In what may be the most important story of the day, or maybe year, for a world in which there already is an $11 trillion shortfall in high-quality collateral (and declining every day courtesy of Ben’s monetization of Treasury paper) so needed to support the deposit-free liability structures of the shadow banking system (as most recently explained here), Bloomberg has just reported that Europe may begin a crackdown on that most important credit money conduit: the $80 trillion+ global shadow banking system, by effectively collapsing collateral chains, and by making wanton asset rehypothecation a thing of the past, permitted only with express prior permission, which obviously will never come: who in their right mind would allow a bank to repledge an asset which may be lost as part of the counterparty carnage should said bank pull a Lehman.

The result of this, should it be taken to completion, would be pervasive liquidations as countless collateral chain margin calls spread, counterparty risk soars all over again, and as the scramble to obtain the true underlying assets finally begins.

From Bloomberg:

Banks and brokers face a clampdown on using assets they hold for clients as collateral for their own trades as part of European Union moves to bolster market stability and rein in shadow banking.

The European Commission is weighing whether firms should have to obtain formal consent from their clients before being allowed to reuse assets to back other trades, according to a document obtained by Bloomberg News. The consent would be enshrined in a “contractual agreement” between the parties.

The handing over of collateral is an integral part of repurchase agreements, or repos — one of the activities under review by global regulators as part of their efforts to regulate shadow banking. The reuse of clients’ assets poses a potential threat to financial stability should one of a chain of firms that handled the securities go bankrupt, according to the document prepared by commission officials and dated May 15. Uncertainty about who holds an asset can fuel panic in times of market stress, according to the paper.

“Complex” chains of collateral can make it difficult for investors to “identify who owns what, where risk is concentrated and who is exposed to whom,” according to the document. “This has consequences for transparency and financial stability.”

Under the plans being weighed by the commission, banks and brokers holding securities for clients wouldn’t be allowed to reuse the assets for trading on their own account — speculation on the markets aimed solely at boosting their own revenues, according to the document.

…

The Financial Stability Board has estimated that the global shadow-banking system was worth $67 trillion in 2011, with EU-based activities accounting for about $31 trillion. Here’s the kicker: collateral chains collapse on their own when confidence and faith in the financial system is evapoarting. This is usually manifested in soaring variation margin, and demand for delivery of collateral (which having been pledged at 10 or more different places just doesn’t actually exist).

In other words, the last thing Europe needs is to force the aftereffect of a plunge in systemic confidence to be imposed upon the market participants! And yet, it is doing just that.

And for a comparable virtualization of repo pathways in the US, here is a chart showing the key relationships as of 2009. For the modern iteration, just update $30 trillion with $80 trillion (including custodial “assets” State Street, BoNY and JPM). This is $80 trillion in custodial credit money created via repo. Just in the US.

In other words, just as we have been warning for the past four years, Europe may pull the switch on its own electric chair. Among others, read:

• “The Scramble For US Safety, As Europe Imploded, Offset The $357 Billion Plunge In Q3 Shadow Banking“
• “Shadow Rehypothecation, Infinite Leverage, And Why Breaking The Tyranny Of Ignorance Is The Only Solution“
• “Why The UK Trail Of The MF Global Collapse May Have “Apocalyptic” Consequences For The Eurozone, Canadian Banks, Jefferies And Everyone Else“.

Finally, read Kyle Bass’ own thoughts on the matter: Presenting Kyle Bass’ Analysis On Shortening Collateral Chains; Or The Gradual Evisceration Of Shadow Banking

Hayman Capital Letter Dec 14

Follow us:      

About a million landmines have been planted by the Israeli occupation in occupied Palestinian West Bank, official Palestinian data has shown.

The Commissioner General of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation in Washington, Maan Erekat, said: “The number of Israeli landmines planted is between 800,000 to a million.”

During his meeting with UN and NGO officials in New York on Wednesday, Erekat said: “This significant number of landmines poses great direct danger to the safety and security of Palestinian citizens.” He discussed efforts with the officials he met to remove these landmines.

Erekat reiterated the importance of “continuing the efforts being exerted by the UN and NGO in cooperation with Palestinian parties to remove the landmines planted around the occupied West Bank.”

