul of this “resistance,” called technocracy, is really the apotheosis of the ritual—mystical, God-from-the-machine, and humans as electronic receivers of vetted official data.

To make sure humans are, in fact, consenting to the meaning of official data, the Surveillance State is conjured up. This is a public works program. “A job for anyone who wants to spy.”

Priest-class magic was always about control. A pipeline to salvation was offered to the population. Now the magic is about merging with the Machine.

Ablutions: for that day, the human must undergo preparatory exercises, to cleanse his psyche of idiosyncrasy, to attain uniformity preceding the initiation.

To establish a clear channel, so he can receive.

So he can receive the direct opposite of a galvanizing creative life, so he can receive the downloaded zero of empty magic.

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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

The basis of mass mind control

The basis of mass mind control

by Jon Rappoport

May 23, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

“Aliens visiting Earth would report back to their superiors: ‘It’s quite amazing, those people worship images. They know it and they pretend not to know it.’” — Hypnotherapist Jack True.

This is a backgrounder for my mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, which contains many exercises designed to liberate an individual from the standardized perception of reality—and usher in his own creative reality.

Mass mind control focuses on two elements: image and feeling.

By linking the two primary elements, it is possible to short-circuit thought and “cut to the chase,” when it comes to enlisting the allegiance of huge populations.

Two seemingly unrelated events spurred my interest in mass mind control.

On the evening of April 12, 1945, I listened to a radio report on the death of Franklin D Roosevelt. I was seven years old.

I became upset. I didn’t know why. I was angry at my own reaction.

Forty years later, I pulled into a gas station near my apartment in West Los Angeles. I got out of my car and took the cap off my gas tank. I looked to my right and saw Tony Curtis sitting in his car. I was shocked.

A few days later, I began making notes under the heading of “image-emotion cues.” At the time, I was working as a reporter, writing articles for LA Weekly. I knew next to nothing about mind control, MKULTRA, Soviet psychiatric gulags, Chinese re-education programs, or US psychological warfare operations.

But because I had been painting for 25 years, I knew something about the power of images.

I remembered my first exhibition of paintings in LA, at my friend Hadidjah Lamas’ house. We had hung my work in her large living room and dining room. Hadidjah had enlisted the services of a friend who had videotaped me painting in my studio, and at the exhibition she set up a television set out on her patio and continuously played the videocassette.

People came through her front door, almost automatically walked through the house to the patio, as if guided by an unseen hand, and watched the video; then they came back inside and looked at the paintings.

They would stop at a painting and say: “That picture was in the video!” It excited them.

My first note on “image-emotion cues” was, “Investing an image with importance. Projecting emotion into an image.”

Projecting emotion into a newspaper image of the president, FDR. Projecting emotion into the screen image of Tony Curtis. Projecting emotion into a video of a painter working in his studio.

When people encounter an image, when they invest it with importance, they project feeling into the image—and this all happens in a private sphere, a private space.

If this didn’t happen, there would be no way to control populations through images. It wouldn’t work. It all starts with a person setting up his own personal feedback loop that travels from him to an image and back again.

Coming out of World War 2, US psychological warfare operatives knew they could turn their skills to political purposes. They had just succeeded in making Americans believe that all Japanese and German people were horribly evil. They had been able to manipulate imagery successfully in that area. Why couldn’t they shape America’s view of a whole planet that lay beyond personal experience?

They could and they did. But the power to do that emanated from the fact that every person invests images with feeling. That’s where it really starts.

I had seen the 1957 film, Sweet Smell of Success, a number of times. I admired it. Burt Lancaster and Tony Curtis gave tremendous performances. When, decades later, I saw Curtis sitting in his car at that gas station, I was “working from” the emotion I had invested in his onscreen image. It produced a sense of shock and paralysis for a few seconds.

Other people might have rushed up to Curtis and asked for his autograph. With me, it was shock, cognitive dissonance. Ditto for the death of FDR. I was working off newspaper pictures I’d seen of him, and the feeling I’d invested in those presidential images. Other people, when FDR died, went out into the street and hugged their neighbors and wept openly. For me, it was upset and shock and anger.

