The Vision Of Technocracy & Your Future

breakaway3
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
January 9, 2018

“Well, boys, we’ve got this strange thing called THE INDIVIDUAL. Could somebody tell me what he is? He’s not conforming to our algorithms. He’s all over the place. And while we’re at it, what the hell is this IMAGINATION? It keeps slipping out of our grasp, it doesn’t fit the plan…”

PART ONE

—Technocrats say they want to wipe out poverty, war, and inequality. But in order to achieve these lofty goals (or pretend to), they need to re-program humans—

Technocracy is the basic agenda and plan for ruling global society from above, so we need to understand it from several angles.

Consider a group of enthusiastic forward-looking engineers in the early 20th century. They work for a company that has a contract to manufacture a locomotive.

This is a highly complex piece of equipment.

On one level, workers are required to make the components to spec. Then they must put them all together. These tasks are formidable.

On another level, various departments of the company must coordinate their efforts. This is also viewed as a technological job. Organizing is considered a technology.

When the locomotive is finished and delivered, and when it runs on its tracks and pulls a train, a great and inspiring victory is won.

And then…the engineers begin to think about the implications. Suppose the locomotive was society itself? Suppose society was the finished product? Couldn’t society be put together in a coordinated fashion? And couldn’t the “technology of organizing things” be utilized for the job?

Why bother with endlessly arguing and lying politicians? Why should they be in charge? Isn’t that an obvious losing proposition? Of course it is.

Engineers could lay out and build a future society that would benefit all people. Disease and poverty could be wiped out. Eliminating them would be part of the blueprint.

This “insight” hit engineers and technicians like a ton of bricks. Of course! All societies had been failures for the same reason: the wrong people were in charge.

Armed with this new understanding, engineers of every stripe began to see what was needed. A revolution in thinking about societal organization. Science was the new king. And science would rule.

Of course, for an engineered world to work, certain decisions would have to be made about the role of the individual. Every individual. You couldn’t have an air-tight plan if every human were free to pursue his own objectives. Too many variables. Too much confusion. Too much conflict. Well, that problem could be solved. The individual’s actions would be tailored to fit the coordinated operations of the planned society.

The individual would be “one of the components of the locomotive.” His life would be connected to other lives to produce an exemplary shape.

Yes, this could imply a few problems, but those problems could be worked out. They would have to be worked out, because the overriding goal was the forming of a world organization. What would you do if one bolt (an individual human) in one wheel of a locomotive was the wrong size? You would go back and correct the error. You would re-make the bolt.

Other people entered the game. High-echelon Globalists saw technocracy as a system they could use to control the population.

Essentially, an already-misguided vision of a future technocratic utopia was hijacked. Something bad was made much worse.

In a nutshell, this is the history of technocracy.

A locomotive is a society? No. That was the first fatally flawed idea. Everything that followed was increasingly bizarre.

Unfortunately, many people in our world believe in Globalism, if you could call a partial vague view a legitimate belief. They dreamily float on all the propaganda cover stories—greatest good for the greatest number of people; no more poverty; equality of sharing; reducing the carbon footprint; a green economy; “sustainable development”; international cooperation; allotting production and consumption of goods and services for the betterment of everyone; and all of this delivered from a central platform of altruistic guidance.

If you track down the specifics that sit under these cover stories, you discover a warped system of planning that expresses control over the global population.

The collective utopia turns out to be a sham.

Waking up is hard to do? Breaking up is hard to do? They must be done.

A workable technological fix is a very nice achievement when the project is a machine. But transferring that glow of victory to the whole of society is an illusion. Anything that calls itself education would tackle the illusion as the first order of business.

Engineering society requires engineering humans.

That is the fatal flaw.

It’s called mind control.

PART TWO

Any genuine artist, any builder of communities, any sane activist, any honorable visionary stands outside technocracy, and is not part of this program.

Instead, his thrust is toward more individual freedom and a more open society with greater decentralization of power.

Decentralization is the key.

The use of technology does not imply living inside its control. The use of technology does not imply that society should be laid out like a giant machine with fitted parts.

Those futurists who have offered “overall plans” for the disposition of society generally ignore or sidestep the issue of who is going to administer the plan. To say this is an error is a vast understatement.

Where is one far-reaching center of power in our world that would run society?

