PART 2, TAKING IT TO ANOTHER LEVEL

APRIL 6, 2011. Literature, plays, films, and television are littered with stories that contain a mystery—and at the end comes the payoff, when the mystery is solved.

For a moment, the audience is absorbed, and then there is the let down.

It’s as if a voyage through a rich forest suddenly ended in a vacuum, in a Nothing.

As long as the secret and the mystery can be prolonged, you have the audience with you. But when the solution is revealed, all you have is the thirst for another mystery. “Tell us more! Tell us another one! Give us another puzzle!”

An ancient manuscript, an unexplored cave, a probe sent to a distant planet…there is a powerful desire to come to the punch line…and then…boredom edges in.

I once had a conversation with a modern guru in the field of self-improvement. He is a very successful author and lecturer. At one point, he said, essentially: You know, I have nothing left. I’ve written these books, I’ve told my audiences what they need to know. They keep wanting more. The next book, the next lecture. I’m tired. I don’t have any more secrets. They don’t really want to know what works in their lives. They want stories. They want the thrill of the hunt for the next big thing. But when they get it, I can see them go over the edge into depression…

It’s a paradox. People want to massage a secret, but they want it to be solved. Yet, when it’s solved, they don’t care anymore. But if you give them a real secret, one that doesn’t resolve, one that challenges them in a different way, they throw up their hands and give up. They claim they “don’t understand.”

Several years ago, I went to the Vatican, to the Sistine Chapel, to see the Michelangelo fresco. I sat in the room with several hundred other visitors. We all craned our necks, looking at the famous ceiling. I’m sure that for many of those people, it was the fulfillment of a dream: to finally witness the greatness of one of the most famous works of art on the planet.

Afterwards, outside in the corridor, I watched them leave. What I saw on their faces was a neutrality tinged with boredom.

The mystery was solved. They had seen the thing in person, finally. It was the end.

I could have papered over that ceiling with a modern painting that would have puzzled them for the rest of their lives—withholding its mystery—but then the travelers would have been angry. They would have said, “I don’t understand!” No, the secret must be revealed, even if the outcome is a let down.

I’m sketching in here the anatomy of The Voyage to Discover What Exists.

It is one of the great enduring passions. But it has a vast and gaping downside. The payoff melts into a sagging passivity. “Well, that’s over. What’s next?”

Remember the Mike Nichols film, The Graduate? In that middle-class drama, the young Benjamin goes to extreme lengths to win Elaine, the daughter of Mrs. Robinson, who has seduced him. He storms into Elaine’s wedding; she deserts her fiancee. Outside the church, Ben and Elaine catch a bus and take their seats in the back. As the film ends, Ben just sits there. He has captured the prize. The secret is his. He stares vaguely at nothing. No joy. Only a blank.

Here is a statement attributed to Nobel Laureate Albert Szent- Gyorgyi (1937 Prize for Physiology and Medicine): “In my search for the secret of life, I ended up with atoms and electrons, which have no life at all. Somewhere along the line, life has run out through my fingers. So, in my old age, I am now retracing my steps…”

Try to count the number of cosmologies that have been floated since the dawn of time on this planet. Each one is a picture of What Exists behind What Seems to Exist. Even at that level, the search goes on. The master of them all, Plato, formulated a Theory of Forms, static and perfect Ideas sitting above and beyond ordinary reality. What a “discovery”–and yet, when he tried to put together a political state based on it, he was forced to conclude that utter fascism was the only possible authority.

In fact, fascism tends to become the outcome of every metaphysical search for What Exists, once an answer has been settled on. High priests, despots, mad rulers, kings who claim divine right run the show.

Up the road 50 or a hundred years, we will see whether science itself and its voyage of discovery turns into a genetic dictatorship.

Something that appears so right and so real and so entrancing, the attempt to nail down What Exists, has such a strange result.

What is going on?

How many seekers after the grand conspiracy behind all conspiracies become bogged down in their own journey, especially after they believe they have the answers to their ultimate questions? How many travelers along this road decide their findings add up to a portrait of a hopeless locked-down future, from which no one can escape—and then give up the whole enterprise in disgust and disillusionment?

How many people will fall into a weary swamp after December 21, 2012, passes and the revelation, the secret they have been chasing, doesn’t yield up the kind of personal illumination they were counting on?

