Ebola: question all basic assumptions

by Jon Rappoport

October 28, 2014

NoMoreFakeNews.com

To understand what the sellers are selling, you have to go back to the beginning of their story.

You have to restrain yourself from buying the beginning, because if you do buy it, uncritically, you’re now on their river, you’re now traveling in their boat.

And even if you jump off later and claim, “They’re lying!”, you’re still holding the suitcase with their first assumptions in it.

At the beginning they say there has been an outbreak in three separate areas of West Africa.

The first part of “outbreak” means: accelerated dying is occurring.

How do you know that’s true? Where are the numbers to confirm that? Where is evidence that shows present deaths are jumping beyond recent past deaths?

The second part of “outbreak” means: the new accelerated deaths in all three geo-areas are linked by the same cause.

Where is the evidence for that?

The diagnostic tests? The antibody and PCR tests, both of which are useless, misleading, irrelevant, and rampant with false-positive results?

Is the evidence the symptoms these victims are showing? General symptoms like fever, fatigue, diarrhea, vomiting, bleeding, all of which can and do stem from a variety of causes? Of course not.

The third part of “outbreak” means: researchers have found what the link is among all the new deaths—the Ebola virus.

On what basis do they know this? Those useless diagnostic tests? Divining rods? The solemn assurance of the CDC? Quick eyeball diagnosis of every patient with a fever wandering into a clinic in West Africa?

On all counts, the beginning of the story is unproven—and the burden of proof is not on you, it’s on the “experts” making the claims.

Three cops are called to the scene of a death. In the apartment, a man is lying on the floor. He is, in fact, dead.

Upon examination, the cops and a medical examiner find no holes in his body. They find no shell casings, no weapons, no gunshot residue.

They confer. Their conclusion? He was killed at close range by two rounds from a revolver.

The papers and the local news broadcasts carry the story: “A man was shot to death in his apartment by an unknown assailant last night…”

The next day, the cops arrest a schoolteacher who has a revolver locked in the trunk of his car.

A few days later, you’re sitting in a bar watching the news on television. You see video of the schoolteacher’s arraignment on a charge of first-degree murder.

You say, “How do they know he did it?”

The people sitting near you break out into a chorus: “Who else could it be?”

Sixteen years later, while the schoolteacher is sitting on death row awaiting his execution, a lawyer manages to have the victim’s body exhumed.

On re-examination, the coroner finds no evidence of a gunshot wound…but the remains of the body are decayed beyond the point where a definitive judgment can be made.

Oh well, those are the breaks.

Here is what I’m encountering in many quarters. People are saying, or assuming: the CDC and the World Health Organization lie about everything under the sun EXCEPT…when they launch stories about outbreaks. Then they must be telling the truth. The basic beginning of their tale must be true.

In those crucial moments, they never lie.

Really, now. Think about that.

And then think about this: the 2009 “outbreak” called Swine Flu. In that situation, the CDC stopped counting cases in the US, because the overwhelming number of lab tests on diagnosed and likely Swine Flu patients were coming back… with no sign of Swine Flu or any other kind of flu.

So…as a “big lie” strategy, with roughly ten thousand bogus cases of Swine Flu cases on their hands, the CDC suddenly claimed there were 22 MILLION cases of Swine Flu in the US.

That was their “outbreak” story.

And now, when they tell a story about an “outbreak” of a virus called Ebola…well, they must be telling the truth, right?

Egregiously lying THEN means they must be telling the truth NOW, right?

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

Advertisements

Nine real technologies that will soon be inside you

9 real technologies that will soon be inside you
9 real technologies that will soon be inside you

Given the frenzy of interest following the announcement of the Apple Watch, you might think wearables will be the next really important shift in technology.

Not so.

Wearables will have their moment in the sun, but they’re simply a transition technology.

Technology will move from existing outside our bodies to residing inside us.

That’s the next big frontier.

Here are nine signs that implantable tech is here now, growing rapidly, and that it will be part of your life (and your body) in the near future.