The Israeli occupation has planted landmines in the Palestinian territories since it occupied the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in 1967 under “security” pretexts.

There are about 51 landmine fields scattered around the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, especially in the Jordan valley, the north and west of the West Bank, near the ‘Green Line,’ around Israeli settlements and around large empty spaces where Israeli soldiers practice their military drills.

Follow us:      

Did you hear about the 800 esteemed scientists who came together and demanded the production of genetically modified crops and products be stopped? Scientists who called on world powers to re-evaluate the future of agriculture and seek sustainability rather than corporate profits? Don’t be surprised if you haven’t, as the mainstream media won’t touch this one.

Eight-hundred scientists did make such a demand. They made it first over a decade ago and they have updated it over the years, adding signatures and release dates. Still global powers have all but ignored their calls.

The Institute of Science in Society is a non-profit group of scientists from around the world, dedicated to bringing an end to what they refer to as the “dangerous GMO “experiment. In their open letter to the world, they have highlighted why governments need to stop genetically modified crops now – before there are irreversible effects on the health of the people and the health of the earth at large.

The Open Letter from World Scientists to All Governments calls for “the immediate suspension of all environmental releases of GM crops and products, both commercially and in open field trials, for at least 5 years.”

They also want patents on organisms, cell lines, and living things revoked and banned. Such patents (a sort of corporate version of “playing God,”) “threaten food security, sanction biopiracy of indigenous knowledge and genetic resources, violate basic human rights and dignity, compromise healthcare, impede medical and scientific research and are against the welfare of animals.”

And as Anthony Gucciardi recently detailed on NaturalSociety, this would be bad news for Monsanto following the recent Supreme Court decision that they have the ‘right’ to patent life.

Scientists Speaking Out

In the beginning, after its first draft in 1999, the letter had just over 300 signatures. Since then, it’s grown significantly. At the writing of this article, the document has 828 signatures representing 84 different countries.

While we are told by Monsanto and the FDA that GMOs are nothing to worry about and instead safe tools for the future of agriculture, a growing number of esteemed scientists seem to disagree. So, who’s listening?

The letter has been presented to numerous governments and organizations, including the U.N. Commission on Sustainable Development, the U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity, the World Trade Organization, and yes, even the U.S. Congress. The letter has been shared at these venues, but it doesn’t seem like anyone was listening.

The populous has to dig for information like this. We have to seek out the news sources willing to cover it, because we won’t hear about this letter on the nightly news or through a governmental agency. No, the U.S. government wants you to fear what they want you to fear (“terror” and crime, for instance), but they certainly don’t want you to fear the information and the food they are putting on your table. Or the GMOs they are funding with your taxpayer dime.

© 2013 Natural Society

Follow us:

In yet another showing of their lack of concern towards the people who give them their jobs, Senators in Washington D.C. voted against a key GMO labeling amendment to the Farm bill. One that would have allowed states to decide to label the presence of genetically modified ingredients in food products.

They didn’t just vote it down, they did it overwhelmingly: 71 to 27. Let’s be clear—this wasn’t a bill that would have mandated the labeling of foods with genetically modified ingredients. No, it was far less provocative. This measure would have simply said it was okay for states to decide to do that for themselves.

“The concept we’re talking about today is a fairly commonsense and non-radical idea,” said the amendment’s sponsor, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) according to the Huffington Post. “All over the world, in the European Union, in many other countries around the world, dozens and dozens of countries, people are able to look at the food that they are buying and determine through labeling whether or not that product contains genetically modified organisms.”

Vermont and more-recently Connecticut have both decided to label foods in their state. But they are concerned big-wigs like Monsanto will sue, particularly in light of this failure of a decision in the Senate.

One of the many senators who voted against what would seem to be commonsense and non-radical, Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) says that labeling GMO foods runs counter to what we “know” about them. This knowledge, she says, is that GMO foods are safe, no more dangerous than their “conventional counterparts.”

Apparently ignoring any of the research that runs to the contrary of that being put out by Monsanto-supporters, Sen. Stabenow talks about GMO crops as if they are the answer to the world’s prayers. That they are able to “resist crop diseases and improve nutritional content.” Stabenow and others like her must be getting their briefs directly from those within Monsanto itself.