All such centers of power are, first and foremost, dedicated to their own survival. And after that, they are dedicated to control of the territory they believe they own. THE INDIVIDUAL is a messy thing that needs to be sidelined or dealt with as a disruptive element.

I speak to those people who understand that the idea of the free, independent, powerful, and creative individual is being sidelined, shelved, and sent down the memory hole. This is no accident. This isn’t just a devolutionary trend. Technocrats see this as a necessary action, in order to “clean up” their equation for the civilization they’re building. The individual is a slippery variable that throws a monkey wrench into formulas.

PART THREE

Imagination never dies.

It belongs to the individual. It isn’t property of the group.

It enables solutions that eradicate problems and get out ahead of problems before they raise their heads.

Time and time again, the individual, as he wends his way through life, encounters persons and organizations that consider imagination a negative. In the clearly defined shapes of society, imagination must take a back seat to planning.

Is the individual resistant to such manipulations, or does he give in?

This is the key question.

Does the individual view society as an operation that can potentially lift up individuals and empower them? Or does he give in to the idea that society should create more and more dependent people?

The individual can be a source of spreading freedom, or he can defend the notion that there are an endless number of “entitlements” that must be honored.

Technocracy promotes entitlements as a doorway into the future. Its ultimate entitlement goes this way: you have the right to be re-programmed to believe you have a slot in the future world; we will make this slot as attractive as possible; you will serve the overall good as we engineer it.

That is the fundamental justification for the Welfare State. It’s the justification for a future technocratic policy which will assign citizens energy quotas. A citizen would be permitted to consume a set amount of energy in a given time period. (So-called smart meters are a step in that direction. The meters enable more specific measurements of energy consumption.)

This is how technocracy views the future…your future.

The ultimate technocratic vision? Your brain is a processor, and your brain is your mind. That’s all your mind is. Therefore, connecting your brain to a super-computer, or to the Cloud, will magically expand your mind and make it “more than human.”

You will become trans-human. A hybrid of human and machine.

This is the fairy tale to end all fairy tales.

It’s wishful fantasy dressed up as science.

The idea is: you will become More. You will overcome the limits and problems associated with being an individual.

Every individual will receive the same information and the same answers and the same solutions from the Cloud. AUTOMATICALLY.

This is the programmer’s wet dream.

Technocrats will thus be able to build a global society and control its every facet.

That’s the revolution.

The counter-revolution is YOU.

The free individual.

Never forget it.

Read More At: NoMoreFakeNews.com

Advertisements

“Go Underground, Young Man” – DARPA’s Latest Goal

cosmic war
Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
January 6, 2018

This fascinating story was shared by Mr. R.M., and it has me speculating wildly (of course) on what it might all mean. It seems that our friends at the Defense Advance Research Projects Agency, or as we like to refer to it here following the suggestion of Mr. J.B., the Diabolically Apocalyptic Research Projects Agency,  want to take humanity underground. The only question is, why? As one might imagine, the ostensible purpose is military, but as we’ll see in today’s high octane speculation, I can think of a few others.

Here’s the article:

Dig Deep: DARPA Contest Aims to Take People Underground

According to Ms. Tia Ghose, authoress of this article, the goal of all this is to develop the technologies, both hard and soft, for deep human presence underground, with an ability to respond to “unknown conditions” quickly, a military purpose to be sure:

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has announced its latest challenge, called the Subterranean or “SubT” Challenge. The global competition asks entrants to develop systems that can help humans navigate, map and search in underground locations that are normally too perilous to visit.

“One of the main limitations facing war fighters and emergency responders in subterranean environments is a lack of situational awareness; we often don’t know what lies beneath us,” Timothy Chung, program manager in DARPA’s Tactical Technology Office (TTO), said in a statement. “The DARPA Subterranean Challenge aims to provide previously unimaginable situational awareness capabilities for operations underground.” [Humanoid Robots to Flying Cars: 10 Coolest DARPA Projects]

Groups all around the world will compete to solve problems that help people navigate in unknown, treacherous subterranean conditions, where time is of the essence, according to the statement.