1. Implantable smartphones

Sure, we’re virtual connected to our phones 24/7 now, but what if we were actually connected to our phones?

That’s already starting to happen.

Last year, for instance, artist Anthony Antonellis had an RFID chip embedded in his arm that could store and transfer art to his handheld smartphone.

Researchers are experimenting with embedded sensors that turn human bone into living speakers.

Other scientists are working on eye implants that let an image be captured with a blink and transmitted to any local storage (such as that arm-borne RFID chip).

But what takes the place of the screen if the phone is inside you? Techs at Autodesk are experimenting with a system that can display images through artificial skin.

Or the images may appear in your eye implants.

2. Healing chips

Right now, patients are using cyber-implants that tie directly to smartphone apps to monitor and treat diseases.

A new bionic pancreas being tested at America’s Boston University, for instance, has a tiny sensor on an implantable needle that talks directly to a smartphone app to monitor blood-sugar levels for diabetics.

Scientists in London are developing swallowable capsule-sized circuits that monitor fat levels in obese patients and generate genetic material that makes them feel “full”.

It has potential as an alternative to current surgery or other invasive ways to handle gross obesity.

Dozens of other medical issues from heart murmurs to anxiety have implant/phone initiatives under way.

3. Cyber pills that talk to your doctor

Implantables won’t just communicate with your phone; they’ll chat up your doctor, too.

In a project named Proteus, after the eensy body-navigating vessel in the film Fantastic Voyage, a British research team is developing cyber-pills with microprocessors in them that can text doctors directly from inside your body.

The pills can share (literally) inside info to help doctors know if you are taking your medication properly and if it is having the desired effect.

4. Bill Gates’ implantable birth control

The Gates Foundation is supporting an MIT project to create an implantable female compu-contraceptive controlled by an external remote control.

The tiny chip generates small amounts of contraceptive hormone from within the woman’s body for up to 16 years.

Implantation is no more invasive than a tattoo.

And, “The ability to turn the device on and off provides a certain convenience factor for those who are planning their family.”, said Dr Robert Farra of MIT.

Gives losing the remote a whole new meaning.

5. Smart tattoos

Tattoos are hip and seemingly ubiquitous, so why not smart, digital tattoos that not only look cool, but can also perform useful tasks, like unlocking your car or entering mobile phone codes with a finger-point?

Researchers at the University of Illinois have crafted an implantable skin mesh of computer fibers thinner than a human hair that can monitor your body’s inner workings from the surface.

A company called Dangerous Things has an NFC chip that can be embedded in a finger through a tattoo-like process, letting you unlock things or enter codes simply by pointing.

A Texas research group has developed microparticles that can be injected just under the skin, like tattoo ink, and can track body processes.

All of these are much wiser choices than the name of a soon-to-be-ex.

6. Brain-computer interface

Having the human brain linked directly to computers is the dream (or nightmare) of sci-fi.

But now, a team at Brown University called BrainGate is at the forefront of the real-world movement to link human brains directly to computers for a host of uses.

As the BrainGate website says, “using a baby aspirin-sized array of electrodes implanted into the brain, early research from the BrainGate team has shown that the neural signals can be ‘decoded’ by a computer in real-time and used to operate external devices.”

Chip maker Intel predicts practical computer-brain interfaces by 2020.

Intel scientist Dean Pomerleau said in a recent article, “Eventually people may be willing to be more committed to brain implants.”

“Imagine being able to surf the Web with the power of your thoughts.”

7. Meltable bio-batteries

One of the challenges for implantable tech has been how to get power to devices tethered inside or floating around in human bodies.

You can’t plug them in.

You can’t easily take them out to replace a battery.

A team at Draper Laboratory in Cambridge, Massachusetts, is working on biodegradable batteries.

They generate power inside the body, transfer it wirelessly where needed, and then simply melt away.

Another project is looking at how to use the body’s own glucose to generate power for implantables.

Think the potato battery of grammar school science, but smaller and much more advanced.

8. Smart dust

Perhaps the most startling of current implantable innovations is smart dust, arrays of full computers with antennas, each much smaller than a grain of sand, that can organize themselves inside the body into as-needed networks to power a whole range of complex internal processes.

Imagine swarms of these nano-devices, called motes, attacking early cancer or bringing pain relief to a wound or even storing critical personal information in a manner that is deeply encrypted and hard to hack.

With smart dust, doctors will be able to act inside your body without opening you up, and information could be stored inside you, deeply encrypted, until you unlocked it from your very personal nano network.

9. The verified self

Implantables hammer against social norms.

They raise privacy issues and even point to a larger potential dystopia.

This technology could be used to ID every single human being, for example.

Already, the US military has serious programs afoot to equip soldiers with implanted RFID chips, so keeping track of troops becomes automatic and worldwide.

Many social critics believe the expansion of this kind of ID is inevitable.

Some see it as a positive: improved crime fighting, universal secure elections, a positive revolution in medical information and response, and never a lost child again.

Others see the perfect Orwellian society: a Big Brother who, knowing all and seeing all, can control all.

And some see the first big, fatal step toward the Singularity, that moment when humanity turns its future over to software.

Purdue professor says Ebola ‘primed’ to go airborne

6:35 PM, Oct 12, 2014
6:30 AM, Oct 13, 2014

WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. – The first case of Ebola transmitted between patients in America has experts across the country reviewing safety protocols.

At Purdue University, Dr. David Sanders has been studying the virus since 2003 – specifically how this particular Zaire strain of Ebola enters human cells.

While the virus has thus far only been shown to be transferred via bodily fluids, Sanders argues that it could become airborne.

“It can enter the lung from the airway side,” Sanders said. “So this argues that Ebola is primed to have respiratory transmission.

“We need to be taking this into consideration,” he continued. “What if? This is not a crazy, ‘What if?’ This is not a wild, ‘What if?'”

Sanders said the longer the virus spread and mutates, the more likely airborne transmission will become. He also said that’s why it’s critical to suppress the outbreak in Africa to prevent a worldwide spread.

Sanders said it’s impossible to know how many Americans could contract Ebola, or how much longer this outbreak could last. But, he said, the danger is still very low for the average American.

IU hosts Ebola Q & A forum

Indiana University (Bloomington) is planning an educational forum from noon to 1:30 p.m. Monday in Whittenberger Auditorium in Indiana Memorial Union. If you can’t make it in-person, you can watch a live video stream of the forum here.

Find more details on the forum here.

NC GOP Chair Claude Pope admits Thom Tillis is in violation of the NCGOP platform

by Rocco Piserchia

I spoke with NC GOP Chair Claude Pope on October 1, 2014 at Big Ed’s restaurant in Raleigh NC when Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) was there to campaign for Thom Tillis (R-NC) for US Senate. Chairman Pope admitted that Thom Tillis was in violation of the 2013 (https://paradshift.net/2014/05/12/nc-s…) and 2014 NCGOP platforms which reject foreign owned toll roads in NC. Chairman Pope criticized the Democrats who formerly had control of the NC General Assembly (NCGA) for diverting the highway fund. When I reminded Chairman Pope that the GOP super majority in the NCGA have continued the same practice of diverting the highway fund he said it should stop. (The GOP super majority continue the practice of the Democrats by transferring $255 million a year from the Highway Fund to the state’s General Fund.) It remains to be seen what Chairman Pope will do, if anything, to persuade the Republican super majority to stop diverting $255 million per year from the highway fund to the general fund.

Rand Paul – Just another Politician

by Rocco J. Piserchia

Back in 2010 I was one of the Ron Paul supporters who also was very excited that Rand Paul won a US Senate seat in KY. As time went on Rand changed his positions. Rand’s defenders interpret all of his changes as sheer political brilliance. The Rand mythology goes like this: He’s learned from his father’s ineptitude and failures in Washington DC not to be principled. Rand is theoretically and allegedly deeply committed to the original intent of the US Constitution, however unlike any other DC politician who’s ever lived he alone knows how to be effective by pragmatism. So Rand endorsed Willard “Mitt” Romney in 2012. Then he went on to endorse the GOP minority leader of the US Senate Mitch McConnell (R-KY). Rand’s brilliance was apparent in his explanation for why he endorsed McConnell – McConnell asked him (This in and of itself should come as a great warning to his wife in the event another woman simply asks Rand to do something objectionable.)  Rand held a meaningless filibuster which changed nothing but claimed victory – the reality is that US citizens still may be targeted as enemy combatants and executed without due process.

One talking point that Randbots use is that Rand’s voting record in office is second to none. His voting record is excellent – however Randbots appear to be ignorant that over 90% of the votes in the US Senate aren’t recorded by name, they’re unanimous consent/without roll call votes.  So Rand does have an excellent voting record for the 6% of the votes that can be verified. Jim DeMint exposed this problem and supposedly sought to change the procedure. One would think that champions of liberty such as Rand Paul and Ted Cruz would make this an issue and change the rules in the US Senate that permit this practice, unless they enjoy keeping the public in the dark about how they vote 94% of the time.

Rand endorsed Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) – tyranny is worthy of endorsement as long as an oath breaking politician has an R next to his or her name. Rand reflected his political brilliance by not recalling that Susan Collins voted for illegal NSA spying, the Patriot Act and the 2012 NDAA. (Selective memory is a radical new method that no DC politician has ever utilized prior to Rand.) Rand has even raised funds for the RNC. This week Rand was dispatched by Thom Tillis (R-NC) in a desperate attempt to help Tillis win the general election for US Senate. Rand appeared at Big Ed’s restaurant in Raleigh NC on Wednesday October 1, 2014 followed by a private fund raising event for Tillis after his psy op at the restaurant.

Tillis as Speaker of the House in the NC General Assembly has been a vocal proponent of public private partnerships (P3s) which includes the first foreign owned toll road in NC. I asked Rand about his position on P3s and foreign owned toll roads. Rand said he has no position on toll roads and in typical political fashion he refused to address P3s. Tillis is in violation of the 2013 and 2014 NCGOP platforms regarding foreign owned toll roads. If the leadership of the state NCGOP was not corrupt Tillis would have been censured for supporting foreign owned toll roads in NC. Instead of being censured he was given the nomination for US Senate. This senate race should have been won by any Republican with a heart beat but Thom Tillis is finding a way to lose. Tillis was backed by establishment Republicans in DC and Raleigh yet in the primary he could not even get 50% of the vote in spite of spending $10 million by his campaign and outside groups. Tillis’ arrogance has been on display during the primary and general campaigns in that he has not even made token concessions to the Tea Party and the conservative GOP base voters. His attitude is that Conservative voters have no other place to go. Tillis evidently forgot that people may cast a protest vote for the Libertarian candidate or have the option of writing in John Rhodes or David Waddell.

As he was leaving the restaurant I tried to ask Rand about Obamacare since both he and Tillis no longer support the repeal of Obamacare. Rand’s handler would not let the covert champion of liberty answer any more questions. I can understand why any questions about Obamacare have to be avoided. Tillis ads are running which state Obamacare should not be repealed after he had previously said “It’s a great idea that can’t be paid for.”  Rand has also stated that Obamacare will not be repealed while he continues to raise funds from his supporters to repeal Obamacare. While I see this as typical political duplicity Randbots interpret this as yet another example of his political brilliance.

In essence the politics of Rand Paul can only be explained by deception and duplicity. Randbots live in an imaginary world where only the supporters of Rand Paul understand his true motives which permit him to allegedly lie to the RNC and GOP establishment. The fact that Rand is lying is beyond dispute at this point. The real question is who is being deceived – is it the GOP establishment or Rand’s supporters? The fact that Rand continues to raise funds from his supporters to repeal Obamacare after he’s already admitted it’s not getting repealed speaks volumes about the morality of his political brilliance.