Even more telling about where her (and others like her) allegiances lie, Stabenow said labeling GMO ingredients would “interfere with the FDA’s science-based process to determine what food labeling is necessary for consumers.” In other words, if it doesn’t come from Monsanto or the FDA, she doesn’t want to hear it.

She doesn’t want to hear about the study that showed GMO-fed rats developed mass tumors and died premature deaths. Senators like her don’t seem to care that research has shown GMO corn to be a contributor to the obesity epidemic. Apparently, studies linking GMO crops to lung damage, cancer, organ damage, and immune suppression aren’t “good enough” for the FDA, so they aren’t “good enough” for lawmakers.

The fact is, most processed foods on our store shelves contain GMO ingredients (usually corn or soy). Another fact, most conscientious consumers would like to know which foods are safe and which are not. But, with their decision to not grant states the right to decide for themselves, lawmakers have shown us (once again) where their loyalties lie.

© 2013 Natural Society

Follow us:

Monsanto is a company feared and reviled by the public in equal measure.

But whatever cases Monsanto has lost in the court of public opinion it has made up for in the courts of justice thanks to its revolving door with the upper reaches of Washington.

Now, a new movement is seeking to galvanize grassroots resistance to the corporation, and derail its agenda.

This is the GRTV Backgrounder on Global Research TV.

For more information on GMOs, click the banner below:

Follow us:

Hopefully, you already know what’s going down in Baraboo, Wisconsin. It’s one of the biggest, precedent-setting food freedom cases in history that’s got even conventional dairy industries watching.

Raw milk is the smallest part of this trial – Vernon is fighting for you and he didn’t have to. A large, mostly eclectic group has been gathering since Monday and a verdict is expected Friday.

The judge, Guy Reynolds, is essentially directing the jury how to vote and what they are allowed to hear….The whole case hinges on these words that are banned.

Vernon Hershberger is facing over two years prison time and $10,000 in fines for four criminal misdemeanor charges aimed at him for providing fresh food to his community through members in agreement. Some background here. Prosecution from the State is having a hard time proving that Vernon is running a “retail establishment”.

He’s not, unless you consider horse boarding, co-ops and Craigslist storefronts with retail transactions requiring business licenses to use. Government would love to eradicate “herd share” type agreements and so it’s no surprise that there is NO discussion of herd share memberships allowed in the courtroom – see how they are keeping the jury in the dark below.

Streaming Live. Follow the caption link to view archives.

Watch live video from farmfoodfreedom on www.justin.tv

Let it be known that the jury has been frequently shoo-ed from the room anytime the judge felt that something truthful was about to be uttered on the stand. I bet they wondered what they were missing and why they weren’t allowed to hear it.

Read Full Article

Follow us:

The secretive Bilderberg Group has had more exposure in the past several years than it has since its founding in 1954. This is due mostly to the alternative media pushing the issue to the forefront.

Today Bilderberg appears to be grooming itself for a new era and coming into the open.

As reported by Paul Joseph Watson, Google and Bilderberg are apparently merging.

What is the end game of this merger? It is possible to reverse-engineer the Google-Berg plan by sifting through open source information.

In this article we will be connecting the dots to paint a picture of what is very likely the big picture plan of the Google-Bilderberg partnership. This partnership entails the networking of powerful individuals who operate vast networks of influence. Among these include Banks, technology developers, CEO’s of corporations and Prime Ministers.

In his 2011 book How to Run the World: Charting a Course to the Next Renaissance, Parag Khanna – Director of the Global Governance Initiative at the New America Foundation - outlines a vision for the future in which mega corporations, NGO’s and governments team up to govern the globe. As the Asia Times reports “Apart from the usual government/institutional suspects, Khanna includes an array of extra players in the new rulers of the world, mostly powerful NGOs such as the Gates Foundation. These players are particularly fond of the global conference circuit – from the annual bash at in Davos of the World Economic Forum (WEF) to the seductively mysterious Bilderberg Group.”

An example of these individuals “fondness of the global conference circuit” is a 2009 meeting in New York at the home of Sir Paul Nurse, President of the Rockefeller Foundation. As to the secrecy of the meeting, a guest said, “They wanted to speak rich to rich without worrying anything they said would end up in the newspapers, painting them as an alternative world government.”

