offguardian--2020-05-28--Donald Trump is completely right about mail-in ballots

The President ’ s claim that postal votes are easily rigged is widely supported by historical precedent It ’ s an artefact of the peculiar world in which we live that we are sometimes forced to agree with , fight alongside or even defend people with whom we would never wish to be associated .
Donald Trump is right at the top of that list .
And his “ feud ” with twitter over tweets concerning postal votes is a perfect example .
To be clear , whatever the MAGA crowd and QAnons may wish to believe , Trump is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Whatever small threat he posed to the status quo was stamped out shortly after the Deep State switched sides from Hillary to Trump sometime in October 2016 .
From Syria to Russia to Wikileaks , most of the good parts of Trump ’ s “ America first ” or “ isolationist ” approach have fallen completely by the wayside .
Either opposed by the Deep State to the point of total paralysis or shown to be nothing but talk in the first place .
Ever since he was elected , despite his rhetoric @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a boorish Bush .
Most of the time .
But sometimes , in small ways , he strikes a raw nerve with the establishment .
Like two days ago , when he tweeted out criticisms of the proposal to rely on postal votes for forthcoming elections : Whether this was put into Trump ’ s mouth by his handlers to create the controversy , or whether it ’ s his genuine opinion , it is obviously something people are not supposed to agree with .
Because twitter then took the unprecedented step of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tweets .
Donald Trump is a crass , narcissistic bullshit merchant , but twitter has never done that to him before .
So why now ?
Why is twitter “ fact-checking ” Trump ’ s claim that postal ballots are easier to rig ?
Well , it ’ s certainly not because he ’ s wrong .
Because he ’ s actually right .
Postal ballots ARE much easier to rig than in-person voting .
This is not just logically obvious , it is historically shown to be true through dozens of examples @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was convicted of voter fraud after acquiring 200 blank postal ballots , filling them in and adding them to the uncounted votes .
In 2005 , when on-demand postal voting was first spreading around Britain , many councils expressed concerns that the system was vulnerable to fraud .
These fears were repeated in 2010 , when there was a surge in those using the system .
In 2014 the electoral commission warned that “ ghost voters ” could be created using mail-in ballots .
Also in 2014 Richard Mawrey QC , a UK @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hearing electoral fraud cases , warned that on-demand postal ballots were open to “ systematic and widespread ” voter fraud .
This was echoing thoughts he first expressed in 2005 , after finding 6 Labour councillors guilty of postal ballot-related fraud schemes .
Mawrey repeated those concerns again in 2015 , after former Tower Hamlets mayor Lutfur Rahman was convicted of election fraud using postal votes .
That same month , the BBC ’ s political editor accidentally revealed a serious potential corruption on the postal ballot front .
Now , all of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same frailties exist in the United States .
In fact , just two years ago , a Republican candidate was found to have committed electoral fraud in North Carolina…using absentee postal ballots .
In 2007 Teresa James and Michael Slater of Project Vote authored a report titled “ Vote By Mail Doesn ’ t Deliver ” in which they found there was evidence that : They cite multiple examples , including the Miami mayoral election of 1997 being overturned by the courts after a candidate was found to have committed widespread absentee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this year , when Joe Biden repeatedly won primaries he was predicted to lose , there were reported irregularities in postal ballots in several states , including Wisconsin , New Jersey and Ohio .
So , if there are so many recent examples of fraud – and so many obvious potential vulnerabilities to the system – why is Twitter suddenly ( incorrectly ) fact-checking “ The Donald ” ?
And not just Twitter , but all of the mainstream media as well .
For example , CNN , the Washington Post and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ long , very similar refutations of Trump ’ s anti-postal votes diatribe .
It ’ s interesting to note that the Wikipedia page for “ Postal Voting ” has already been edited to insert the same quote twice , from a New York Times article which came out today .
Their defences of the system are , frankly , sad .
The New York Times argues that , yes , postal vote rigging does happen ( and even cites some of the examples I mentioned ) but says doing it on a scale @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be really hard , and someone would probably notice .
CNN ’ s is even worse .
Collapsing from incompetence to unintentional hilarity , by using a report commissioned by George W. Bush in 2002 which found there was “ virtually no evidence of any organized effort to skew federal elections.
” ( Eagled-eyed readers will note it says “ virtually no evidence ” , and not “ no evidence ” . )
Students of history will no doubt realise that this report from the Bush-era Justice Department was commissioned in direct response @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was rigged ( which it fairly obviously was ) .