There’s nothing intrinsically wrong with investing emotion in images. It can be exhilarating. It can be uplifting. As a painter, I know this in spades. Putting emotion into images can, in fact, vault you into a different perception of reality.

But on the downside, it can also take you into lockstep with what media/propaganda operatives want you to experience, second-hand.

We focus to such a degree on how we are being manipulated that we don’t stop to consider how we are participating in the operation. And our own role is clear and stark: we invest images with feeling.

So how does one individual’s projection of feeling into an image become a uniform projection of the same feeling into one image, by millions of people? How does what one person invests privately become mass mind control?

Through external instruction or cues. And also, by engendering the idea that there is only a limited palette of emotions to work with in the first place.

Why do millions of people fall into line?

Because they don’t realize they started the whole ball rolling themselves. All they know is: images are connected to feelings.

If they knew they were the real power in the whole operation, if they knew they were investing feelings into images all day long, if they could actually slow down enough to see how they do this….then they would be far less prone to taking instruction about what feelings they “ought to” invest in second-hand images.

Hypnotherapist Jack True unceremoniously put it to me this way: “If a dog could analyze how he got from eating meat to drooling at the sound of a bell that came at feeding time, he could stop drooling.”

(If Chris Matthews could analyze how his own voluntary investment of feeling in the image of Barack Obama sends a tingle up his leg, he could stop tingling.)

We see images of people rioting all over the Middle East. We see burning flags and crowds outside embassies. We’re supposed to invest our own anger and resentment into those images. Unless we’re suddenly told those rioters are actually “the good rebels,” in which case we’re supposed to invest our joy in the images.

We see a picture of miles of flat farmland and (GMO) corn waving in the breeze. We’re supposed to invest that image with feelings of happiness and pride.

Nowhere are we told we can back up a step and realize that we are the ones who begin the whole process, by projecting feelings into images. Any images.


When I was 19, I was sent to a trained expert in New York to take a Rorschach (ink-blot) Test. I was displaying signs of what would now be called Oppositional Defiance Disorder.

The expert said he wanted me to tell him everything I saw in each ink-blot. I took him at his word.

An hour later, I was still working on the first blot. I was describing everything from bats and owls and chickens to space ships and buckets of hidden treasure in caves.

Well, I was cheating a little. I wasn’t really describing what I saw. I was imagining. I was taking off from what was on the page and improvising. This was outside the bounds of the Test.

The expert was seething. He was sweating, because he had many other blots to show me, and it was late in the afternoon, and he was looking at spending the entire evening with me. Finally, he held up his hand and put an end to the Test.

I wasn’t playing his game. Among other sins, I wasn’t investing a limited palette of feelings in the images. Therefore, my choices of “what to see” in the blots expanded greatly.

When I go to a museum, I like to watch people stand in front of abstract paintings. Many of them are stumped. They’re trying to figure out what feelings they “are supposed to” project into the painting. They’re looking for “instruction,” and there isn’t any. They’re asking for mind control, and they’re not getting it.


Exit From the Matrix


Fanaticism of any kind begins with individuals projecting feelings into images. This is harnessed by leaders, who then choose the images and direct which feelings are permitted. The tempting prospect for the follower is: participation in a drama that goes beyond what he would ordinarily experience in life. This is bolstered by the idea that what he is doing is moral.

In an election season, people on the left are urged to project messianic feelings into images of X. People on the right are cued to invest feelings of pride, hope, and “tradition” into images of Y. The real candidates aren’t actually experienced.

Since Vietnam, shooting wars have been more difficult to sustain among soldiers. “In the old days,” feelings of hatred could be projected into images of enemies that included civilians, so overtly killing everybody on foreign soil was easier to accept. Now, soldiers are taught “enemy combatant” and “civilian” are two different images that require the injection of two different feelings.

Here at home, police and military are taught, more and more, to invest feelings of suspicion into images of American civilians. This is an acceleration of mass mind control for law enforcement.

The astonishing number of civilians who participate in government and corporate surveillance of the public, through technological means, learn to invest “dead empty feelings” into images of citizens, as if these targets are nothing more than ciphers, units.

Bizarre instances of police detaining and questioning parents who allow their children to play unsupervised reveal another accelerating trend. These confrontations start with neighbors snitching on the parents. The neighbors have learned to invest feelings of panic, suspicion, and anger in images of “free children.”