This is the backdrop to the Google-Berg merger. Governments are going broke. Globalist influences have broken down national borders. Tax exempt foundations and mega corporations are filling the gap.

These groups are essentially hijacking national government’s policies and advancing a top down, authoritarian system of control. In an interview with the Seattle Times, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was asked, “Some say the emergence of super rich philanthropies like the Gates Foundation has undermined the effectiveness of the U.N. and its member organizations, like the WHO.” Moon responded,

“On the contrary that is what we really want — contributions from the business community as well as philanthropies. We need to have political support, but it doesn’t give us all that we need. NGOs and philanthropies and many foundations such as Bill Gates Foundation — they’re taking a very important role…”

The Gates Foundation has successfully hijacked America’s national education policy. To demonstrate the intimate relationship that the Gates Foundation has with the Obama administration, this 2009 article points out that within the first four months of his Presidency, Obama appointed four high ranking officials from the Gates Foundation.

The Bilderberg conglomerate is tapping into this immense power to advance its objectives.

Planned-Opolis

What will the future look like under the direction of mega corporations and philanthropic organizations?

Parag Khanna and Ayesha Khanna write in Foreign Policy magazine, “As we move into the Hybrid Age, whoever has the capacity to mange the intersection of technology, capital, and identity can become a pole of power.” As we have seen, tax exempt foundations and corporations like Google have taken on a powerful role in global affairs. Governments are increasingly taking a back seat to the influence of these groups. Some have charged that they are “monopolizing development.”

In joining with Bilderberg, Google is preparing to enter this “Hybrid Age” of advancing technology and rapidly changing geopolitical landscapes with its hands gripped tightly on the reigns of power. With this merger, the world is set to be shaped into a highly surveilled and planned system at the direction of unelected elitists.

In 2010 the Forum for the Future presented a vision of the future in which mega-cities are run by supercomputers and citizens lives are tightly controlled. The Forum for the Future is backed by Bank of America, Sony, the City of London Corporation, PepsiCo UK, Time Warner, and Royal Dutch Shell. Each of these entities have representatives at the Bilderberg Group.

Their vision for the future was called “Planned-Opolis”:

These mega-cities will likely be based on an ongoing project in a South Korean city called New Songdo. The “U-City” will deploy so called “ubiquitous computing” technology that enables the monitoring of citizens 24/7 via pressure sensitive floors that track your walk to computer chips that are embedded everywhere in the environment. U-cities are described as places where “…all major information systems (residential, medical, business, governmental and the like) share data, and computers (e.g., RFID, smart cards and sensor-based devices) are built into the houses, streets, bridges and office buildings.”

Bill Gates’ Microsoft Corporation is playing a key role in developing technology for New Songdo. While a large portion of the technology is being developed in the U.S., it is being tested in South Korea where there are historically less traditional, ethical and social blockades to prevent its acceptance and use.

Google chairman Eric Schmidt – who expects to be swallowing nanobots in the not too distant future – envisions life in this technological age as a streamlined and convenient existence. Google’s driverless cars – now legal in California and Nevada – will no doubt find their way into Planned-Opolis.

The Hybrid Age

Are we headed to a Rollerball like future in which corporations have replaced countries? According to Parag and Ayesha Khanna we are indeed headed in that direction. In the Hybrid Age, mega coporations will provide advanced technology to their constituents and thus gain loyalty. As we stray away from broken governments to provide security and prosperity, these entities will fill the gap.

“Employees of Facebook or Google can spend their days on campuses that are effectively full-service communes; the same is happening in companies in Russia, India, and China. One day a corporate passport might afford them greater freedom of mobility than their national citizenship.”

In 2008 the Washington Post published an article titled “Washington’s Future, a History.” The Post gathered trends analysts, university heads and government officials to look into the future and develop potential scenarios. The Post depicts a future in which small scale terror attacks and angry rioters plague the streets while implantable ID chips allow government workers to pass through checkpoints unmolested. Economic decline and cyber terrorism fracture the country. Bobbie Kilberg, president of the Northern Virginia Technology Council, told the Washington Post, “Basic functions of government will be outsourced.”

