Witnessing abuse/bullying takes more of a toll on people than actually being bullied. I believe that the powers that be use social media to make us all witnesses to injustice in order to try to psychologically break us.
In this video report, Spiro examines new information regarding the deadly coronavirus outbreak which could potentially be a game changer as the numbers of infected and dead continue to rise.
Two key points which could potentially be a game changer for this coronavirus outbreak. Number one, a Yale study conducted by several Chinese doctors and scientists of the 2019 novel coronavirus clearly states that the virus has a 3- to 24-day incubation period. Currently, the quarantine time has been set at 14 days, so according to this study, people who could have been exposed to the virus and completed the 14-day quarantine and were released, could possibly still be infected for another 10 days while showing no symptoms, but is still being contagious, possibly infecting others. Second, it appears that it is possible to contract the virus a second time, with even more dangerous results than the first time.
Clinical characteristics of 2019 novel coronavirus infection in China
The largest study of coronavirus patients so far suggests it could take up to 24 days after exposure for symptoms to show
com/wuhan-coronavirus- symptoms-24-days-after- infection-2020-2
People could get the novel coronavirus more than once, health experts warn — recovering does not necessarily make you immune
Exclusive: Chinese doctors say Wuhan coronavirus reinfection even deadlier
Top Chinese expert Zhong Nanshan clarifies only 1 case in coronavirus study shows 24-day incubation period
asia/east-asia/top-chinese- expert-zhong-nanshan- clarifies-only-1-case-in- coronavirus-study-shows-24
Vaccine candidate for coronavirus on track for human trials in April
coronavirus-human-trials- 1e52aefa-094e-4724-b794- 14e4f76369dd.html
Inside the Chinese lab poised to study world’s most dangerous pathogens
inside-the-chinese-lab-poised- to-study-world-s-most- dangerous-pathogens-1.21487
Lab-Made Coronavirus Triggers Debate
news-opinion/lab-made- coronavirus-triggers-debate- 34502
Early last week, the city of New York launched — with little media scrutiny — one of two new massive cybersecurity centers that will be run by private Israeli firms with close ties to Israel’s government, the so-called “Mega Group” tied to the Jeffrey Epstein scandal and prominent pro-Israel lobby organizations operating in the United States. The centers were first announced in 2018 as was the identity of the firms who would run them: Israel-based Jerusalem Venture Partners and SOSA.
As MintPress has reported on several occasions, all three of these entities have a history of aggressively spying on the U.S. federal government and/or blackmailing top American politicians, raising concerns regarding why these companies were chosen to run the new centers in the heart of Manhattan. The news also comes as Israeli cybersecurity companies tied to Israeli military intelligence Unit 8200 were revealed to have access to the U.S. government’s most classified systems and simulating the cancellation of the upcoming 2020 presidential election.
The uncertainty and the debate over the origins of the coronavirus pandemic are growing with each passing day.
One week after the White House asked scientists to finally investigate whether the Covid-19 virus was bio-engineered (i.e., created in a lab), none other than CNBC jumped on the bandwagon and echoing a similar question by Senator Tom Cotton – and of course, Zero Hedge – said “maybe the coronavirus was man made.”
All this is taking place as the mainstream media, whose purpose is similar to that of Beijing in minimizing public concerns and panic even if it means fabricating reality, presses on with the popular theory that the virus emerged from the Huanan seafood market in Wuhan (we recently showed why this appears very unlikely) while branding anyone who suggests that the coronavirus might have originated as a bioweapon developed in a secretive Wuhan lab as deranged conspiracy theorist (a propaganda approach first popularized in the 1960s by the CIA to discredit controversial views).
Indeed, just today, the FT reported that Trevor Bedford, of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, “rubbished stories circulating on social media that Covid-19 was created at Wuhan Institute of Virology or elsewhere in China.” Bedford is of course entitled to his opinion, which was only reinforced by the lack of any dissenting views from the scientific community, especially in “ground zero”, China.