In all these cases, there is no real experience. It’s all second-hand. It’s all feeling-projected-into-image.

In the medical arena, countless advertisements and news stories are geared to convince people to invest feelings of trust in images of doctors. The suggestion, “Ask your doctor if X is right for you,” is framed as the solution to a little problem. The problem is set this way: Drug X is wonderful; drug X has serious adverse effects; what to do? Solution: ask your doctor; trust him; he knows.

As the class of victims in society has grown by leaps and bounds, including any group that can organize and promote itself as needing help or justice—going miles beyond the people who really do need assistance—citizens have been trained to invest feelings of sympathy and concern for all images of victims everywhere, real or imagined. This, too, is mass mind control.

Pick an image; invest feelings in it. Facts don’t matter. Evidence doesn’t matter.

You’ve heard people say, So-and-so (a celebrity) has become a caricature of himself. Well, that’s what it means. The celebrity has projected massive feelings of approval into a concocted, cartoonish image of himself.

As a society, we can go on this way until we become a horrific cartoon of a cartoon (well, we’re already there), or we can step back and discover how we invest emotion into images, and then use that process to pour feelings into visions of our own choosing and invent better futures.

Since the dawn of time, leaders have portrayed themselves as gods. They’ve assembled teams to promote that image, so their followers could project powerful emotion into the image and thereby cement the leaders’ control and power.

The game isn’t new. Understanding the roots of it within each individual could, however, break the trance of mass mind control.

During the first West Nile fake outbreak of 1999, I spoke with a student who had just dropped out of medical school. He told me he’d been looking at electron-microscope photos of the West Nile Virus, and he suddenly realized he was “supposed to” invest feelings of “great concern” in those images.

Somehow, he broke free from the image-feeling link. He was rather stunned at the experience. His entire conditioning as a medical student evaporated.

Parents all over the world are having the same experience vis-a-vis vaccines. They realize they’re supposed to invest fear in images of germs and disease, and they’re also supposed to invest feelings of hope and confidence in images of needles and vaccines. They see the game. They’re supposed to remain victims of mass mind control.

But they’ve awakened.


We’ve all been taught that what we feel is always and everywhere out of our control. These feelings are simply part of us, and we have to act on them. The alternative would be to sit on them and repress them and turn into androids, robots.

This is simply not true. There are an infinite number of feelings, and as strange as it may sound, we can literally invent them.

This, it is said, is inhuman. It’s a bad idea. It’s wrong. It would lead us to “deserting the human community.”

Nonsense. That’s part of the propaganda of mind control. If the controllers can convince us that we’re working from a limited map of emotions and we have to stay within that territory, they can manipulate that limited set of feelings and trap us.

The power of art is that it shows us there are so many more emotions than we had previously imagined. We can be much freer than we supposed.

The synthetic world of mind control and the handful of feelings that are linked to images is what keeps us in thrall.

The world—the world of what we can be—is so much wider and more thrilling and revealing.

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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Brave New Mind Control: everyone belongs to everyone else

Brave New Mind Control: everyone belongs to everyone else

by Jon Rappoport

March 28, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

From my work-in-progress, The Magician Awakes, here is a relevant quote:

“The modern assumption is, each person’s consciousness is connected to every other person’s consciousness. And following from that, enlightenment comes from seeing the connection and surrendering to it.

“The truth is, we are talking about theater. You can take on a role, you can ‘become’ someone else, just as an actor slips into character in a play. But you can also put aside that role. There is nothing final about it.

“On a political level, the idea that we are all one unity is just another corrupt piece of propaganda, intentionally promoted to convince people that their individual independence is a delusion.

“And on a personal level, many, many people are all too eager to lay down their own power, to stop exploring what that power is really capable of, to short-circuit that power and instead join up with an Image of ‘all consciousness.’”

“Every one belongs to every one else” is a quote from Huxley’s novel, Brave New World. Is this slogan a genuine humanitarian effort on the part of the State, or a weapon directed at the individual?

The answer in the novel is given by the characterof the “Director”:

“…at last the child’s mind is these suggestions, and the sum of the suggestions is the child’s mind. And not the child’s mind only. The adult’s mind too—all his life long. The mind that judges and desires and decides—made up of these suggestions. But all these suggestions are our suggestions!”