In the Post’s vision of the future, “Google LifeServices” provide the wealthy with employment at “work pods,” goods, and other services in one complex. Those who subscribe have access to,

“…entertainment and socializing… gathering goods, eating and working. The new subscription retailing was catching on in cavernous buildings, old big box stores that had been reconstituted as workspaces. Here, people could spend a good chunk of their day, moving seamlessly from their work pod to take in a movie with a friend, choose the dinner items that would be delivered before they got home, and take care of the day’s errands, all while staying in constant touch with colleagues, and all for one monthly Google LifeServices subscription fee.”

The global elite are pushing the globe toward a dystopic future in which all aspects of life are in some way managed by their interests. Humanity cannot afford to blindly accept this future, no matter how attractive the propaganda might seem. On June 6 the Bilderberg conference will commence. The future of humanity will be discussed by a handful of elites with agendas that will have a far reaching impact on all of our lives.

Copyright © 2013 Old-Thinker News

Follow us:

Nothing can replace exercise, but turmeric extract does a pretty good job of producing some of the same cardiovascular health benefits, most notably in women undergoing age-associated adverse changes in arterial health.

Despite the general lack of interest by conventional medical practitioners in turmeric’s role in preventing heart disease, there is a robust body of published research on its remarkable cardioprotective properties, with three dozen study abstracts on the topic available to view on our database alone: turmeric’s cardioprective properties.

Last year, we reported on a study published in the American Journal of Cardiology that found turmeric extract reduces post-bypass heart attack risk by 56%. Now, we would like to bring attention to a remarkable study published in the journal Nutrition Research in 2012 that revealed that curcumin, the primary polyphenol in turmeric and which gives the spice its golden hue, is as effective in improving vascular function in postmenopausal women as a moderate aerobic exercise training regimen. [1]

The 8-week long study involved 32 postmenopausal women who were assigned into 3 groups: a non-treatment control, exercise, and curcumin. Researchers ascertained the health of the inner lining of their blood vessels (known as the endothelium) by using ultrasound to measure flow-mediated arterial dilation, a well-known indicator of arterial elasticity and therefore endothelial function. A disturbance of the endothelial function is considered a key cause of the development of atherosclerosis.[2] Anything, therefore, that can prevent, reduce or reverse endothelial dysfunction therefore may reduce morbidity and mortality associated with cardiovascular disease.

Subjects in the curcumin group received 150 mg turmeric extract per day, for 8 weeks, supplying 25 mg of collodially dispersed nanoparticle curcumin. Their diet and exercise habits were unchanged during the study period.

Subjects in the exercise group underwent aerobic exercise training more than 3 days per week (2-3 supervised sessions and additional home-based training). Over the course of the 8 week exercise program involving cycling and walking, they engaged in between 30-60 minute long sessions, ranging in intensity from 60% of their individually determined maximal heart rate in the initial phase of the trial, to 70-75% maximal heart rate in the latter half.

After eight weeks of intervention, flow-mediated dilation increased significantly in both curcumin and exercise groups, compared to the control.  The researchers concluded:

The present study showed that regular ingestion of curcumin or regular aerobic exercise training significantly improved endothelial function. The magnitude of improvement in endothelial function to the same extent, suggesting that curcumin may prevent the age-associated decline in endothelial function in postmenopausal women.”

Discussion:

While this study is encouraging for those who already use turmeric in their diet, or perhaps take a curcumin supplement to ward off a wide range of potential ailments (we have indexed over 600 conditions that may benefit from turmeric/curcumin ingestion), it should be clearly noted that exercise shouldn’t, and can’t be replaced with a supplement.

Nor can exercise necessarily supplant the critical role that turmeric can play in human health and disease. Of course, if one incorporates plenty of regular exercise with regular culinary doses of turmeric, the synergy of health benefits produced would most likely far exceed exercise or turmeric taken alone.

The study didn’t look at what would happen if both exercise and supplements were used, but if we feel the necessity to sit around waiting for another clinical trial before employing this obviously optimal strategy, we probably need a healthy dose of commonsense more than a supplement or exercise program.