So , apart from twitter fact-checking the POTUS for criticising postal votes , we also have all the mainstream media doing pretzel-like feats of mental and verbal gymnastics to try and refute him .
Why ?
Well , because postal ballots are a large part of the establishment ’ s agenda at the moment .
They are one of the key ideas being pushed in the wake the Covid19 “ crisis ” .
Just three weeks ago , the New York Times had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s just the latest and most brazen example of the propaganda surge on this issue .
In February , well before he could use Covid19 as an excuse , the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan was campaigning for more postal votes .
In March Poland ’ s lower house approved a bill to conduct this year ’ s Presidential election by post ( which was later rejected by the upper house ) .
Australia likewise “ urged ” postal votes in their local elections this year .
The Independent reports that “ two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and Joe Biden called opposing mail-in ballots “ un-American ” There are many other examples of pro-postal voting stories , all over the local and national media : see here , here , here , here and here .
Oh , and here and here .
You could even see this whole “ controversy ” as part of the propaganda itself .
Trump has such a lousy reputation that any thought he expresses is instantly discredited by association .
From now on anybody that doubts the postal ballot system can be said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , whilst the hordes of potential voters whose only understanding of politics is “ Orange Man Bad ” will throw their weight behind postal ballots as if it were some kind of moral crusade .
( Expect a hashtag like # ImGoingPostal in the next couple of days ) .
Here , in the UK , our elections are currently totally suspended .
When they “ lift the lockdown ” , postal ballots will be pushed as a way of “ saving democracy ” .
But that will be far from the truth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and with his trademark lack of nuance , but anybody paying attention should definitely be very wary of widespread postal voting .
And worried by the large-scale media campaign to promote it .

The President’s claim that postal votes are easily rigged is widely supported by historical precedent
Kit Knightly
It’s an artefact of the peculiar world in which we live that we are sometimes forced to agree with, fight alongside or even defend people with whom we would never wish to be associated.
Donald Trump is right at the top of that list. And his “feud” with twitter over tweets concerning postal votes is a perfect example.
To be clear, whatever the MAGA crowd and QAnons may wish to believe, Trump is NOT some kind of anti-establishment rebel.
Whatever small threat he posed to the status quo was stamped out shortly after the Deep State switched sides from Hillary to Trump sometime in October 2016.
From Syria to Russia to Wikileaks, most of the good parts of Trump’s “America first” or “isolationist” approach have fallen completely by the wayside. Either opposed by the Deep State to the point of total paralysis or shown to be nothing but talk in the first place.
Ever since he was elected, despite his rhetoric, Trump has been little more than a boorish Bush. Most of the time.
But sometimes, in small ways, he strikes a raw nerve with the establishment.
Like two days ago, when he tweeted out criticisms of the proposal to rely on postal votes for forthcoming elections:
Whether this was put into Trump’s mouth by his handlers to create the controversy, or whether it’s his genuine opinion, it is obviously something people are not supposed to agree with. Because twitter then took the unprecedented step of adding “fact-checking links” to his tweets.
Donald Trump is a crass, narcissistic bullshit merchant, but twitter has never done that to him before.
So why now? Why is twitter “fact-checking” Trump’s claim that postal ballots are easier to rig?
Well, it’s certainly not because he’s wrong. Because he’s actually right.
Postal ballots ARE much easier to rig than in-person voting. This is not just logically obvious, it is historically shown to be true through dozens of examples.
In 2002, a Labour councillor was convicted of voter fraud after acquiring 200 blank postal ballots, filling them in and adding them to the uncounted votes.
In 2005, when on-demand postal voting was first spreading around Britain, many councils expressed concerns that the system was vulnerable to fraud. These fears were repeated in 2010, when there was a surge in those using the system.
In 2014 the electoral commission warned that “ghost voters” could be created using mail-in ballots.
Also in 2014 Richard Mawrey QC, a UK deputy High Court judge in charge of hearing electoral fraud cases, warned that on-demand postal ballots were open to “systematic and widespread” voter fraud.
This was echoing thoughts he first expressed in 2005, after finding 6 Labour councillors guilty of postal ballot-related fraud schemes.
Mawrey repeated those concerns again in 2015, after former Tower Hamlets mayor Lutfur Rahman was convicted of election fraud using postal votes.
In Decmeber 2019 Steve Baker MP wrote that:
There is widespread abuse of postal votes, this simply cannot go on
That same month, the BBC’s political editor accidentally revealed a serious potential corruption on the postal ballot front.
Now, all of these examples are from the UK but the same frailties exist in the United States.