Now, obviously, the ostensible purpose of this contest and goal is to develop new military capabilities for subterranean cartography and operational capability. This has been going on as long as there have been militaries and fortifications: the easiest way is not through, but under, or over them. “Sapping” or digging beneath an enemy position is as old as warfare, perhaps the most famous example being the enormous tunnel and mine the British tried to dig prior to the Battle of the Somme in 1916. Then, British sappers dug a tunnel beneath the German fortified trenches and planted an enormous amount of explosives, which were then exploded at the beginning of the battle with the hopes of blowing an enormous hole in the German lines. That it certainly did. The only problem was, the Germans heard the British digging, and simply pulled back prior to the detonation, and the effect aimed for was entirely lost.

So while the DARPA project appears to be par for the course for the military-industrial complex, I cannot help but think that there may be other purposes lurking in the shadows, unstated, and herewith, my high octane speculation of the day.

Recall, for a moment, that it is the same DARPA that (1) wants to create “super-soldiers” of various types, sizes, and “capabilities” (including the capability of relying on less sleep, and being able to function in exotic environments), and (2) set the century-objective for the USSA to be “warp capable” in one hundred years. Goodbye, rockets. Thus, I strongly suspect that this “subterranean operations” initiative is related to the long-term space objectives, where such capabilities would be most valuable, and, if the indications of subterranean structures on Mars that have emerged over the years are any indicator, it’s a capability that would serve any manned missions there quite well…

… particularly if one suspected there might be someone to encounter…

See you on the flip side…

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com

Top Questions & Doubts About UFO Whistleblower, Luis Elizondo

TruthFact
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
January 5, 2017

“The day of final UFO revelation is at hand! Glory! The government heroes in the shadows have stepped forward with the good news! All hail! Let us praise these insiders and bow down! Our efforts have not been in vain!”

No.

No kid gloves, no fawning gratitude toward sources.

For far too long, government insiders who offer UFO “revelations” have been given a free pass.

They should be treated like any other sources for breaking stories. “Your information is fascinating, but I have lots of questions about you and your background.”

There is a history of these insiders spreading disinformation or lies mixed with truth. This is how intelligence and propaganda operatives work. For instance, they could present tidbits about actual UFO sightings along with false claims about recovering “alien bodies.” Those latter claims would be part of their covert agenda.

Suppose secret government/corporate programs have been using the stolen work of Tesla and other outlier researchers to achieve advanced propulsion technology? They cover up that fact by spinning tales about alien ET tech. I’m not asserting that’s what happened, but it would illustrate why they would float lies…

Journalism—by which I mean independent journalism—should be miles past the point of asking softball questions and naïvely accepting “breakthrough revelations” from government sources.

In the wake of recent NY Times UFO disclosures from Luis Elizondo, a former intelligence operative who headed up a secret Pentagon program to study UFOs, many questions arise. Not one reporter who has gained access to Elizondo has publicly queried him at length about his suspect background in the intelligence community.

It would be more than interesting to get serious answers from Mr. Elizondo. They would provide a new jumping off point for further investigation.

Vetting a government insider isn’t easy. You ask many questions, you observe how he answers them, you keep pressing and probing and form your best assessment of the person. You don’t just lie down and accept him running you over like steamroller.

Here are questions Mr. Elizondo should respond to:

Mr. Elizondo, in your extensive high-level work as an intelligence case officer, did you ever plant stories in the press? False stories? If not, let me put it to you this way: if you had seen the value of planting a false story, in order to move a covert operation forward, would you have done it?

Mr. Elizondo, you resigned from the Pentagon in October. Almost immediately, you began revealing secret UFO information to the public and the press. What about your non-disclosure agreements with the government? You violated them, didn’t you?

Did you have permission from the government to ignore those agreements? If so, how did you arrange that?

If not, what has the government told you about your violations?

It appears the Pentagon wanted you to speak publicly about UFOs. True? If so, why?

According to Pentagon sources, you took several UFO videos with you when you resigned. You originally obtained these videos, in order to train pilots on how to respond when they encountered UFOs—but then you turned around and used the videos to inform the press and public about the reality of UFOs. Is this true? Has the government communicated with you about this?

In your interviews, you mention that the government, or one of its sub-contractors, has been studying materials from UFOs. What specific materials? How were they obtained? From captured UFOs? Crashed UFOs? Where are these UFOs now? Did the reporters at the New York Times ask you about this?