Interestingly, another study published by the same research group in 2012 in the American Journal of Hypertension did look at the combined effect of curcumin and exercise in postmenopausal women in improving heart muscle stress tolerance, finding that “regular endurance exercise combined with daily curcumin ingestion may reduce LV [left ventricular] afterload to a greater extent than monotherapy with either intervention alone in postmenopausal women.”  Chronic heightened left ventricular afterload can contribute to pathological hypertrophy of that region of the heart, and is associated with elevated blood pressure an aortic valve disease. These findings clearly indicate that combining exercise with turmeric (or curcumin) would produce the most benefit.

Another ‘side benefit’ of using turmeric with exercise is the fact that it an ideal remedy for reducing exercise-associated pain and inflammation. It has already been found quite effective in relieving symptoms associated with osteoarthritis, the details of which are discussed here: Turmeric Extract Puts Drugs For Knee Osteoarthritis To Shame.

For additional research on the benefits of turmeric and curcumin visit our research page on the topic, which includes over 1500 study abstracts: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/substance/curcumin

For additional research on over 80 natural substances which prevent, reduce or reverse endothelial dysfunction visit our page on the topic: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/disease/endothelial-dysfunction   

UK’s elite school asked 13-year old boys to pretend to be Prime Minister and justify the army shooting dead 25 protesters in a speech to win a scholarship it is revealed.

The question, which was put to students applying for the King’s Scholarship, worth one tenth of Eton’s £32,000 a year fees, is entitled “Concerning Cruelty, Clemency and Whether It Is better To Be Loved than Feared”, and follows a passage from Machiavelli.

“The year is 2040. There have been riots in the streets of London after Britain has run out of petrol because of an oil crisis in the Middle East. Protesters have attacked public buildings. Several policemen have died. Consequently, the government has deployed the army to curb the protests. After two days the protests have stopped but 25 protestors have been killed by the army,” the question reads.

Candidates are then asked to imagine that they were the Prime Minister and to write a speech for broadcast to the nation on why the decision to deploy the army against violent protests was both necessary and morally right.

The paper was set in April 2011, just after the student riots in which the headquarters of the Conservative Party and the treasury were hit and, by coincidence, just before the August 2011 riots, which injured many and caused millions of pounds of damage. At the time David Cameron warned that the army might be deployed.

The question caused uproar, with many taking to twitter to express their disagreement.

Damian Walter tweeted sarcastically, “having been born into a council estate single parent family, I would never question the superiority of Eton boys with millionaire parents.”

The headmaster of Eton College, Tony Little, emailed the US paper the Huffington Post saying the question has been taken out of context and that Eton School does not favor any particular political viewpoint.

“We are looking for candidates who can see both sides of an idea and express them clearly. High ability candidates at this level are often asked to put themselves in someone else’s shoes,” he wrote.

He then compared the question to a GCSE level English question, which is sat by all secondary school 16-year olds in England and Wales as well as those from fee paying public schools, in which he imagined a question, “Imagine you are Lady Macbeth, write a diary entry to express your feelings on receiving your husband’s letter.”

He added that a similar question in this year’s paper was about a community without any government.
Both the current British Prime Minister David Cameron and the London Mayor Boris Johnson went to Eton, Boris was also a King’s Scholar.

Follow us:

In the 1950s, before television had numbed minds and turned them into jelly, there was a growing sense of: the Individual versus the Corporate State.

Something needed to be done. People were fitting into slots. They were surrendering their lives in increasing numbers.

They were carving away their own idiosyncrasies and their independent ideas.

Collectivism wasn’t merely a Soviet paradigm. It was spreading like a fungus at every level of American life. It might fly a political banner here and there, but on the whole it was a social phenomenon and nightmare.

Television then added fuel to the fire. Under the control of psyops experts, it became, as the 1950s droned on, the facile barrel of a weapon:

“What’s important is the group, the family, peers. Conform. Give in. Bathe in the great belonging…”

Recognize that every message television imparts is a proxy, a fabrication, a simulacrum, an imitation of life one step removed. It isn’t people talking in a park or on a street corner or in a saloon or a barber shop or a meeting hall or a church.

It’s happening on a screen, and that makes it both fake and more real than real.

Therefore, the argument that television can impart important values, if “directed properly,” is specious from the ground up. Television tells lies in its very being. And because it appears to supersede the real, it hypnotizes.

When this medium also broadcasts words and images of belonging and the need to belong, it’s engaged in revolutionary social engineering.