In fact, just two years ago, a Republican candidate was found to have committed electoral fraud in North Carolina…using absentee postal ballots.
In 2007 Teresa James and Michael Slater of Project Vote authored a report titled “Vote By Mail Doesn’t Deliver” in which they found there was evidence that:
Vote by mail is more susceptible to corruption than voting at polling places.
And:
Vote by mail is amenable to manipulation by election officials.
They cite multiple examples, including the Miami mayoral election of 1997 being overturned by the courts after a candidate was found to have committed widespread absentee ballot fraud.
As recently as March of this year, when Joe Biden repeatedly won primaries he was predicted to lose, there were reported irregularities in postal ballots in several states, including Wisconsin, New Jersey and Ohio.
So, if there are so many recent examples of fraud – and so many obvious potential vulnerabilities to the system – why is Twitter suddenly (incorrectly) fact-checking “The Donald”?
And not just Twitter, but all of the mainstream media as well. For example, CNN, the Washington Post and The New York times all have very long, very similar refutations of Trump’s anti-postal votes diatribe.
It’s interesting to note that the Wikipedia page for “Postal Voting” has already been edited to insert the same quote twice, from a New York Times article which came out today.
Their defences of the system are, frankly, sad.
The New York Times argues that, yes, postal vote rigging does happen (and even cites some of the examples I mentioned) but says doing it on a scale large enough to swing an election would be really hard, and someone would probably notice.
CNN’s is even worse. Collapsing from incompetence to unintentional hilarity, by using a report commissioned by George W. Bush in 2002 which found there was “virtually no evidence of any organized effort to skew federal elections.” (Eagled-eyed readers will note it says “virtually no evidence”, and not “no evidence”.)
Students of history will no doubt realise that this report from the Bush-era Justice Department was commissioned in direct response to allegations that the 2000 Presidential election was rigged (which it fairly obviously was).
So, apart from twitter fact-checking the POTUS for criticising postal votes, we also have all the mainstream media doing pretzel-like feats of mental and verbal gymnastics to try and refute him. Why?
Well, because postal ballots are a large part of the establishment’s agenda at the moment. They are one of the key ideas being pushed in the wake the Covid19 “crisis”.
Just three weeks ago, the New York Times had an article headlined:
We Should Never Have to Vote in Person Again
And that’s just the latest and most brazen example of the propaganda surge on this issue.
In February, well before he could use Covid19 as an excuse, the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan was campaigning for more postal votes.
In March Poland’s lower house approved a bill to conduct this year’s Presidential election by post (which was later rejected by the upper house). Australia likewise “urged” postal votes in their local elections this year.
The Independent reports that “two thirds of Americans favor postal votes”, and Joe Biden called opposing mail-in ballots “un-American”
There are many other examples of pro-postal voting stories, all over the local and national media: see here, here, here, here and here.
Oh, and here and here.
You could even see this whole “controversy” as part of the propaganda itself. Trump has such a lousy reputation that any thought he expresses is instantly discredited by association.
From now on anybody that doubts the postal ballot system can be said to be “agreeing with Trump”, whilst the hordes of potential voters whose only understanding of politics is “Orange Man Bad” will throw their weight behind postal ballots as if it were some kind of moral crusade. (Expect a hashtag like #ImGoingPostal in the next couple of days).
Here, in the UK, our elections are currently totally suspended. When they “lift the lockdown”, postal ballots will be pushed as a way of “saving democracy”. But that will be far from the truth.
Trump expressed it brashly, coarsely and with his trademark lack of nuance, but anybody paying attention should definitely be very wary of widespread postal voting. And worried by the large-scale media campaign to promote it.


offguardian--2020-05-29--The Question Of Evidence When Governments Push Political Narratives

Today , in the background of the risk of world conflict and threat to health and our way of life arising from Covid-19 , it ’ s never been more important to be sceptical and understand evidence .
Earlier in my career , I used to adjudicate financial disputes between two parties , weigh up the evidence , and decide the most likely scenario .
So , in terms of what ’ s going on in the world , I ’ m interested in narratives which are open to challenge and the thinking and motives of those in power , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And particularly how the public watching and listening process these messages .
In the last 30 years , there have been many big events which have been questioned .
Iraq is the classic example of where a relative few questioning the pretext of that invasion ( Weapons of Mass Destruction – WMDs ) were insulted and smeared but later vindicated .