Is it true that scientists have been unable to analyze the composition of “UFO metals?”

Why, after decades of denial and silence, did the New York Times suddenly use you as a main source for a UFO story? Did the Times have a green light from the Pentagon?

You state that the secret Pentagon program, under your leadership, studied reports of UFOs and compared the probable technological capability of those vehicles to the technology the US possesses. Did you probe what has been going on at the Lockheed Skunkworks in Palmdale, California? What have you discovered about advanced secret technology at the Skunkworks and other facilities?

As a “whistleblower,” have you decided to parcel out what you know in small pieces, over time? If so, why?

How did you move from working as a case officer, running clandestine operations in Latin America, to heading up a secret Pentagon program on UFOs? The shift seems odd, to say the least?

Surely you understand that, because intelligence operatives are trained to lie and deceive, there are doubts about your veracity now. Your comments?

Why did the New York Times suddenly break a huge UFO story? Why now? It certainly appears that you, the Times, and the Pentagon are operating in concert, bypassing the usual secrecy, denial, and skepticism. What’s going on?

Your background includes “Microbiology, Immunology and Parasitology, with research experience in tropical diseases.” Where did you study these subjects? For what purpose?

You’re now a member of Tom DeLonge’s team at To the Stars Academy. Several members have significant medical backgrounds. Here are quotes from the Academy’s website:

Dr. Norm Kahn’s career with the CIA “culminat[ed] in his development and direction of the Intelligence Community’s Counter-Biological Weapons Program.”

Dr. Paul Rapp “is a Professor of Military and Emergency Medicine at the Uniformed Services University.”

Dr. Garry Nolan “is the Rachford and Carlota A. Harris Professor in the Department of Microbiology and Immunology at Stanford University School of Medicine…He holds a B.S. in genetics from Cornell University, a Ph.D. in genetics from Stanford University.”

Dr. Adele Gilpin, “is a scientist with biomedical academic and research experience as well as an active, licensed, attorney.”

Dr. Colm Kelleher “is a biochemist with a twenty-eight-year research career in cell and molecular biology currently working in senior management in the aerospace sector. He served as Laboratory Director at biotech company, Prosetta Corporation, leading several small molecule drug discovery programs focused on viruses of interest to the United States Department of Defense. He worked for eight years as Deputy Director of the National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS), a research organization using forensic science methodology to unravel scientific anomalies. From 2008-2011, he served as Deputy Administrator of a US government funded threat assessment program focused on advanced aerospace technology. Dr. Kelleher has authored more than forty peer reviewed scientific articles in cell and molecular biology, immunology and virology as well as two best-selling books, “Hunt for the Skinwalker” and “Brain Trust”. He holds a Ph.D. in biochemistry from the University of Dublin, Trinity College.”

What are all these medical people doing on your team? Are we about to be treated to warnings about “viruses from outer space?” What is the bio-medical component of UFO disclosure? Are you looking for huge government funding for new programs in this area? Is THIS a covert agenda behind your breakout story about UFOs?

If you were running a UFO disinformation op on the public, what is the most important lie you would float, and why?

Would you agree that such disinformation ops have been run in the past? Give us an example or two.

Your Academy has released a statement which claims “there is sufficient credible evidence of UAP [Unidentified Aerial Phenomena] that proves exotic technologies exist that could revolutionize the human experience.” Are some of those technologies already under the control of the Lockheed Skunkworks? One member of your new team is Steve Justice, who “is the recently retired Program Director for Advanced Systems from Lockheed Martin Advanced Development Programs – better known as the ‘Skunk Works’.” He should know the answer to that question. What does Steve have to say? How would you suggest we check his statements?

Mr. Elizondo, I’m asking all these questions, because the mainstream press isn’t.

If you claim we are in a new era of honest Disclosure, that honesty should include you answering these and other inquiries. After all, you’re the prime source of the current story. As such, you should be willing to open up and address doubts.

Or are you banking on naïve public acceptance of your assertions?

If that’s the case, you’re only adding to the decades of obfuscation surrounding the UFO issue.

I’m here, I’m ready, able, and willing to have you lay your cards on the table.

No, I don’t expect you to contact me. But I do air these questions so people can compare them to what reporters will ask you in the months to come.