The very opposite of living as a strong, independent, and powerful individual is the cloying need to belong. And the latter is what television ceaselessly promotes.

This is no accident. After World War 2, psychological-warfare operatives turned their attention to two long-term strategies: inculcating negative stereotypes of distant populations, to rationalize covert military plans to conquer and build an empire for America; and disseminating the unparalleled joys of disappearing into a group existence.

When, for example, television promotes “family,” it’s all on the level of fictitiously happy, desperate, yearning, last-chance, problem-resolving, melted-down, trance-inducing, gooey family.

This isn’t, by any stretch, an actual human value. Whether it’s the suburban-lawn family in an ad for the wonders of a toxic medical drug, or the mob family going to the mattresses to fend off a rival, it’s fantasy time in the land of mind control.

Television has carried its mission forward. The consciousness of the Individual versus the State has turned into: love the State. Love the State as family.

The political Left of the 1960s, who rioted against Democratic President Lyndon Johnson, at the Century Plaza Hotel, and ended his hopes to run again in 1968…that Left is now all about the State and its glories and gifts. The collective.

A great deal of the television coverage of mass shootings is now dedicated to bringing home the spurious message: we all grieve together and heal together.

In the only study I have been able to find, Wictionary partially surveys the scripts of all television shows from the year 2006, to analyze the words most frequently broadcast to viewers in America.

Out of 29,713,800 words, including the massively used “a,” “an,” “the,” “you,” “me,” and the like, the word “home” ranks 179 from the top. “Mom” is 218. “Together” is 222. “Family” is 250.

This usage reflects an unending psyop.

Are you with the family or not? Are you with the group, the collective, or not? Those are the blunt parameters.

“When you get right down to it, all you have is family.” “Our team is really a family.” “You’re deserting the family.” “You fight for the guy next to you.” “Our department is like a family.” “Here at Corporation X, we’re a family.” “Above all, this is a community.”

The committee, the group, the company, the sector, the planet, the family.

The goal? Submerge the individual and tie him inexorably to a group.

Individual achievement, imagination, creative power? Not on the agenda. Something for the dustbin of history.

All you need to do is fall into the arms of a group. After that, everything is settled. You can care exclusively about the collective.

Aldous Huxley, Brave New World: “‘Ninety-six identical twins working ninety-six identical machines’! The voice was almost tremulous with enthusiasm. ‘You really know where you are. For the first time in history.’”

George Orwell, 1984: “The two aims of the Party are to conquer the whole surface of the earth and to extinguish once and for all the possibility of independent thought.”

Television seeks to emphasize one decision: inclusion or exclusion. Exclusion is portrayed as the only condition that is possible if you aren’t part of the group. And exclusion carries the connotation of exile, excommunication, and criminality.

The soap opera is the apotheosis of television. The long-running characters in Anytown are irreversibly enmeshed in one another’s lives. There’s no escape. And with that comes mind-numbing meddling.

“I’m just trying to help you realize we all love you (in chains).”

“Your father, rest his soul, would never have wanted you to do this to yourself…”

“How dare you set yourself apart from us. Who do you think you are?”

Of the three elite network anchors, the one who fictionally conveys the sense that “we’re all in this together” is Brian Williams (NBC). He’s also the number-one-rated anchor on the evening news.

Am I saying that no groups anywhere can achieve important objectives? Of course not. I’m talking about a state of mind wherein the individual surrenders his own life-force.

There is an indissoluble link between the artifact called “we” and “limited context.” This is precisely what television news gives to the public. With each story that fails to explore the deeper players and their motives, the news speaks to a collective consciousness, which is to say, the sharing of a fabrication.

What “we” shares is foreshortened perspective, lies, misdirection, and superficial gloss. Those qualities are built for the group, and the group digests them automatically.

The group needs something to focus on, to claim is of the greatest significance. So it settles on those deceptions fed to it. It works with those deceptions, rearranges them, voices them, troubles itself over them, massages them, sculpts them, complains about them, praises them.

Retired psyops specialist Ellis Medavoy once said to me, “I think we’ve reached the point where the collective doesn’t even need a leader anymore. It can take all its cues from television.”

For some people, “we” has a fragrant scent, until they get down in the trenches with it. There they discover odd odors and postures and mutations. They find self-distorted creatures running around doing bizarre things with an exhibitionist flair.