That has now changed, however, with what may be a “smoking gun” report, first noted by Harvard to the big house, from a scientist at the prestigious South China University of Technology in Guangzhou China. A pre-print published by Botao Xiao and Lei Xiao, titled “The possible origins of 2019-nCoV coronavirus” whose abstract is the following…
This is an updated and revised version of the full cover-story that appeared in the important publication, garrison: The Journal of History and Deep Politics, Issue 003. Issue 004 is due out this week and I urge readers to purchase it. You will read articles there that you will find no place else, brilliant, eye-opening analyses of issues that the MSM will never touch.
It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn’t happening. It didn’t matter. It was of no interest. The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It’s a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis.”
Harold Pinter’s Nobel Prize Acceptance Speech, 2005
While truth-tellers Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning sit inside jail cells and Edward Snowden lives in exile in Russia, the American people hole up in an illusionary dwelling constructed to reduce them to children afraid of the truth. Or is it the dark?
This is not new; it has been so for a very long time, but it has become a more sophisticated haunted doll’s house, an electronic one with many bells and whistles and images that move faster than the eye can see. We now inhabit a digital technological nightmare controlled by government and corporate forces intent on dominating every aspect of people’s lives.
This is true despite the valiant efforts of dissidents to use the technology for human liberation. The old wooden doll houses, where you needed small fingers to rearrange the furniture, now only need thumbs that can click you into your cell’s fantasy world. So many dwell there in the fabricated reality otherwise known as propaganda. The result is mass hallucination.
In a 1969 interview, Jim Garrison, the District Attorney of New Orleans and the only person to ever bring to trial a case involving the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, said that as a result of the CIA’s murderous coup d’état on behalf of the military-industrial-financial-media-intelligence complex that rules the country to this day, the American people have been subjected to a fabricated reality that has rendered them a nation of passive Eichmanns, who sit in their living rooms, popping pills and watching television as their country’s military machine mows down people by the millions and the announcers tell them all the things they should be afraid of, such as bacteria on cutting boards and Russian spies infiltrating their hair salons.
The creation of such inanities as acceptable reality and unacceptable reality is necessary for the self-preservation of the super-state against its greatest danger: understanding on the part of the people as to what is really happening.
All factors which contribute to its burgeoning power are exaggerated.
All factors which might reveal its corrosive effect on the nation are concealed.
The result is to place the populace in the position of persons living in a house whose windows no longer reveal the outside but on which murals have been painted.
Some of the murals are frightening and have the effect of reminding the occupants of the outside menaces against which the paternal war machine is protecting them. Other murals are pleasant to remind them how nice things are inside the house.
But to live like this is to live in a doll’s house. If life has one lesson to teach us, it is that to live in illusion is ultimately disastrous.
In the doll’s house into which America gradually has been converted, a great many of our basic assumptions are totally illusory.
Fifty years have disappeared behind us since the eloquent and courageous Garrison (read On the Trail of the Assassins) metaphorically voiced the truth, despite the CIA’s persistent efforts to paint him as an unhinged lunatic through its media mouthpieces.
These days they would probably just lock him up or send him fleeing across borders, as with Assange, Manning, and Snowden.
It is stunning to take a cue from his comment regarding the JFK assassination, when he suggested that one reverse the lone assassin scenario and place it in the U.S.S.R.
No American could possibly believe a tale that a former Russian soldier, trained in English and having served at a top Soviet secret military base, who had defected to the U.S. and then returned home with the help of the K.G.B., could kill the Russian Premier with a defective and shoddy rifle and then be shot to death in police headquarters in Moscow by a K.G.B. connected hit man so there would be no trial and the K.G.B. would go scot-free.
That would be a howler! So too, of course, are the Warren Commission’s fictions about Oswald.
SNOWDEN, ASSANGE, AND MANNING
If we then update this mental exercise and imagine that Snowden, Assange, and Manning were all Russian, and that they released information about Russian war crimes, political corruption, and a system of total electronic surveillance of the Russian population, and were then jailed or sent fleeing into exile as a result, who in the U.S., liberal, libertarian or conservative, would possibly believe the Russian government’s accusations that these three were criminals.
Nevertheless, Barack Obama, the transparency president, made sure to treat them as such, all the while parading as a “liberal” concerned for freedom of speech and the First Amendment. He made sure that Snowden and Manning were charged under the Espionage Act of 1917, and that Assange was corralled via false Swedish sex charges so he had to seek asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London (a form of jail).
He brought Espionage Act prosecutions against eight people, more than all former presidents combined. He hypocritically pardoned Manning on his way out the door as if this would polish his deluded liberal legacy after making her suffer terribly through seven years of imprisonment.
He set the stage for Trump to re-jail Manning to try to get this most courageous woman to testify against Assange, which she will not do, and for the collaborationist British government to jail Assange in preparation for his extradition to the United States and a show trial. As for Snowden, he has been relegated to invisibility, good for news headlines once and for a movie, but now gone and forgotten.
Obama and Trump, arch political “enemies,” have made sure that those who reveal the sordid acts of the American murderous state are cruelly punished and silenced.
This is how the system works, and for most Americans, it is not happening. It doesn’t matter. They don’t care, just as they don’t care that Obama backed the 2009 coup d’état in Honduras that has resulted in so many deaths at the hands of U.S trained killers, and then Trump ranted about all these “non-white” people fleeing to the U.S. to escape a hell created by the U.S., as it has been doing throughout Latin America for so long.
Who does care about the truth? Has anyone even noticed how the corporate media has disappeared the “news” of all those desperate people clamouring to enter the U.S.A. from Mexico? One day they were there and in the headlines; the next day, gone. It’s called news.
But even though a majority of Americans have never believed the government’s explanation for JFK’s murder, they nevertheless have insouciantly gone to sleep for half a century in the doll’s house of illusions as the killing and the lies of their own government have increased over the years and any semblance of a democratic and peaceful America has gone extinct.
The fates of courageous whistle-blowers Assange, Manning, and Snowden don’t concern them. The fates of Hondurans don’t concern them. The fates of Syrians don’t concern them. The fates of Iraqis, Afghans, Yemenis, Palestinians don’t concern them. The fates of America’s victims all around the world don’t concern them. Indifference reigns.
Obviously, if you are reading this, you are not one of the sleepwalkers and are awake to the parade of endless lies and illusions and do care. But you are in a minority.
That is not the case for most Americans. When approximately 129 million people cast their votes for Donald Trump and HilIary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election, you know idiocy reigns and nothing has been learned. Ditto for the votes for Obama, Bush, Clinton, et al. You can keep counting back. It is an ugly fact and sad to say.
Such a repetition compulsion is a sign of a deep sickness, and it will no doubt be repeated in the 2020 election. The systemic illusion must be preserved at all costs and the warfare state supported in its killing. It is the American way.
It is true that average Americans have not built the doll’s house; that is the handiwork of the vast interconnected and far-reaching propaganda arms of the U.S. government and their media accomplices. But that does not render them innocent for accepting decades of fabricated reality for so-called peace of mind by believing that a totally corrupt system works.
The will to believe is very powerful, as is the propaganda.
The lesson that Garrison spoke of has been lost on far too many people, even on those who occasionally leave the doll house for a walk, but who only go slightly down the path for fear of seeing too much reality and connecting too many dots. There is plain ignorance, then there is culpable ignorance…..
Since the appearance of the gilets jaunes (yellow vests) movement in December 2018, and with the recent demonstrations and strikes against pension reform, the question of police violence in France has entered the mainstream.
And the stream of shocking social media videos continues: at an anti-pension reform demonstration in Lyon this year, a police officer fired a teargas grenade at students filming the crowd from the balcony of their apartment. Another one fired a “flash-ball” at a demonstrator at point-blank range. At a gathering in the centre of Paris, police appeared to throttle Cédric Chouviat, a 42-year-old motorcycle courier, who later died with a broken larynx. These images – of the police beating vulnerable people, blinding others or blowing off their hands – have forced the authorities to admit that police violence actually exists.
Until now, the head of state had seemed to rule out any discussion of the matter. In March 2019, during his “great national debate”, President Macron said, “Do not speak of ‘repression’ or ‘police violence’; such words are unacceptable in a state under the rule of law.” The same week the United Nations high commissioner for human rights, Michelle Bachelet, urged the government to undertake a “full investigation of all reported cases of excessive use of force”.
Confronted with pictures of a police officer tripping up a demonstrator, prime minister Édouard Philippe admitted for the first time that there was a problem, describing the footage as “violent and unacceptable”. Interior minister Christophe Castaner followed suit, stressing that policing must be “exemplary”. For his part, Macron claims to expect “top-grade professional practice”. Either this marks a genuine change of tune or it is just a means of defusing public outrage.
The modern-day French police are shaped by the violence of their history – many of their methods of surveillance and repression found their way to the homeland from the repertoire of forces in charge of “indigenous north Africans” in former French colonies. Throughout the colonial period, police agents and officers took their experiences from places such as Algeria and applied them to the policing of working-class neighbourhoods and the quelling of insurrections in mainland France. The manhunt, capture and strangulation techniques that recently killed Adama Traoré or Chouviat, and the use of sexual violence to humiliate, as in the case of Théo Luhaka in 2017, are part of this long history.
But the story of police violence goes hand in hand with efforts to expose it to the wider public. In the early 1970s, organisations such as the Arab workers’ movement started condemning “racist policing crimes”. They tried to counter attempts by the police to criminalise victims by describing people who had been killed to the media as “repeat offenders”, “drug abusers”, responsible for the violence they suffered. The brutal, racist behaviour of French police was never treated as such. The term bavure, or blunder, is still used for police “encounters” that end in death.
Come the early 2000s, new types of independent media gave families and supporters of victims an outlet, and in the 2010s mainstream newspapers finally took on board the concept of “police violence”, albeit in quotation marks to cast doubt on its validity. It was not until 11 January 2020 that Le Monde referred to, “what can only be described, without inverted commas, as police violence”.
The recent changes in police violence are part and parcel of the neoliberal restructuring that started in the early 1970s with the launch of global security and defence markets. New approaches to management evolved to boost police productivity, which increasingly governed itself like a “business” with “targets” to achieve. The police are valued for their performance in hitting these targets; and the easiest way to do this is to make arrests for drug possession or irregular identity papers, which means targeting ethnic minorities and the working classes….
Kill the drug war.
In Ellen Brown’s brilliant new article “Mexico’s AMLO Shows How It’s Done”, the researcher and national banking advocate made the powerful point that the only way to properly fight the neo-liberal order is for nations of the west to follow the lead of Mexico’s current President Lopez Obrador who recently announced the creation of a new network of national banks- of which over 3238 branches will be in operation by 2021. Obrador’s stated aim is to have 13 000 branches built across Mexico which would far outnumber the total number of all private banks and will also provide a vital tool for the economic liberation of Mexico.
This act is nothing short of heresy in the corridors of the neoliberal priesthood of our modern age. The “economic foundation” upon which today’s globalized world are premised assert that nation states may not participate in the marketplace. No price controls, no protective tariffs, no bank regulation and certainly no national banks. Following this gospel, nations are permitted to do war and promote various forms of population control… but nothing that pollutes the purity of the supposedly “free market”.
Of course, simply utilizing national banking practices by themselves is not a full solution. A fascist regime can of course, use national banks for destructive ends just as a democratic republic can use them for positive ends, and as we have seen over the years, the financial oligarchy has no problem supporting fascist regimes such as Hitler’s Germany or Mussolini’s Italy nor do they have any problem supporting “national Keynesian initiatives” so long as they are done under an anti-human Green New Deal frame work.
So what makes President Obrador’s current efforts different?
As Brown states in her paper:
“The new president has held to his campaign promises. In 2019, his first year in office, he did what Donald Trump pledged to do — “drain the swamp” — purging the government of technocrats and institutions he considered corrupt, profligate or impeding the transformation of Mexico after 36 years of failed market-focused neoliberal policies. Other accomplishments have included substantially increasing the minimum wage while cutting top government salaries and oversize pensions; making small loans and grants directly to farmers; guaranteeing crop prices for key agricultural crops; launching programs to benefit youth, the disabled and the elderly; and initiating a $44 billion infrastructure plan. López Obrador’s goal, he says, is to construct a “new paradigm” in economic policy that improves human welfare, not just increases gross domestic product.”
If you haven’t figured it out, the answer is MORALITY.