Which brand of whistleblower are you? The limited-hangout variety, or a no-holds-barred truth teller?

Certainly, you know we are used to hearing from government limited-hangout artists, and the truth tellers are rare, to say the least.

If you want to be recognized as authentic, you’ll have to go the extra mile.

To put it another way, if a career intelligence officer, who has worked with the US Army, the DOD, the National Counterintelligence Executive, the Director of National Intelligence; who has conducted and supervised highly sensitive espionage and terrorism investigations around the world; who has acted as an intelligence case officer running clandestine operations in Latin America and the Middle East—if such a person approached me with secret information about UFOs, I would naturally want do everything I could to vet him.

Well, that person is you. That is your resume.

You should be willing to answer a very large number of pointed and specific queries.

Are you?

Read More At: NoMoreFakeNews.com

A UFO Encounter For The Ages [Don’t worry, nothing happened, go back to sleep]

breakaway3
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
January 2, 2017

(UFO archive, here)

In my work as a reporter over the past 35 years, I’ve studied how major media cover stories. One of their consistent blunders:

Failure to follow up.

But it isn’t really a blunder.

There is a boundary, and reporters aren’t allowed to cross it.

Therefore, it looks like these reporters are inherently stupid. They don’t ask the right questions. They back away from a story just when it becomes vital.

Well, many of them are stupid—but it’s often a trained response. Over time, they learn to act as if they’re clueless; and then, after years, they are.

What is this boundary? It’s the line beyond which “important people” would be damaged and exposed, if the reporter followed his instincts and pressed forward.

Important people, important institutions are like giants standing on slippery mud. Give them a push, and they fall. Start digging around in the mud, and they fall.

Official reality falls.

The underlying dictum of the press is: Official reality must never fall.

Here is a stunning example of a day when it did—a UFO encounter for the ages.

On March 18, 2001, Jeff Rense (rense.com) published an article by Frank Altomonte, headlined: “SIX ‘SAUCER-SHAPED’ UFOS AND FACE-TO-FACE ET CONTACT IN LA IN 1957.”

Altomonte dug up a November 6, 1957, article from the LA Times. Not just any article. Page one, under a huge black banner headline at the top of the page: MYSTERY AIR OBJECTS SEEN IN SKY OVER LA.

Read these 1957 quotes, and remember, this is the LA Times, the most important newspaper in Los Angeles, and one of the leading papers in the US—during a time when print journalism was still the main source of information for the public.

“They (USAF personnel) spotted six ‘saucer shaped flying objects’ at an altitude of about 7000 feet at the base of a cloud bank about 3:50 p.m.”

“Those unidentified flying objects first reported over Texas and Gulf of Mexico arrived over Southern California yesterday.”

“Personnel at Los Alamitos Naval Air Station reported unidentified objects in sight almost continuously between 6:05 and 7:25 p.m.”

“Lt. Richard Spencer, a flying officer, saw the object from the ground. ‘It was not a star and it was not an airplane’, he said. He admitted, however, that it appeared to be ‘starlike,’ and added that it glowed in varying colors, changing from bright to dim and back again.”

“Airport Tower Operator Louis D. Mitchell and a sentry on duty, Hospitalman Charles Kreiger, also observed the object. Almost all observers were agreed that the object moved slowly — almost imperceptibly, across the sky. Most were agreed that the direction of travel was north or northwest.”

“Lending credence to the reports was the fact that…Air Force weather observers, including the commanding officer of the unit, acknowledged sighting unidentified phenomena over Long Beach Municipal Airport.”

“They spotted six ‘saucer shaped flying objects’ at an altitude of about 7000 feet at the base of a cloud bank about 3:50 p.m.”

“Maj. Louis F. Baker, commanding officer of the weather observation post, who sighted the objects with his assistants Airmen Joseph Abramavage and William Nieland said: ‘They were circular and shiny like spun aluminum changing course instantaneously without loss of speed like planes in a dogfight,’ Maj. Baker said. He said the objects were larger than a twin engine C-46 aircraft and were in sight for about a minute and a half.”

“The objects also were observed by 10 military personnel waiting to board an airplane at the airport, the spotters reported. Maj. Baker said he rejected the theory that the objects were sheet ice in a cumulonimbus cloud because of their regular circular shape.”