The night becomes long. The ideals melt. The level of intelligence required to inhabit this cave-like realm is lower than expected, much lower.

Perceptions formerly believed to be the glue that holds this territory together begin to crack and fall apart, and all that is left is a grim determination to see things through.

As the night moves into its latter stages, some participants come to know that all their activity is taking place in a chimerical universe.

It is as if reality has been constructed to yield up gibberish.

Whose idea was it to become deaf, dumb, and blind in the first place?

And then perhaps one person in the cave suddenly says: I EXIST.

That’s starts a cacophony of howling.

The spell is being broken.

People dimly wonder whether, beyond this night, there is another whole world where individuals live, where some of them do, in fact, join together, but not in a desolate way.

Where individuals finally separate from the sticky substance of coordinated defeat.

The “we” that television gives us is a fiction designed to make the independent individual extinct. That is its job.

In the aftermath of the 1963 assassination of JFK and the 1995 bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, the covert theme was the same: a lone individual did this.

A lone individual, detached from the group, did this. See what happens when the group is rejected? Lone individuals are really no different than individuals. They are people who left the fold. They wandered from the communal hearth. They thought for themselves. This is what happens when individuals assert their independent existence. They become killers. They lose their way. They break the sacred bond. They are heretics who fall away from the collective.

In 1995, after the Oklahoma City Bombing, President Bill Clinton made a speech to the nation. He rescued his presidency by essentially saying, “Come home to the government. We will protect you and save you.”

He framed the crime in those terms. The individual versus the collective.

Of course, he was an individual who had chosen to be a mouthpiece and a middleman for the elite players who run the collective from above. But that went unnoticed.

The strongest argument against the free and independent and powerful individual, and in favor of the collective is, simply: the collective has advanced to such a degree that there is no going back; the individual can’t win; the battle is over.

All I can say is, I’ve never accepted an argument on that basis, and never will. The liberation of the individual has existed as an aim since the dawn of time on this planet. That aim will not vanish.

Why? Because underneath all the programs for mind control, there is, obviously, something to control. Otherwise, why bother? The deeper you go in discovering what “must be controlled,” the more freedom and power and imagination you encounter in the individual.

There is no limit. These three qualities are endless.

It may not seem so. It may seem that all the propaganda about the inherent weakness and smallness of the human being is accurate. But that is a false dream.

The reality is far different.

A million psyops won’t change that reality.

Finally, here is a 1980 quote from author Philip K Dick. He is writing poignantly about another titan of science fiction, Robert Heinlein. The relevance of his words to the subject of this article? There are probably a number of interpretations. I won’t try to flesh it out. I’ll leave it to you to decide:

“Several years ago, when I was ill, Heinlein offered his help, anything he could do, and we had never met; he would phone me to cheer me up and see how I was doing. He wanted to buy me an electric typewriter, God bless him—one of the few true gentlemen in this world. I don’t agree with any ideas he puts forth in his writing, but that is neither here nor there. One time when I owed the IRS a lot of money and couldn’t raise it, Heinlein loaned the money to me. I think a great deal of him and his wife; I dedicated a book to them in appreciation. Robert Heinlein is a fine-looking man, very impressive and very military in stance; you can tell he has a military background, even to the haircut. He knows I’m a flipped-out freak and still he helped me and my wife when we were in trouble. That is the best in humanity, there; that is who and what I love.”

Okay, I can’t resist giving you one more from Philip Dick. I don’t agree with the “motive” part of the quote, but everything else? Perfect.

“Because today we live in a society in which spurious realities are manufactured by the media, by governments, by big corporations, by religious groups, political groups…So I ask, in my writing, What is real? Because unceasingly we are bombarded with pseudo-realities manufactured by very sophisticated people using very sophisticated electronic mechanisms. I do not distrust their motives; I distrust their power. They have a lot of it. And it is an astonishing power: that of creating whole universes, universes of the mind. I ought to know. I do the same thing.”

The question is, in gaining freedom from these pseudo-realities, does the process happen for everyone at once, or is it one individual at a time? The answer is clear, and it tells us a great deal about the illusion of the collective.

————————————————————————

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. 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

Follow us: