Reader comment: Dear Watchman,
"Would the
government let Jesus cure cancer?"
By Jon Rappoport
In the 1990s, I watched a federal trial in a Los Angeles courtroom. The defendant was charged with selling medical drugs without a license to practice medicine.
The defendant was prepared to argue that a) the substance he was selling was naturally produced in the body and b) it was effective.
The prosecution moved to exclude such testimony, on the grounds that it was irrelevant.
The judge agreed. Therefore, the trial was nasty, brutish, and short. The defendant was found guilty and sentenced to prison for several years.
This is how the federal bureaucracy operates. "Do you have a government-issued license to heal? No? You're a criminal. End of story."
"Jon Rappoport"...........A
By Jon Rappoport
Regarding your "OMG, Yeshua Cured Cancer" article, I
believe there is a tie to where 85 Holistic Doctors have been mysteriously
killed recently. Erin Elizabeth is tracking this.
Also, per my emails to Jon Rappoport (below,) I thought it
important to know more about the 1994 Court case where the Defendant was
charged with selling medical drugs without a license to practice medicine, and
sentenced.
To Jon Rappoport
Mar 14 at 2:32 PM
from.............A
Hi Jon,
In a bigger picture - this must be the reason why the Deep State is killing off Holistic Doctors . . . . .
On Wednesday, March 14, 2018 2:11 PM, Jon Rappoport
wrote:
Thanks.
No idea about the court case --- it was somewhere around 1994. Can't recall the defendant's name. But he was sentenced to prison.
Dear Jon,
What was the Name of the Court Case (and Docket#) that you referred to in "Would the government let Jesus cure cancer?"
Thank you.
from.............A
Hi Jon,
In a bigger picture - this must be the reason why the Deep State is killing off Holistic Doctors . . . . .
On Wednesday, March 14, 2018 2:11 PM, Jon Rappoport
Thanks.
No idea about the court case --- it was somewhere around 1994. Can't recall the defendant's name. But he was sentenced to prison.
Dear Jon,
What was the Name of the Court Case (and Docket#) that you referred to in "Would the government let Jesus cure cancer?"
Thank you.
By Jon Rappoport
In the 1990s, I watched a federal trial in a Los Angeles courtroom. The defendant was charged with selling medical drugs without a license to practice medicine.
The defendant was prepared to argue that a) the substance he was selling was naturally produced in the body and b) it was effective.
The prosecution moved to exclude such testimony, on the grounds that it was irrelevant.
The judge agreed. Therefore, the trial was nasty, brutish, and short. The defendant was found guilty and sentenced to prison for several years.
This is how the federal bureaucracy operates. "Do you have a government-issued license to heal? No? You're a criminal. End of story."
"Jon Rappoport"
By Jon Rappoport
In the 1990s, I
watched a federal trial in a Los Angeles courtroom. The defendant was charged
with selling medical drugs without a license to practice medicine.
The defendant was
prepared to argue that a) the substance he was selling was naturally produced
in the body and b) it was effective.
The prosecution moved
to exclude such testimony, on the grounds that it was irrelevant.
The judge agreed.
Therefore, the trial was nasty, brutish, and short. The defendant was found
guilty and sentenced to prison for several years.
This is how the
federal bureaucracy operates. "Do you have a government-issued license to
heal? No? You're a criminal. End of story."
I believe that if
Jesus of Nazareth were walking the Earth today, in the United States, he would
be arrested on the same grounds.
This would be
particularly so if he were curing cancer.
Imagine this extreme
case: In a stadium packed with 50,000 people who have been diagnosed with
cancer, Jesus of Nazareth waves his hand and cures all of them in a few
seconds.
Now he is threatening
the profits of many companies, to say nothing of the power of the government,
which backs the chemo-radiation-surgery monopoly to the hilt.
So he is arrested. He
is put on trial. He opts to defend himself without an attorney. He tells the
court that curing cancer is no crime.
The prosecuting
attorney objects. "Your Honor," he says, "whether or not this
man has cured cancer is beside the point. He has no license to practice
medicine. That is why we are here today. We are simply establishing that a) he
was practicing medicine and b) he has no government-issued license. That is the
scope of this proceeding."
The judge agrees. The
verdict is issued. Guilty.
Of course, on another
front, the major media, who depend for their existence on pharmaceutical
advertising, take the ball and run with it. The networks and major newspapers
seek out "experts," who emphatically state that what Jesus of
Nazareth "performed" in the stadium was mere hypnotism. It was
placebo effect. Whatever sudden "remissions" may have occurred are
just temporary. Tragically, the cancers will return.
Not only that, these
50,000 people have effectively been sidetracked and diverted from seeking
"real care from real doctors." With chemo, with radiation, with
surgery, they would have stood a chance of surviving and living long normal
lives.
Other media pundits
send up this flag: "Many of those present in the stadium were clinging
bitterly to their religion. They refuse to accept science. They are living in
the past. They favor superstition over real medical care. In fact, they are
threatening the whole basis of healthcare, since other confused and deluded
Americans may now turn away from doctors and seek snake-oil salesmen and
preachers for healing."
From the highest
perches of political power in this country, the word quietly goes out to the
media: don't follow up on those people who were in the stadium; don't try to
track them; don't compile statistics on their survival rates; move on to other
stories (distractions); let this whole madness die down.
But among the
citizenry, an awareness spreads: the government is controlling healing through
its issuance of licenses. That's how the government is essentially protecting
one form of "healing" and enabling it to become an all-encompassing
cartel.
What would be the
alternative to licenses?
Contracts.
Contracts are
agreements entered into by consenting adults, who assume responsibility for the
outcomes. In the case of healing, a contract would specify that people have a
right to be wrong.
Let's say two
consenting adults, Jim and Frank, agree to allow Frank to treat Jim for his
arthritis with water from a well on Frank's land.
The two men
acknowledge that no liability will be attached to the outcome. In other words,
whether Jim gets better or gets worse, no one is going file a suit. No one is
going to go to the government for redress of wrongs.
The well water may be
wonderful or it may be completely useless. Both men understand and acknowledge
that. But they assert a right to try the treatment, because they are free.
Immediately people say,
"This is ridiculous. Water can't cure arthritis. Frank is cheating Jim.
Jim is a victim. He needs to see a doctor. He needs to go on arthritis
drugs."
No, Jim doesn't have
to do anything. He is free.
To put it another
way, Jim has the right to be right or wrong. It's his decision, which is beyond
the scope of any authority.
If government tries
to remove that right from all of us, it is essentially saying it knows what is
correct, it knows what is true, it knows what we need and require, and it's going
to give it to us even if it has to shove it down our throats. Does that sound
like freedom to you?
If Jesus of Nazareth
lived in the United States today, and if he went around curing cancer, he would
be arrested. He wouldn't be charged with blasphemy or treason. He would be
charged with something much simpler and more mundane: practicing medicine
without a license.
And he would be
convicted and sentenced.
Because the
government, in its throne of corruption, in its partnership with corporations,
wants to monopolize proprietary and illegal interests.
No comments:
Post a Comment