“An electronics executive, Merlin G. Perkins, 1102 N. Wright St., Santa Ana, said he observed an object though binoculars for almost a half hour as it moved slowly overhead finally fading away into the reflected light above the Santa Ana business district. It appeared to be round and it winked slowly from dim to bright, with a reddish glow, Perkins said.”

The November 6, 1957, LA Times also ran a short piece from the Associated Press, dated a day earlier. AP is, of course, one of the two or three largest news wire services in the world.

“New Orleans, Nov 5 (AP) — The Coast Guard cutter Sebago sighted an unidentified flying object over the Gulf of Mexico at 5:21 a.m. today. The object, seen for about three seconds, resembled a brilliant planet moving at tremendous speed.”

There is much more to Altomonte’s article, but you’re getting the picture.

As far as the LA Times was concerned, back in 1957, what happened next? What did they do?

Nothing.

No follow-up.

One of the most significant events in modern times occurs over the skies of Los Angeles, with multiple professional observers (and private citizens also quoted), so you would assume an EXTENSIVE INVESTIGATION would be launched.

“OK, boys, this is when you earn your paychecks. You’re supposed to be relentless reporters. I’m your boss, and this is when I earn my paycheck, too. I’m setting you loose. I don’t care how long it takes. Find out what the hell this is. Break down doors. Go up against the Pentagon and the CIA. The Times will back you up. Is it people from another planet? Is it our own secret craft, with onboard technology no one has ever heard of? Is it Nazis, Russians? We’re going to chase this until the cows come home. And by cows, I mean you. Come home with the true story. We’re not going to let go. You’ll never cover another story like this in your lives…”

But no.

That didn’t happen.

The massive follow-up that should have launched from the Times, like rockets, was squelched.

Looking at the LA Times archives, for the day AFTER the boggling UFO story, I find two major headlines. The first is above the masthead: “Halimi beats Macias for Title.” The second: “Rocket Artillery Unveiled by Russ[ians].”

Here today, gone tomorrow.

Ten years later, many people in Los Angeles would barely remember the UFO encounter. Well, the LA Times hadn’t kept the story alive.

“Say Bob, do you recall that thing where a whole lot of UFOs flew over the city? Did it really happen? Maybe I just had a dream about it. Strange…”

And thus, official reality is preserved.

A hole ISN’T punched in the literal and figurative sky. Instead, citizens go about their business and their lives.

“Hi, I’m an amnesiac.”

“Me too.”

Collective reality is often maintained through omission. A shocking event occurs, an event which, if pursued and investigated, would change the course of history. The press is forced to cover the event…which then sinks below the waves. By design.

If you assembled, say, a hundred such shocking occurrences end to end, and you watched them bob in the water and then disappear from view, the residue—what is left over—would be official reality.

The event I cite most often in these pages occurred on July 26, 2000. That was the day the Journal of the American Medical Association, one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world, published a review by Dr. Barbara Starfield, a respected and revered public health expert at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. The review was titled: “Is US Health Really the Best in the World?”

Dr. Starfield concluded that the US medical system kills 225,000 people a year. In a follow-up interview I did with her, she said this was a conservative estimate.

Extrapolate: Every decade, the US medical system (through FDA approved, correctly prescribed medicines, and mistreatment in hospitals) kills 2.25 MILLION Americans. Let that sink in.

When Dr. Starfield’s review was published…

Continue Reading At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com

FCC hides net neutrality complaints after calling for public comment

Source: RT
August 23, 2017

The Federal Communications Commission has received more than 47,000 complaints concerning the planned elimination of net neutrality rules. Despite a Freedom of Information Act request, they have refused to release the requests. Net neutrality campaign director Katy Anderson of Open Media joins RT America’s Anya Parampil to discuss the harm that the FCC’s proposals could cause.

A Totalitarian Society Has Totalitarian Science

drugs
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
By: Jon Rappoport
August 23, 2017

Over the past 35 years, I’ve exposed as least as much fraudulent science as any reporter around. That’s just a fact.

I mention it, because one would expect I’ve learned a few lessons in the process.

And I have.

Government-backed science exists because it is a fine weapon to use, in order to force an agenda of control over the population.

We aren’t talking about knowledge here. Knowledge is irrelevant. What counts is: ‘How can we fabricate something that looks like the truth?’