What gave the establishment of modern nation states their power and legitimacy in the wake of the Golden Renaissance, was the fact that they are premised upon the common good of the people against the interests of private oligarchs and elite families. Those feudal orders dominated by hereditary institutions during most of human history placed the “natural order” upside down, with the welfare of the talking cows (aka: peasants) granted to them by the fancy of the master class of land lords.
Under a true sovereign nation state, elected leaders derive their legitimacy and support of the people through their mandate to defend the inalienable rights of people though internal improvements which increase the socio-physical-spiritual well being of the people. This used to be recognised in past ages as an elementary idea of Natural Law (which saw the laws of morality as intertwined into the fabric of objective reality as the laws of gravity, and electricity).
Ben Franklin’s Electric Insight into Economics
It is here no coincidence that the leading proponent of national banking and productive credit in America was also the leading scientist who trumped all elite scientific minds of Europe when he discovered the principle of electricity in 1752. Benjamin Franklin and his vast network of leading collaborators across Europe and America never saw a distinction between “subjective moral sciences” and “objective a-moral physics”. The foundational documents and also the first national banking system of America (upon which other republics in South and Central America modelled themselves in the coming years) were based upon this idea of Natural Law. This insight was the basis for Franklin’s 1727 opus on the Necessity for a Paper Currency where Franklin argued that value was not located in gold, or silver, or land or even demand per se, but rather in the creative powers of a people!
The consolidation of America’s revolutionary war debt incurred by each of the 13 colonies into a unified federal credit transformed the unpayable debt “into a national blessing” as Ben Franklin’s protégé Alexander Hamilton (first Treasury Secretary) laid out in his famous Reports on a National Bank and On Manufactures in 1791. In opposition to the early free traders and monetarists who wished America would end its protective tariff, stay agrarian and allow Britain to maintain its global monopoly on industry, Hamilton and Franklin understood this would undo the entire revolutionary cause resulting in America’s eventual re-absorption back into the empire….
By 1865, Lincoln’s use of national banking practices (the Greenback) was instrumental in saving the union from British-orchestrated Civil War- although his assassination hampered this momentum to full industrial reconstruction of the south. During this time, Britain, French and Spanish Hapsburg empires had initiated parallel wars to destroy the newly emerging Mexican republic then led by Lincoln-admiring president Benito Juarez, first with the 1858-1860 War of Reform and then 1862-1867 French Invasion. In spite of this existential challenge, Juarez succeeded in driving out the imperialists with political and military support from Lincoln patriots in America, while also imposing tariffs which encouraged the build-up of industry- liberating Mexico from its status as cash cropping exporter. Social and educational reforms elevating the health and welfare of the people grew enormously under Juarez’s leadership….
Self-declared Venezuelan “Interim President” Juan Guaido may have been given a hero’s welcome at President Trump’s State of the Union Address last week, but he certainly did not receive the same treatment after he touched down at Simon Bolivar International Airport, Caracas, yesterday. His very presence was enough to turn those present, including airport employees, into an enraged mob hectoring, jeering and manhandling him, kicking his car and covering him in water and other liquids.
Video shows an angry female immigration employee shouting, “You are a traitor to our country” as his passport is getting checked. Others yelled “murderer” and “fascist” at the controversial opposition politician. Guaido was roughed up in a scrum of angry Venezuelans, his shirt ripped and his pride dented. Another video shows an employee of Conviasa (an airline recently sanctioned by Trump) chasing him through the arrivals lounge, pouring beer on him, expressing her contempt for him. He escaped in his car as onlookers pelted it with traffic cones chanting that he was “trash” and a “murderer.”
After Washington-declared President Juan Guaido landed in Caracas, scuffles broke out between Guaido supporters and opponents
Guaido left to objects being thrown at his car and chants of 'MURDERER'
Evidently Washingon's regime change plan is popular 🙃 pic.twitter.com/F5ICsfA106
— Going Underground on RT (@Underground_RT) February 12, 2020
Perhaps more notable than the event is how corporate media, who have strongly supported Guaio in the past, described the event. The influential French newswire Agence France-Presse described the scenes caught on camera as him “being greeted by a throng of cheering supporters at the Caracas international airport, where he arrived on a flight from Portugal.” And their account was picked up across the media….