Many years ago, a friend told me about a UFO cult that had existed somewhere in the Midwest, in the 1920s. The leader informed her followers that a great ship was coming to take them all away to a better place, a wonderful planet. The date and time were set. The leader had been receiving instructions from alien ET guides.

On this basis, all the members of the cult sold their houses and belongings (as if money would be useful on Planet X?). On the appointed date, the group was sitting in room, waiting for the ship to arrive. After several delays, the leader emerged from another room and said the UFO guides had just told her they weren’t coming after all, because the catastrophe that was supposed to decimate Earth had been sidetracked and avoided.

So there they were, sitting in a room, all dressed up and nowhere to go (and nowhere to live).

The result? The effort at recruiting new members expanded, and the cult grew! The leader told them a new story about what was coming in the wonderful years ahead—a new mystery was in progress.

THE OBSESSION TO DISCOVER WHAT EXISTS.

What Exists is, on a significant level, the greatest con game ever invented.

Everyone wants to chase down WHAT EXISTS and reveal it.

If Jesus really survived the crucifixion or was never hung on the cross, and escaped the Middle East, and if he married and had children, and if those children had children, and if that bloodline still exists…

Ten or 20 years after this great secret is exposed…how many of the millions of people who were originally galvanized by it still care or think about it….it’s old hat…we want another story…tell us another story….

Oh yes, that whole business about Jesus…that was pretty fantastic, wasn’t it…so tell us another story….

Well, perhaps I could tell you one story that keeps on driving its way through time and space and even beyond the Continuum. I don’t know whether it would interest you. I don’t know whether you would be willing to buy it. It has a few unusual wrinkles in it. It cuts across the grain of all human programming, especially the programming you’re sure doesn’t exist in your particular case.

And it definitely contradicts the whole obsession with finding out What Exists. It’s definitely not one of those I-have-a-mystery stories, so you might be exasperated. It might puzzle you and make you turn away. But on the off-chance that you would enjoy it, I’ll give it a shot…

Coming: Part 3.

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

Visit the site, sign for the email list and receive free articles, and order a copy of my book, THE OWNERSHIP OF ALL LIFE, in pdf or Kindle format.

TAKING IT TO ANOTHER LEVEL

APRIL 7, 2011. For the past two weeks, I’ve been writing extensively about genetic engineering and the human future. Now I want to move to another level, one which some people will think is esoteric.

Looked at from a particular angle, the mad dash for knowledge about genes is, actually, a sub-category of a much larger obsession:

THE DESIRE TO DISCOVER WHAT EXISTS.

This may, at first glance, seem like an empty truism.

Well, of course we want to know what exists. We want to know it at the bottom of the sea and out in the stars and within our own minds and in realms outside the normal channels of perception. Of course we want to journey to those places and find out what’s there.

Nothing wrong with that, right?

But there is a problem. Along with that urge to discover what exists in all these places, there comes a glitch.

We search for design and pattern and structure and system, in order to reach the highest kind of knowledge about existence, and then all our forward motion seems to bring us back around to the place where we began: ignorance.

Oh yes, we’ve found out a great deal along the way, but about the nature of life and the life-force itself, we’re still at the starting gate.

Many physicists experience this. For their whole careers, they probe the realm of micro particles, they accumulate massive amounts of information, and then they see these particles as neutral dead entities, and they wonder where life went.

There needs to be a new approach.

Instead of the Discovery Process, there needs to be something else.

It’s not a question of looking in the wrong place for enlightenment and illumination, it’s a matter of the Looking itself.

I’m not, however, proposing we all go blind.

We need a different platform.

Design, structure, system, and shape are not the end of the voyage. They are objectives that serve lesser goals. They are real and very useful and fine and good—but they are limited.

Obsession means people don’t see that. They think the structure and system are the grandest end-points.

This obsession is a deep part of human programming. When operating at full-bore, it obscures the farther shore.

It keeps the human race in one place.

It absorbs people with magnetic force.

And all programming is meant to limit power.

It is meant to divert and ultimately confuse us.

When the goal of discovering-what-exists takes over to the point of obsession, it forms a mesh of reality that surrounds us.

It is the meta-program that allows the matrix to have strength.

It is the externally applied input that keeps the whole matrix humming.

It’s interesting to reflect on those three Matrix films, and how they disintegrate step by step, from the discovery of the reality-prison—and the rush of adrenaline which ensues—on to the mindless war—as if that kind of struggle will actually free anyone.