The State is the shaper, the groomer, the proponent of all-encompassing mind control.

In our time, such phrases as “it takes a village,” “you didn’t build that,” and “we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to their communities” are suggestions pumped out by the State and its allies.

There are millions of people who resemble the naïve citizens of Brave New World, who accept the above communitarian sentiments as genuine and true and even messianic.

The State (and its media fronts), in our time, wants to impart a “spiritual tone” to its pronouncements. This comes in two basic forms. One, we are holy crusaders who must drop bombs on those who refuse to accept our traditional religion (Bush). And two, we are a single unified consciousness who must diminish the notion of the independent individual (Obama).

Coming from the State and its minions, these are straight cons.

They carry the moral weight of a mafia rep who promises a grocery-store owner protection for a weekly cut of his income.

A common theme runs through Orwell’s 1984, Huxley’s Brave New World, and Anthony Burgess’ A Clockwork Orange: there is an overwhelming problem that must be solved for the benefit of all humanity.

The problem could be described as poverty or suffering or irrational resistance to leadership or crime. The solution, though, always produces something far worse than the problem.

And the solution always involves mind control, thought control, conditioning, programming.

There was a reason Edward Bernays, the father of modern public relations wrote, “It is sometimes possible to change the attitudes of millions but impossible to change the attitude of one man.”

Mind control is directed at the mass, the group, the collective, the community, the population.

Bernays also wrote, “The three main elements of public relations are practically as old as society: informing people, persuading people, or integrating people with people.”

Integrating people with people. In other words, to make mind control propaganda work, people must cease thinking of themselves as independent individuals. That’s the key. They must think of themselves, first and foremost, as part of a group. Then the propaganda works beautifully.

Therefore, the first order of business, for propaganda, is launching suggestion after suggestion that “we’re all together.”

This “meta-suggestion” must appear to be made with the greatest sincerity and concern for the general good.

Mustapha Mond, the World Controller of Western Europe in Brave New World, comments: “Sleep teaching was actually prohibited in England…Parliament, if you know what that was, passed a law against it. The records survive. Speeches about liberty of the subject [individual person]. [Which was really] Liberty to be inefficient and miserable. Freedom to be a round peg in a square hole.”

In the novel, sleep teaching was a series of vocal repetitions, thousands of them, which added up to the insertion of State-sponsored thought in the mind of the sleeper.

Mustapha Mond is reflecting on the old world. He’s linking the ancient concept of freedom to inevitable consequences of inefficiency, suffering, and isolation. And of course the State solves all these conditions by reshaping the minds of the people, engineering them in the womb, treating them with a drug, called Soma, which relieves and banishes unhappiness, and teaching (hypnotizing) them in their sleep.

“Every one works for every one else. We can’t do without any one…for I am you and you are I.” These are the sentiments of the Brave New World. These are the thoughts produced by sleep teaching. These are the utopian principles. This is mind control.


The Matrix Revealed


Exit From the Matrix


These principles cut far deeper than, say, worker-owned businesses or intentional communities. They seek to eliminate the individual’s consciousness that he is an independent individual. In fact, they seek to cause confusion whenever an individual does consider the possibility that he is independent.

Another character in Brave new World, Bernard Marx, expresses this confusion: “How is it that I can’t, or rather—because I know quite well why I can’t—what would it be like if I could, if I were free—not enslaved by my conditioning.”

He can’t conceive what his own freedom would be.

Another Brave New World slogan capsulizes the threat freedom poses: “When the individual feels, the community reels.”

Mond, the Controller, describes the essence of Brave New World. Ask yourself how many people would opt for this kind of life, if they could have it now:

“…you’re so conditioned that you can’t help doing what you ought to do. And what you ought to do is on the whole so pleasant, so many of the natural impulses are allowed free play, that there really aren’t any temptations to resist. And if ever, by some unlucky chance, anything unpleasant should somehow happen, why, there’s always soma to give you a holiday from the facts. And there’s always soma to calm your anger, to reconcile you to your enemies, to make you patient and long-suffering. In the past you could only accomplish these things by making a great effort and after years of hard moral training. Now, you swallow two or three half-gramme tablets, and there you are. Anybody can be virtuous now. You can carry at least half your morality about in a bottle…”

And how about this feature of the New World? “Men and women must have their adrenals stimulated from time to time…It’s one of the conditions of perfect health. That’s why we’ve made the V.P.S. treatments compulsory…Violent Passion Surrogate. Regularly once a month. We flood the whole system with adrenalin. It’s the complete physiological equivalent of fear and rage. All the tonic effects of murdering Desdemona and being murdered by Othello, without any of the inconveniences.” (Video games, anyone?)