I keep pointing this out: we’re dealing with reality builders. In this case, they make their roads and fences and buildings out of data, and they massage and invent the data out of thin air to suit their purposes. After all, they also invent money out of thin air.

Since 1987, one of my goals as a reporter has been to educate the public about false science.

Between then and now, I have found that, with remarkably few exceptions, mainstream reporters are studiously indifferent to false science.

They shy away from it. They pretend “it couldn’t be.” They refuse to consider facts. They and their editors parrot “the experts.”

Official science has a stranglehold on major media. It has the force of a State religion. When you stop and think about it, official science is, in a significant sense, a holy church. Therefore, it is no surprise that the church’s spokespeople would wield power over major information outlets.

These prelates invent, guard, and dispense “what is known.” That was precisely the role of the Roman Church in times past. And those professionals within the modern Church of Science are severely punished when they leave the fold and accuse their former masters of lies and crimes. They are blackballed, discredited, and stripped of their licenses. At the very least.

Totalitarian science lets you know you’re living in a totalitarian society.

The government, the press, the mega-corporations, the prestigious foundations, the academic institutions, the “humanitarian” organizations say:

“This is the disease. This is its name. This is what causes it. This is the drug that treats it. This is the vaccine that prevents it.”

“This is how accurate diagnosis is done. These are the tests. These are the possible results and what they mean.”

“Here are the genes. This is what they do. This is how they can be changed and substituted and manipulated. These are the outcomes.”

“These are the data and the statistics. They are correct. There can be no argument about them.”

“This is life. These are the components of life. All change and improvement result from our management of the components.”

“This is the path. It is governed by truth which our science reveals. Walk the path. We will inform you when you stray. We will report new improvements.”

“This is the end. You can go no farther. You must give up the ghost. We will remember you.”

We are now witnessing the acceleration of Official Science. Of course, that term is an internal contradiction. But the State shrugs and moves forward.

The notion that the State can put its seal on favored science, enforce it, and punish its competitors, is anathema to a free society.

For example: declaring that psychiatrists can appear in court as expert witnesses, when none of the 300 so-called mental disorders listed in the psychiatric literature are diagnosed by laboratory tests.

For example: stating that vaccination is mandatory, in order to protect the vaccinated (who are supposed to be immune) from the unvaccinated. An absurdity on its face.

For example: announcing that the science of climate change is “settled,” when there are, in fact, huge numbers of researchers who disagree. —And then, drafting legislation and issuing executive orders based on the decidedly unsettled science.

For example: officially approving the release and sale of medical drugs (“safe and effective”) which go on to kill, at a conservative estimate, 100,000 Americans every year. And then refusing to investigate or punish the agents of these drug approvals (the FDA).

For example: permitting the widespread use of genetically modified food crops, based on no studies of their impact on human health. And then, arbitrarily announcing that the herbicide, Roundup, for which many of these crops are specifically designed, is non-toxic.

For example: declaring and promoting the existence of various epidemics, when the viruses purportedly causing them are not proven to exist or not proven to cause human illness (SARS, West Nile, Swine Flu, etc.)

A few of you reading this have been with me since 1988, when I published my first book, AIDS INC., Scandal of the Century. Among other conclusions, I pointed out that HIV had never been shown to cause human illness; the front-line drug given to AIDS patients, AZT, was overwhelmingly toxic; and what was being called AIDS was actually a diverse number immune-suppressing conditions.

Others of you have found my work more recently. I always return to the subject of false science, because it is the most powerful long-term instrument for repression, political control, and destruction of human life.

As I’ve stated on many occasions, medical science is ideal for mounting and launching covert ops aimed at populations—because it appears to be politically neutral, without any allegiance to State interests.

Unfortunately, medical science, on many fronts, has been hijacked and taken over. The profit motive is one objective, but beyond that, there is a more embracing goal:

Totalitarian control.

On the issue of vaccines, I’ve written much about their dangers and ineffectiveness. But also consider this: the push for mandatory vaccination goes a long way toward creating a herd effect—which is really a social construction.

In other words, parents are propagandized to think of themselves as a kind of synthetic artificial “community.”