The collapse of the storyline mirrors what happens when the impulse to see through to the Final Structure tries to continue past that point: there is nowhere to go.

Why? Because the heroes are really only armed with the all-consuming desire to uncover What Exists. Beyond that, they are clueless.

There is something about that voyage that degrades like an element with a very short half-life. It sputters out. The heroes revert back to older, more basic programming. Fight, conquer territory, defend, attack.

One: the thrill of profound discovery. Two: then the feeling of vacuum and confusion. Three: then the reversion back to primitive hatreds. With that sequence—now you are talking about the real Matrix.

In the arena of genetic research, there is the hope that, someday, we will find a gene which will somehow “wake up” all the dormant circuits in the brain—and then we will gain back fantastic insight and power. But based on what scientists have so far unearthed, is there any reason to believe this? Or is it just one more illusion which propels us forward on the voyage of discovery?

No one wants to swallow a bitter pill. Everyone wants to believe that what he is believing will bring him into port. Everyone wants to believe the voyage of discovery will finally reveal, not just the secrets, but the immediate means to transcend the limited programming of life in this Continuum.

However, we must consider that the road to such a place is a different kind of road.

I’m not talking about religions or myths or fairy tales or the collective unconscious. I’m not talking about revisiting some paradise.

Coming: Part 2.

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

Visit my site, sign up for the email list to receive free articles, and order a copy of my e-book, THE OWNERSHIP OF ALL LIFE, in pdf or Kindle format.

DEPOPULATION, GENETIC ENGINEERING, AND THE “NEW WORLD”

APRIL 1, 2011. Yesterday, I was on another radio show; a station in Oregon, AM 1440 KMED.

The host, Bill Meyer, has the number-one rated program in the Medford area. He and I had a very interesting conversation about human genetic engineering. He extended our segment, and we talked for nearly an hour and took calls.

This subject is hot. People want to know about it. They sense that researchers are willing to overstep legal and moral boundaries and try to design “an improved human being.”

They understand that promises and pretty pictures conveying “amazing genetic breakthroughs” in curing diseases are mostly PR, because the hard evidence is not there.

On my own radio show, which airs live every Wednesday at 4 PM

Pacific Time, at www.ProgessiveRadioNetwork.com, I did an hour of commentary this week on gene engineering and the connection to IG Farben, the infamous Nazi chemical cartel. You can catch it in the archive at that URL. (There are many shows of mine you’ll want to listen to there. Interviews with Peter Breggin, Peter Duesberg, Jeffrey Smith, etc.)

Bill, the KMED host, broached a very interesting question: are we nothing more than the sum total of our genes?

You see, this is where the discussion ultimately leads. People feel the gene researchers are really fronting for a materialistic philosophy that claims we are “particles and particles only.” Well, this is the great theme of 20th-century science.

And our experience tells us it is rubbish. We are aware. We are conscious, and this irreducible fact carries a message: you can’t make science out of the core of life itself. You can’t describe it in equations and technology. Consciousness isn’t a quality the world of science can capture.

It can pretend to surround it. It can pretend to ascribe it to the organ called the brain. But it fails. Consciousness doesn’t come in a bottle. It doesn’t arrive in a welter of formulas. It isn’t synapses and neurons.

Both the infamous CIA mind control program, MKULTRA, and the current gene-engineering mania are trying to make consciousness into a matter of pure conditioning—but it doesn’t work. We aren’t dogs waiting for Pavlov to ring the bell and feed us.

Some of you will remember two Nazi-like researchers, Jose Delgado, and psychiatrist Ewan Cameron. They were obsessed advocates of re-engineering society. They both stated that an individual human doesn’t have an intrinsic right to his own personality. For the good of all, that personality should be modified.

At the bottom of their heinous experiments was the belief that the human being is simply a collection of cells. An aggregate of atoms.

Therefore, re-arranging those particles would be no crime.

A car uses too much gasoline? Build a more efficient one. A human being doesn’t fit into the overall plan of “a better society?” Build a better human.

Those people who see a nasty globalist planet over the horizon should think very seriously about the long-range role of genetic engineering in that framework. It’s there. It’s part of the growing technocracy that wants to inject “the genes of Paradise” into favored individuals and slip other kinds of genes into “lesser people.”

Talk about depopulation? You’re talking about genetically canceling the ability of certain populations to reproduce. Quietly done over time, it’s a much more likely scenario than overt destruction.

Consider this quote from Psychology Professor Richard Lynn, director of the Ulster Institute for Social Research, and winner of the US MENSA Award for Excellence (1985, 1988, 1993, 2005-6):

“What is called for here is not genocide, the killing off of incompetent cultures. But we do need to think realistically in terms of the ‘phasing out’ of such peoples…Evolutionary progress means the extinction of the less competent.” (interview in Newsday, January 9, 1994, cited by the Center for Genetics and Society)

And how does this go down with your morning cereal:

“Many people love their retrievers and their sunny dispositions around children and adults. Could people be chosen in the same way? Would it be so terrible to allow parents to at least aim for a certain type, in the same way that great breeders…try to match a breed of dog to the needs of a family?” (Gregory Pence, professor of philosophy, School of Medicine and Humanities, University of Alabama at Birmingham, “Who’s Afraid of Human Cloning,” cited at the Center for Genetics and Society)

Here is one more:

“Some will hate it, some will love it, but technology is inevitably leading to a world in which plants, animals, and human beings are going to be partly man-made…Suppose parents could add 30 points to their children’s IQ. Wouldn’t you want to do it? And if you don’t, your child will be the stupidest child in the neighborhood.” (Lester Thurow, professor of economics and management, MIT, “Creating Wealth: The New Rules for Individuals, Companies and Nations in a Knowledge-Based Economy.”)

This last quote makes me want to coin a new mental illness: BLITHE INSANITY OF THE UNIVERSITY-CODDLED SUPER-PUNDIT.

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

Visit the site, sign up for the email list, and receive free articles, and order a copy of my e-book, THE OWNERSHIP OF ALL LIFE, in pdf or Kindle format.

INTERVIEW WITH A GENE RESEARCHER

MARCH 29, 2011. During my appearance on Coast to Coast AM, last Thursday, with George Noory, I described three interviews I had with gene researchers.

From my notes, here is an excerpt from the last interview. This scientist, though off the record, was the most outspoken of the three. I confirmed, through separate channels, that he is a working geneticist who has published in his field. Nothing in his background suggested to me he has some personal ax to grind. He makes a comfortable living, and his position is secure.

Q: Why are you talking to me?

A: Because I believe the research is heading in the wrong direction. Let me clarify that. Behind the scenes, there are professionals who are excessively eager to re-design the human being.

Q: Are they motivated by money?

A: Sure. They want grants for their labs. They want to keep the gravy train going. But they also want to enter a Brave New World. They’re reckless about that. They see a science-fiction future in which people will be able to buy genes and become free of the problems that beset the human race now.

Q: And that’s a bad thing because?

A: First of all, will we be told about all the failures? Or will that information be hidden?

Q: To create the cloned sheep, Dolly, there were lots and lots of failed tries.

A: Yes. So what will the human failures look like?

Q: No published studies?

A: There is a very strong possibility we will have two separate lines of research. The cautious experiments, out in the open, and then the reckless ones out of the spotlight.

Q: Complete secrecy?

A: Yes.

Q: How could that happen?

A: With money backing it. Private investors. Black-budget government money, about which very few people would be aware.

Q: And in that venue?

A: The rational restraints would be thrown out the window.

Q: You know people, researchers, who would participate in a scheme like that?

A: I’ve met a few. And I think, over time, others could be dragged into it.

Q: As a parallel, the infamous CIA MKULTRA program of mind control was carried out in secrecy.

A: Yes it was. But with gene experiments, the secrecy would have to be much tighter. There would be many, many failures to cover up.

Q: It sounds like you’re not very confident in the state of gene technology.

A: There is a lot of guesswork. Not only do you have a vast puzzle with all the pieces disconnected from one another, you don’t really know what each piece means. And you don’t know, in general, how solid a relationship there is between genes and human functions. There have been many claims and much promotion, but the science is shaky. It’s all been inflated to raise money from investors.

Q: So a secret program of, say, inserting genes into humans, into fetuses, could result in catastrophic outcomes.

A: One such grotesque outcome, just one, if made public, would cause a public uproar. That’s why I say the secrecy would have to be very, very tight. And the people who would control a program like that…I wouldn’t trust them. Who could trust them? Their lack of ethics would be frightening.

Q: As you talk about this, it’s easy to see the re-emerging picture of the Nazi experiments.

A: It starts out in a very casual way. “We want to raise IQ through genetic manipulation.” Or “We want to improve immune function.” It sounds friendly and plausible. But behind the scenes, the people in charge have far more radical goals.

Q: For example?

A: The creation of military warriors who are impervious to the ups and downs of emotion, regardless of external circumstances.

Q: You really think the people in charge would try for something like that?

A: There is a probability, yes. And because the state of the science is so far from being able to achieve that now—if it ever can—the experiments would be extremely reckless. Sheer guesswork. Trial and error, over and over. Who can say what the results would be?

Q: There are apparently a number of researchers and academicians who have a very rosy view of what’s possible in the next, say, twenty years. They see parents buying genes for their kids. Look better, feel better, perform better. That sort of thing. “Let the free-market forces rule.”

A: I’m not opposed to the free market. It does have a way of canceling out what doesn’t work. But those futurists who have this optimistic ideal don’t seem to realize how technologies are controlled in the real world. Gene technology would be handled by a corporate-government alliance. The most radical aspects of the technology could be carried out on much deeper…a secret channel of research, out of view of the public.

Q: It’s a cliché that the very rich would want unfettered access to the benefits. For themselves and their children.

A: We’re not talking about the middle class here. Or the upper middle class. Or the fairly wealthy. We’re talking about people who are extraordinarily rich and who hold sway over large sectors of society. Such people operate on the principle of Malthusian scarcity. There isn’t enough to go around—so they have to take the cream for themselves. This isn’t a rational view, but it’s the way they think. They would try to gain a monopoly on the most extreme aspects of genetic research. That’s what I see. If, somehow, it became possible to live to an age of two hundred, in excellent health, do you really believe the super-rich would fall all over themselves to share that with everyone else?

Q: But you don’t think such advances are on the immediate horizon for anyone.

A: I think the present state of the science is nowhere close to that. But it doesn’t mean some people won’t try. Some people will take any risks. They don’t care. We have the historical example of the Nazis. Germany wasn’t the only place where Nazis lived or that state of mind existed.

Q: I know many professionals in your field will claim that safeguards against abuses are in place, that watchdog groups and government agencies are very close to the action and will slap down anyone who tries to engage in reckless and dangerous experimentation.

A: On the level of what I’d call routine science, they’re right, for the most part. But from my experience, I see this other factor, the one we’ve been discussing. The black-budget secret line of experimentation.

Q: Just so it’s clear…we are talking about available test subjects, human beings, lots of them, who would participate as guinea pigs in genetic experiments. Exceedingly reckless experiments with uncertain outcomes. All sorts of horrible things could happen.

A: Yes. And if you’re asking me where such guinea pigs would come from, I would remind you that they’ve always been available.

Q: Wherever there is coercion and imprisonment.

A: Of course.

Q: The completion of the Human Genome Project was trumpeted with much praise. What’s your assessment of that work?

A: Assuming the accuracy of the findings, we could see that one range of mountains was conquered, and then we were able to understand how much was left to do. The simple notion of “genes controlling everything in the body” is naïve. There must be other factors, other influences.

Q: People like to speculate about the unknowns when it comes to genetic science.

A: That’s true about any incomplete theory or hypothesis. People come in with wild ideas to fill the holes and gaps. Some of those people try to sell their ideas. I try to avoid all that. But I will say the design features of what we know about the human genome are rather stunning. The idea that this architecture developed from a puddle of mud and amino acids is odd.

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

Visit my site, sign up for the email list and receive free articles, and order my e-book, THE OWNERSHIP OF ALL LIFE, in pdf or Kindle format.

MORE FALLOUT FROM THE NOORY SHOW

MARCH 28, 2011. Emails about my appearance on Coast to Coast AM with George Noory, last Thursday, keep coming in. Many of the questions and comments are on the subject of “designing humans.”

So I thought I’d make a few additional comments:

What about researchers who claim there are genes that monitor factors like talent, like IQ, like which emotions predominate, and so on?

Speculation. It hasn’t been proved. It tends to be hype. It’s wishful thinking right now.

There’s certainly an interest in redesigning humans—undergoing medical procedures that alter genetic structure in some way, in order to produce “a more advanced human being.”

There are very serious questions about whether that’s really possible in any significant way. But if it is, the people who control it will promote their own vision of what a human should be. Suppose, for example, they could engineer a fetus so the child experiences no ups and downs of feeling?

The child is neutral. Entirely goal-driven. Performs like a machine.

This would be an elite program. Run by people who are obsessed by end results. So they would favor a designing operation that created humans in their own image.

In purely commercial terms, parents would want to choose which genes to give their children, for certain “improvements.”

In that case, parents would be the ones creating their children in their own image. But to take this further, what we’re talking about here is synthetic creation. There is no guarantee that the outcome of genetic tinkering would produce something authentic. It’s like a chair factory. You set up machines in an assembly line, so you can spit out ten thousand chairs that look exactly alike, right? That’s what you do in manufacturing. And when you see a chair like that, you immediately recognize that it’s missing something. It’s not the same thing as a chair that was made by hand.

We’re not taking about chairs. And that’s exactly the problem. A human being is involved with desire and struggle and work to find a better existence. What happens if you surgically cut that line? What happens if you remove that whole road? What’s left? How much passion, for example, is left? And if there isn’t any, what sort of person do you have? These somewhat subtle questions aren’t part of the thinking about genetic re-programming. They’re considered irrelevant.

Take an analogy from painting. A certain kind of painter will completely sidestep the richness and depth of his potential work. Instead, he’ll give you “a happy, happy face” that’s a shallow cartoon of existence. He’ll give you a sad face with big glossy eyes, and that’s supposed to make you feel sad and nostalgic. Now transfer that attitude to genetic designers. What sort of human being would they create? I’m not so much talking about the individual traits as the dimensionality of those traits. They could very well come up with a short-cut type of human. A simulation of a human. Instead of the genetically enhanced human thinking A,B,C,D,E,F,G, he thinks A,G. It’s simpler. It’s faster. But it has no BODY to it. It’s just a kind of short circuit. And it’s not really smarter. It’s mechanical. The enhanced person doesn’t sense or feel meaning.

There’s no triumph.

There’s no impulse of passion to seek and find further frontiers. It’s a cartoon. The society is heading in that general direction already: Display what are supposed to be the outward signs of success and you have success. Of course, that’s insane. That means nothing. That’s the fallacy of so-called positive thinking. You develop a shorthand way of expressing what you want, and you hope that the affirmation will get you there. But where does it get you? You’re trying to compress life down to childish formulas. Your own thinking suffers in the process.

I’ve spoken with genetics researchers. I’ve found a few who are genuinely troubled about where this “re-designing” trend is going. The others are people I wouldn’t hire to make curtains for my windows. They’re super-enthusiastic, but they lack something in themselves. They want to do reductions. They want to design a future that is much simpler. Sell a gene, buy a gene. They really believe in that. You want to have greater sexual drive? Buy Gene ABC. They’re stunted people.

Then there’s the Mozart myth.

Yes, they like to bring that up. Here was a kid who suddenly could play the violin and read a musical score with no training, and then he went on to compose so many works, with seemingly no effort. Wouldn’t you want to have a child like that? Well, I happen to prefer Vivaldi. But now, these days, if you could insert a gene into a fetus and he could, at age ten, play ten different consecutive chords on a guitar without falling over, some parents would call that genius. So the culture itself and the genetic designers have common ground. That’s not a good sign. That’s a Disney cartoon standing in for real life.

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

Visit my site to sign up for the email list, and get free articles, and order a copy of my e-book, THE OWNERSHIP OF ALL LIFE, in Kindle or simple pdf format.

RAPPOPORT NOTES ON NOORY SHOW

MARCH 27, 2011. My appearance last Thursday on Coast to Coast AM with George Noory has resulted in many email responses.

It was a long-term objective of mine to get that information (on the genetic engineering of humans) in front of a very large audience.

Accomplished.

In this piece, I’m adding a few odds and ends I didn’t have time to fully cover on the show.

In general, because of my experience as a medical investigative reporter, I know how medical programs—even if they seem well-intentioned—go off track and are taken over by criminal types. So if I concede that gene-reshaping of humans is a sound and good idea—which I don’t—I know the plan will fall under control of the wrong people. I’ve seen this happen time and time again. And in some cases, such medical projects are actally started by people who are very unfriendly to basic human interests.