Every day, week, month, year, more people are coming around to a preference for a synthetic mind-controlled “utopia,” even if they don’t realize it. They would take the Brave New World existence if it were offered to them.

And if the price to pay was the acceptance of conditioning? “Everyone belongs to everyone else”? Oh well, why not?

It’s highly significant that, in Brave New World, even with every fetus subjected to genetic engineering, there was still a need to condition people, through repetitive sleep learning, to accept The Group as all and everything.

That’s how deep the idea of the independent individual goes.

That’s The Problem for the controllers. And no matter what they try, they will never solve it with finality.

Everyone doesn’t belong to everyone else. The individual is irreducible.

He has the power to invent new reality. He has the power to join with others—without invoking mind control—to outdistance the reality of the State.

Jon Rappoport

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. 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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

A Clockwork Orange, Eden, guilt, sin, mind control

A Clockwork Orange, Eden, guilt, sin, mind control

by Jon Rappoport

March 26, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

Here’s a short quote from my unfinished manuscript, The Magician Awakes:

“How do you view a single life? Is it a platform from which a human launches his future, or must he double back and find out what is wrong with him?

“Is he compelled, through social training, to think of himself as flawed? Is that what we’re all coming to? Three or four generations from now, will everyone automatically see their lives as a mistake that demands correction?”

Whether it’s the administration of toxic psychiatric drugs; experiments in changing thought and behavior through electromagnetic transmissions to the brain; genetic modifications, transhuman hook-ups between humans and machines; or other forms of operant conditioning; the message from corporations and government and society is clear:

Something is basically faulty with human beings, and it needs to be remedied.

It’s the modern version of Original Sin and redemption, via science.

Both Orwell and Huxley covered the subject in their novels, 1984 and Brave New World.

The 1962 novel, by Anthony Burgess, A Clockwork Orange, takes up the same assumption. Its young, violent, vicious criminal is put through aversion therapy as a cure—not only for him, but also, potentially, for society.

Here are several key quotes from Burgess’ novel:

“We’re not concerned with motives, with the higher ethics. We are concerned only with cutting down crime—and…with relieving the ghastly congestion in our prisons. He will be your true Christian: ready to turn the other cheek, ready to be crucified rather than crucify, sick to the very heart at the thought even of killing a fly! Reclamation! Joy before the angels of God! The point is that it works.”

“Does God want goodness or the choice of goodness? Is a man who chooses to be bad perhaps in some way better than a man who has the good imposed upon him?”

“He ceases to be a wrongdoer. He ceases also to be a creature capable of moral choice.”

And then from the 1971 film, A Clockwork Orange, written and directed by Stanley Kubrick:

“Our subject [the criminal] is impelled towards the good by paradoxically being impelled towards evil. The intention to act violently is accompanied by strong feelings of physical distress [during aversion therapy]. To counter these [feelings of distress], the subject has to switch to a diametrically opposed attitude. Any questions?”

There are many questions, and too few people who, now, want to think about them seriously.

Slogans, political correctness, turning to The Group for all answers, denying the existence of the individual—these are all signs that Guilt is still being used as the impetus for building the society of the future.

Laid on top of that grid is the program to “enhance” humans. Those who can afford it will undergo genetic alteration, and poof, they will suddenly have talents they only could dream of before.

This is the modern version of buying indulgences from the Roman Church to gain a place in heaven.

And it is just as fanciful.

People are being educated to believe that standing out from The Group is a crime. They must not reveal themselves in that way. Achievement is wrong. It makes The Group look small.

Much better to huddle in a mass, dependent on mind control—and our leaders will determine the form and content of that new programming.

Forget about freedom. It’s an illusion. Confess that we are all fatally misshapen. Submit to “aversion therapy.” In that way, we’ll be restored.


The Matrix Revealed


In one way or another, these propaganda operations are all versions of the Garden of Eden story. But I take the fable this way:

In the Garden, Adam and Eve were delighted with each other and with all they saw. They woke up every morning without a stain of regret or remorse. When the mind-control operative, the serpent, came along, he said:

“You don’t understand. I have other knowledge for you. There are other people over the hill. I’ll take you to them. They’re all suffering.

“And you, Adam and Eve, are the cause of that suffering, because you set yourselves apart from them. As long as you are different, they are trapped. But if you join them, and experience what they experience, you’ll change the nature of life. All of you will wait together, and a new program of existence will be given to you.”

That was the con, and it worked. The snake led Adam and Eve out of the Garden, and they joined The Group.

But everyone over the hill, huddled in a quivering mass, had once been an Adam and Eve. Everyone.

And all those Adams and Eves had once lived in a Garden. And the snake had come to all of them and told them the same story.

And they had fallen for it. Fallen.

As for the very first Adam and the first Eve, when the snake had taken them over the hill, he said: “You see, there is Nothing there. No one is there. And that Nothing is intolerable.

“There must be rules. There must be regulations. There must be boundaries. Otherwise, how will you know how to live?

“So you will stay here and suffer. Because suffering is the way to reach out and ask for rules that will save you. And after a time, those rules will be delivered to you. They’ll be printed in your minds.”


Exit From the Matrix


How many people would consider the possibility that, without mind control and without rules and without propaganda and without a priest class, they already know how to live, they already know how to invent their own realities?

How many people would believe they are already artists of great power?

How many would believe they can invent endlessly, from Nothing?

Versus: how many people would rather embed and embroil themselves in The Group, to suffer there, to scheme and connive and submit, to make war, to demand relief from pain, to wait…

Until leaders with grand solutions come along and program them to live “the life of goodness.”

This is what society is being led to. The principle that so-called goodness must be programmed into people. They can’t choose. There is no choice. There is only the mind control.

Jon Rappoport

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. 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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Guns, schools, mind control, revolution

Guns, schools, mind control, revolution

by Jon Rappoport

March 4, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

“Padre, these are subtleties. We’re not concerned with motives, with the higher ethics. We are concerned only with cutting down crime–and. . .with relieving the ghastly congestion in our prisons. He will be your true Christian: ready to turn the other cheek, ready to be crucified rather than crucify, sick to the very heart at the thought even of killing a fly! Reclamation! Joy before the angels of God! The point is that it works.” — A Clockwork Orange, Anthony Burgess, 1962.

Fingers pointed like a gun. A pop tart chewed into the shape of a gun. A toy gun.

All over America, schools are exercising what they call zero tolerance policy to suspend young children packing “suggestions of guns.”

Behind this practice is the idea that populations can be conditioned against owning real guns. Start early, indoctrinate the kids, and society will change.

In turn, such thinking rests on the premise that human beings are Pavlovian dogs. Programmed biological machines. If the program currently running is faulty, and fails to obey the mandate of “greatest good for the greatest number,” change the program.

If the brain reveals a chemical imbalance (although no research has even established a baseline for normal balance), insert psychiatric drugs and correct the problem.

Maintain surveillance on the entire population, thus convincing millions they may be potential law-breakers…and they will modify their behavior, they will toe the line, they will march straight ahead and keep their mouths shut.

As this sort of flawed reasoning expands and spreads, people begin to believe that a model of radical reconstruction is viable and good.

For instance, how many people would now respond favorably to the idea that “everyone can be programmed to forget guns even exist”?

How many people would agree to a program that “guaranteed” racial prejudice would be wiped from human memory?

How many people would happily respond to the notion that environmental destruction, as an impulse, could be removed from the brain?

How many of these people would even notice that such programs were eliminating freedom? And if they did notice, how many would care?

Operant conditioning and mind control could have side effects? What does that mean, if freedom was never real in the first place?

A recent opinion piece in the Harvard Crimson, by student Sandra YL Korn, was subtitled: “Let’s give up on academic freedom in favor of justice.” Korn asserted that academic research promoting “oppression” should be stopped. Perhaps you can imagine what a university council, convened to define and rule on “justice,” would look and sound like.

(Question for consideration by the Committee: should University funds for African-American left-handed lesbians supersede monies devoted to correcting unequal treatment of differently-abled wheelchair-bound Hispanic immigrants whose parents descend from bloodlines of Spanish conquistadors in the New World?)

The idea that you can obliterate “bad parts” of the brain and preserve the good parts is now embedded in standard science. It is childish, absurd, and dangerous to the extreme.

Brain researchers are, on the whole, disinterested in the law. They aim to create a new species for whom no laws will be needed. People will do the right thing, because their upgraded brains tell them to.

If these researchers and their allies succeed, what we are now calling revolutions will be as pop tarts are to ICBMs. We’ll have mass uprisings that will shake the Earth.

Because when freedom is slipping away, is actually being drained away, and when people know it, in their bones, when they can no longer deny it or sleep through it, they will show exactly how important they think it is.

They will no longer believe that all this programming and brain research are aimed at curing illness. They will understand the madness being visited on them.

Jon Rappoport

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. 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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

The voice of mind control

The voice of mind control

by Jon Rappoport

March 4, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

Every civilization and every generation has their defining voices.

The voice does two things. It tells the story of the times; and it injects the telltale emotions, moods, and attitudes of that story.

The public swallows the tale with all its lies and omissions, and accepts the way in which the whole act is spooled out by the sound of the narrative voice.

The tone of the story creates a trance.

Different societies are vulnerable to different styles of story-telling.

Americans on this side of the Atlantic, listening to the radio speeches of Hitler delivered with staccato militant force, thought the German people were clearly crazy to go along.

It never occurred to the Americans, glued to their radios listening to President Roosevelt, that many Germans would think the sing-song pseudo-British style of the aristocratic FDR was a transparent joke.

I’ll take my hypnosis on rye with mustard.” “I’ll have mine on a bun with mayo.”

It’s assumed that, because Hitler and Mussolini were cementing their control through mass arrests and overt shows of force, they could get away with vocal displays of shouting and intimidation. Otherwise, the people would have turned away from them in disgust.

That’s not the whole picture, by any means. Large numbers of people in Germany and Italy responded enthusiastically to the voices of Hitler and Mussolini.

The trance they entered, as a result, wasn’t a passive narcosis. It was a kind of hysteria that demanded action.

If, down the road, America is put under an openly declared state of martial law, with all the bells and whistles attached, elite television anchors, like Brian Williams and Scott Pelley, will tell that story—not as Mussolini would—but as our anchors always do; in measured, “responsible, objective” tones. It will be “grave and sober.” The voices will suggest a dollop of alarm, but…everything is under control.

That’s the way modern Americans want to hear The Voice narrate the story of the times.

And the president of the moment? He will deploy those same tones. He won’t be standing on the balcony of a building shouting and waving his arms.

But the result will be the same.

In the wake of post-WW2 America, as the feisty combative Harry Truman exited the White House, the bland-egg Eisenhower took up residency. He was always calm and under control. He was the modest hero. He was what you’d call, in his speeches, a Grade B anchor. Not good, but not the worst.

At the same time, American television news was coming into being. Douglas Edwards, one of the first elite anchors, was a smoother, better-trained-for-television Eisenhower. Ed Murrow, who had been narrating the war from London, added his “pregnant-with-meaning” ominous tone to US news broadcasting.

The narrative style of the American voice was under construction.

Chet Huntley and David Brinkley, along with Walter Cronkite, moved in to put their ineradicable stamp on the sound of our civilization. They were a step up from Doug Edwards. They could crystallize a tight range of repressed feelings in every sentence they uttered. They were coming out of literary traditions: Hemingway, Raymond Chandler, Dashiell Hammett.

Tough guy with a warm edge.

America loved it. Those new voices enabled every kind of con, six ways from Sunday, to be visited on an adoring public.

Flash forward to 1968. Despite the revolution of the 60s, more than half of voting America still wanted the whitebread, big-bullshit, used-car-salesman nostalgia of the previous decade. So Richard Nixon, a man who couldn’t open his lips without lying on several simultaneous levels, waltzed into the White House.

After the hopeless Gerald Ford stood in for Nixon, a cartoon of a cartoon was needed; a peacemaker; a man “of the cloth.” Sold out to David Rockefeller down to his jockstrap, Jimmy Carter came to the presidency to heal the nation from Watergate. He was the new voice silkily twanging the American story, a respite from Nixon.

Then, out of Hollywood, appeared an actor who, despite a wretched history in films, could sell a cartoon of “the shining city on the hill.” Ronald Reagan. America wanted a redux of the freedom story, and he supplied it, as the invasive federal government nevertheless continue to burgeon from its every rotting pore.

And on it went. Presidents and anchors on television conspired to deliver a two-dimensional fairy tale, in a country where an accelerated androidal conformity was beginning to dominate the landscape.

Television was the mutual electronic feeding trough for the Great Voices and the public. They mixed and matched and swam in convenient concert, through gray offal.

Talent spotters at the networks and inside the major political parties knew what to look for. They knew how the voices needed to sound. They knew the game.

Slightly more progressive and hip for the boomers? Bill Clinton.

Shit-kicker John Wayne retro? GW Bush.

A new interplanetary sun-god messiah? Obama.

A Hemingway knockoff with an edge in his voice? Dan Rather.

Smooth-groomed high IQ macaque? Brian Williams.

Might turn in his mother to the cops? Scott Pelley.

Drooling sad-eyed swan imported from the Morning Show? Diane Sawyer.

Sacrifice the mind on the altar of cosmically oozing sentimentality, tricked out as New Age news? Oprah.

Floating blithely in an ocean of high-level corporate-government-banking crimes, Americans can choose their favorite voice to obscure the truth and tell a very, very tall tale.

That’s what people want, and that’s what they get.

Will any of these elite voices ever upset a serious apple cart? Not on your life.

If America really wanted a Hitler to stand in the middle of the Rose Bowl, surrounded by perfect columns of ramrod soldiers, and lay out the next hundred years of triumph of the will, do you think the television networks would find one?

Are you kidding? In a New York minute.

But Americans want their fascism soft-boiled. Americans want gradualism. They don’t want a coup in the middle of the night. They want to watch the leaves fall off the tree of freedom one branch at a time.

When the Republicans ran Mitt Romney against Barack Obama, they were banking on the premise that somehow, somewhere, the majority of the public desired a retro Wonder Bread hero. But that voice and that tone and that mood didn’t fit. It didn’t carry the day.

Interestingly, there was an enormous groundswell for a man who had no voice at all, in the media sense.

But the Republican door was firmly closed to him, because of his ideas, but also because he wasn’t a typical anchor.

Ron Paul.

You can take this to the bank. If Ron Paul ever became the voice of our times, reality itself as most people accept it would crack under their feet, and they would fall into black space screaming.

One reason? Paul isn’t spinning a story with the impressive rhythms and tones and segueways of a media pro. Therefore, you actually have to pay attention to the content of his words. That alone is enough to give most people strokes, blood clots, and titanic neurological chaos.

The US government is loathe to legislate mandatory television-news-watching to every American. It leaves that aspect of the fascist agenda to its corporate partners and their advertising agencies.

And little boys and girls dream of growing up and becoming finely coiffed and perfumed anchors and pundits.

A precious few will make it. They’ll tell tales of the adored Matrix. They’ll carve their names in the fake book of chords and melodies. They’ll stir the appropriate sentiments. They’ll deliver the news every night. They’ll present every half-cocked limited hangout and define every outrageous set of straitjacket parameters to a prepared audience.

You’re an aspiring anchor? Come on down. Some day you might be the chosen one. You might become the messenger, the talent turned out by the royal court, to ring the bells and sing the songs. If you’re lucky, and you sing on key, you may have five or 10 years before the next up-and-coming voice edges you out.

You might be assigned to bring mind control to your generation. You might be the one to obscure and conceal the real Fed Reserve, the crimes of the medical cartel, the Globalist agenda, the theft of trillions of dollars, the Collectivist framework, and the death of individual freedom.

Doesn’t that sound like a great job? And you can call it responsible journalism.

Jon Rappoport

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. 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 emails at www.nomorefakenews.com