“Here we are. We are the fathers and mothers. We must all protect our children against the outliers, the rebels, the defectors, the crazy ones who refuse to vaccinate their own children. We are all in this together. They are the threat. The enemy. We are good. We know the truth. They are evil.”

This “community of the willing” are dedicated to what the government tells them. They are crusaders imbued with group-think. They run around promoting “safety and protection.” This group consciousness is entirely an artifact, propelled by official science.

The crusaders are, in effect, agents of the State.

They are created by the State.

Androids.

They live in an absurd Twilight Zone where fear of germs (the tiny invisible terrorists) demands coercive action against the individuals who see through the whole illusion.

This is what official science can achieve. This is how it can enlist obedient foot soldiers and spies who don’t have the faintest idea about how they’re being used.

This is a variant on Orwell’s 1984. The citizens are owned by the all-embracing State, but they aren’t even aware of it.

That’s quite a trick.

One of my favorite examples of double-think or reverse-think is the antibody test. It is given to diagnosis diseases. Antibodies are immune-system scouts sent out to identify germ-intruders, which can then be wiped out by other immune-system troops.

Prior to 1985, the prevailing view of a positive antibody test was: the patient is doing well; his body detected the germ and dispensed with it. After 1985, the view was suddenly: this is bad news; the patient is sick or he is on the verge of getting sick; he has the germ in his body; it does harm.

Within the medical community, no one (with very few exceptions) raised hell over this massive switch. It was accepted. It was actually good for business. Now, many more people could be labeled “needs treatment,” whereas before, they would have been labeled “healthy.”

While I was writing my first book, AIDS INC., in 1987-8, I wrote the FDA asking about a possible AIDS vaccine. I was told the following: every person given such a vaccine would, of course, produce antibodies against HIV. That is the whole purpose of a vaccine: to produce antibodies.

However, I was informed, patients receiving this vaccine would be given a letter to carry with them, in case they were ever tested for HIV and came up positive. The letter would explain that the antibodies causing the positive test were the result of the vaccine, not the result of “natural” action inside the patient’s body.

In other words, the very same antibodies were either protective against AIDS (good) or indicative of deadly disease (bad).

This was the contradictory and ridiculous and extraordinary pronouncement of official science.

It carries over into every disease for which an antibody test is administered. If a vaccine against disease X is given, it delivers immunity, because it produces antibodies. But if a diagnostic test for disease X reveals the presence of the same antibodies, naturally produced in the body, this is taken as a sign of illness.

Extrapolated to a more general level, the Word is: synthetic medical treatment is good; the action of the body to heal itself is incompetent.

This is a type of superstition that would astonish even the most “primitive” societies.

It no longer astonishes me. I see it everywhere in official science.

From the medical establishment’s point of view, being alive is a medical condition.

The most useful politicians—as far as official science is concerned—are those who automatically promote its findings. Such politicians are lifted into prominence. They are champions of the Science Matrix. They never ask questions. They never doubt. They never make waves. They blithely travel their merry way into new positions of power, knowing they have enormous elite support behind them. When they need to lie, they lie. They are taught that those who question or reject official science are a tiny ‘demographic’ who can be ignored during election campaigns. ‘Don’t worry about them. They don’t count.’ These politicians are never in the trenches with the people on issues of health.

The elite Plan is universal collectivism, in which all citizens are atoms of a giant molecule. Many lies need to be told in order to make that dream/nightmare come true. If some of those lies are about science, so much the better. People believe in science.

Think about the agendas behind universal vaccination, climate change, universal psychiatric treatment, GMO food, and other ‘science-based’ frauds. They all imply a model, in which individuals give up their power in exchange for ‘doing good’ and becoming members of the largest group in the world: ‘disabled’ people with needs that must be addressed and satisfied.

Instead of supporting the liberation of the individual, the controllers want to squash it. Why? Because they fear individual power. It is forever the unpredictable wild card. They want a society in which every thought an individual thinks connects him to a greater whole—and if that sounds attractive, understand that this Whole is a fiction, intentionally faked to resemble a genuine oceanic feeling. The elite Whole is ultimately a trance-like fiction that will slow down time to a crawl, and shrink space to a sliver, and focus attention on a single mandate: wait for the next instruction from above, content in the knowledge that it will benefit all of humanity.”

This program has many agents.

Some of them are agents of official science.

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.