First, here are several examples of patented genes—

A company called Biogen owns a patent for the KIM gene used by the kidney for self-repair.

U of California owns the rights to TCP 1,2,3 that relate to the tongue and sense of taste.

Sumino Metal Industries owns a gene related to bone growth and is looking for a treatment for osteoporosis.

In 1988, Harvard obtained a patent on the ONCOMOUSE, a mouse engineered for increased susceptibility to cancer.

The US Dept. of Health and Human Services has applied for 3000 genetic patents—so in that case, we would have the government owning genes or DNA sequences…

A man named John Moore, suffering from leukemia, had his spleen removed and a cell line was produced from it to make very expensive proteins for medical use…he didn’t know about the cell line…he subsequently sued the U of California and lost…

A gene bank associated with the Human Genome Project has taken hair, blood, and cell samples from disappearing indigenous peoples…critics have called this the Vampire Project…

As of 2002, 6 agro-chemical companies held over 900 patents on varieties of basic staple foods….with the intention of making virtually all food crops genetically modified.

The Neem tree in India, Ghandi’s favorite tree, is held under patent by the WR Grace company for a biopesticide devlopment….

Gene prospectors go into 3^rd world countries and patent plants for drugs.

Here is a list of quotes from a site called the Center for Genetics and Society. The Center has used the quotes to demonstrate exactly the kind of mindset they are opposed to, and to illustrate that the gene shapers are alive and well, and in positions of influence. As you can see from the credentials of some of these authors, preference for a Brave New World has gone mainstream. It’s out in the open.

RAPPOPORT ON NOORY

MARCH 23, 2011. A reminder that tomorrow night, Thursday, I’ll be on Coast to Coast AM with George Noory. Pick up show times in your area.

The topic is my e-book, THE OWNERSHIP OF ALL LIFE. The book can be ordered at my site, www.nomorefakenews.com

One never knows what form an interview will take. I hope it will be a story, because how the book was written, how it came to be, was a story of meetings with several scientists, who spoke to me off the record, over a period of 20 years.

Three meetings, three conversations, across that span of time.

These men took precautions to remain off the record, because they felt their jobs would be endangered otherwise.

They had grave concerns about the direction genetic engineering was taking. They want someone to know about it.

Well, over the years, I have written articles about this subject, and I have presented the view that gene research has an ominous side.

But I’ve never told the story of the interviews with these three men.

Until now. So tune into the show.

The e-book comes at things from other angles. It is meant as the foundation for understanding how medicine and science can be taken down the wrong track, for devious purposes. Genetic engineering is one of those tracks.

People are being hoodwinked into thinking we have another magic bullet. So many magic bullets have been presented to us, and they all fail. Genes are hyped as the ultimate cause of disease…and with just a little more patience and a lot more money, we will have the solution in hand.

Yet, we are a very long way from being able to confirm this hypothesis. And perhaps there is a very different reason for all the research being done on genes.

Tune in tomorrow night. I hope you’ll order the book, too.

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

RAPPOPORT ON COAST TO COAST

MARCH 18, 2011. Next Thursday, Mar. 24, I’ll be a guest with George Noory on Coast to Coast AM, the largest late-night radio show in the world.

Go to www.coasttocoastam.com for times in your area, or check your local listings and stations.

This will be a long interview about my book, THE OWNERSHIP OF ALL LIFE, which is now available as an e-book. To order it, go to my site, www.nomorefakenews.com

I hope you’ll tell your friends about the radio show. And I hope some of you will call in and ask questions.

It’s rare that any reporter gets a chance to explain, with this much audience exposure, the real meaning of the medical agenda, especially as it relates to the future of this planet. I’m talking about implications that go far beyond what 99.9% of doctors and researchers even suspect in their wildest dreams.

So tune in. Spread the word.

Thanks.

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

NEW RAPPOPORT E-BOOK

MARCH 8, 2011. We’re working to bring some of my books into e formats. The first one is out and available at Amazon.

THE OWNERSHIP OF ALL LIFE: Notes on Scandals, Conspiracies and Coverups.

Go to my site, www.nomorefakenews.com and pick up the link to Amazon in the upper right corner.

The back-cover blurb for the book reads:

“Jon Rappoport removes the mask from gigantic corporate strategies and reveals their underlying ambitions: not only control of vast material power but the owning of life processes themselves, literally making the planet a commodity. From media scandals to government collusion and coverup, from sterilization vaccines to genetically engineered patented food crops, from an epidemic of medical malpracrice resulting in widespread death to fraudulent AIDS research, these notes provide a picture of global takeover by modern pirates whose front is complete respectabilility and ‘concern for human life.’ Read this expose of the big lie.”

I pulled together several years of my research in allied areas of fraud and coverup, and wrote the book.

It contains pieces that could fade into the dustbin of history, if they aren’t remembered and understood.

It may not cost a huge sum to operate my site, but the cost in hours over the last ten years is enormous. I hope my readers will pay a few bucks and get this book. It’s worth it for you, and it helps me.

JON RAPPOPORT

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

MORE ON DREAMS:

FRAGMENTS FROM JACK TRUE

MARCH 3, 2011. These are remarks hypnotherapist Jack True made during a 1987 conversation we had. I present them as fragments from my notes.

“The overall situation a patient might find himself in, over a period of time…His emotions and thoughts are stymied. They’re frozen, in a way. He may be doing well or poorly in his life. It doesn’t matter. The situation is negative, in the sense that he doesn’t believe he can make progress in his own terms. He may not even know what his own terms are.”

“Despite his successes and victories, it all feels temporary, in retrospect. He keeps coming back to the situation. The unyielding rock. I’ve had patients, for example, who have been through many spiritual efforts to achieve greater consciousness—and they have had remarkable experiences…but then it all seems to fade away, and they’re back at the rock. As they get older, the situation hardens. A part of them is resigned. So the situation, the negative trend is very dense, you could say. It’s firm.”

“…A dream in which he becomes a master over space and time. Would inventing such a dream release energies which are bottled up? Would it make him feel better? …Then I have him invent other dreams—traveling to other dimensions, for instance. Dreams that get him past physical reality and its rules in other ways. An important part of what I do is decide what will work with different people. It’s not all the same for everyone. You have to understand that. “

“In myths, the gods can bring worlds into being, and they can take them out of being. They can rearrange reality. They can operate well beyond all the slaves who are trapped in a narrow context of reality. And these myths represent a human longing. It’s not just attributing certain qualities to gods. It’s wanting to be like gods. These are the terms of the myths. So you can simply dismiss all this as inconsequential fantasizing, or you can look further into it and see that these so-called godlike capacities are what humans think about subconsciously.”

“The subconscious is usually thought to contain repressed anti-social material. Well, if you adjust that notion a little bit, what’s more anti-social than being able to exceed the rules of time and space? You see? This carries us out far beyond traditional psychological concepts. This takes us into the underpinning of whole cultures. A culture is the reverse of what human beings really yearn for. It’s the dark side of the moon. A culture is an average. It’s the dream repressed. A culture is a thing people want to escape from. A culture, by its very nature, is defeatist. What’s in the subconscious is the desire to go past the rules of the continuum in which we live. To travel through time, for example. To go forward and back. Impossible, right? Well, that’s the sort of thing I find in the subconscious. So I have a choice. I can say it’s buried deep because it’s a fantasy of no importance that doesn’t belong in the world, or I can say it’s the key. I can say it represents the desire to climb to a higher level. And when I do that, and when I bolster it by having patients, in a light trance, invent dreams that support it, the patients get better. They experience well-being. They heal. They become more powerful in their lives. They become freer. And I DON’T mean they become healthier because they give up those dreams and fit in—I mean they step on to the path of magic.”

“A child grows up with a certain standard of beauty. It isn’t drilled into his head. He sees what’s around him and his feelings tell him what’s beautiful and what’s ugly. But then, at a certain age, there is a chance that he realizes something new. What he sees as beautiful isn’t really doing him any good. It’s becoming a little boring. But instead of exploring that idea, he shoves it under the rug because it feels too odd. He goes back to claiming what he felt was beautiful as a child is beautiful now. But he doesn’t quite feel the same way about it anymore. “Beautiful” is becoming a kind of category, to which he pays lip service. He is now beginning to perceive through a category. He’s sort of doing it by the numbers. He’s doing it by rote. Old categories of perception tend you hold you back. If you’re seeing based on what you’re supposed to see and feel, you’re cutting yourself off from energy, from creative power.”

JON RAPPOPORT

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

www.nomorefakenews.com