Today , in the background of the risk of world conflict and threat to health and our way of life arising from Covid-19 , it ’ s never been more important @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Earlier in my career , I used to adjudicate financial disputes between two parties , weigh up the evidence , and decide the most likely scenario .
So , in terms of what ’ s going on in the world , I ’ m interested in narratives which are open to challenge and the thinking and motives of those in power , the media , and experts behind them .
And particularly how the public watching and listening process these messages .
First , before reading on , watch this clip , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to what I ’ m going to say .
For those not familiar with the actors , this was a press conference held by Eliot Higgins of Bellingcat in 2018 .
Bellingcat is an Atlantic Council-funded online investigative website which has looked into the shooting down of the MH17 passenger plane , alleged chemical attacks in Syria , and the Sergei Skripal incident .
Graham Phillips , who crashed the event , is an independent UK journalist .
He was there to ask Higgins what evidence he had for concluding Russia was responsible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the background watching the clip might view Phillips as an amusing but disruptive , perhaps even unhinged , character who should have been escorted away by the police sooner .
Yet appearances can be deceiving .
Those aware of Bellingcat , Higgins , and their highly suspect investigations , will know that the some of the questions Phillips was posing about the evidence for Skripal were pertinent .
Secondly , many people think they are not qualified to research or question the politics or science behind government decisions .
I can understand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ events in far-away parts of the world .
But Covid-19 should really change that given the impact that lockdown may have on our lives for years to come .
This is what Lord Sumption , former member of the English Supreme Court , said about Covid-19 on BBC Radio 4 recently : Lord Sumption is right .
I often didn ’ t have expert knowledge of the area I was adjudicating on .
It wasn ’ t necessary as we would rely on expert evidence , typically independent or from two sources .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ information — an ability most of us have when applying ourselves .
Evidence comes in many forms : testimony , circumstantial , documents , and research or expert studies .
Below are some established concepts of assessing evidence as well as some pointers about the reality of today ’ s global scene that ’ s relevant when reviewing sharply conflicting narratives .
This is a good initial indicator .
Similar to detectives investigating a murder , they will be guided towards a suspect who has a criminal record .
In the case of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media , a look at their previous record on a whole range of important issues will show they ’ ve been wrong .
However , we should be mindful that just because they ’ ve always been wrong , that it doesn ’ t follow they are this time around .
For example , based on their past track record , we should certainly view governments ’ response to Covid-19 with scepticism initially and ask questions .
The information which flows from this and other material will make up the main body of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example , it amazes me when someone says , “ you seem to think lockdown is not necessary , it states on the news that it ’ s working , so what proof do you have that it isn ’ t ?
” I probably don ’ t need to elaborate on this lazy thinking except to say that the onus is on those who assert to prove .
So , the duty is on the government to show that lockdown is working by directly reducing infection , and most importantly , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media is a main channel to communicate such evidence , but statements of “ we don ’ t know ” or “ it ’ s too early to tell ” or “ trust the science ” , contradictions , and scare stories have been typical of the entire Covid-19 response .
Meanwhile , many sceptical experts and independent commentators have brought much to the table in terms of scientific studies and the questioning proportionality of lockdown measures .
The sceptics as yet have not had the same air-time to put forward their case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government has not discharged the onus of proof over Covid-19 , and historically , rarely do over other events .
We go back again to our detectives .
Who has most to gain from pushing a certain narrative ?
With Iraq , there were clear agendas in Washington to go to war , so much so that stories appeared in the press of links between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda .
When this nonsense was dismissed , we moved to the threat of WMDs .
We went to war out of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I believe that the UK government is realising their lockdown response was driven by blind panic after receiving incorrect advice on potential mortality rates from their scientists.So , their main motive now is to prevent an angry backlash against the damage caused by lockdown .
Mixed up in all events from Iraq to Covid-19 are the combined interests of numerous parties such as NATO-funded NGOs and investigative sites such as Bellingcat , career journalists , arms industry lobbies , and big pharma .
These vested interests include money , career advancement , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in deciding whether to get involved in Syria , selfish interests worked together .
This is why one war after another has been a disaster .
Independent journalists and activists don ’ t generally have the same motivations and therefore their opposition to their government ’ s Syria policy is based on the horror of the destruction and threat to world peace .
Thus , understanding the main players and their motives is crucial to understanding evidence .
I recall when adjudicating disputes , the lengths one party would go to , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government , in pushing the narrative of the day , is no different , and has many tools in its armoury , not least a compliant media .
Blaming others , dumbing-down debate , and distracting their audience towards less important issues are classic tactics .
For example , when the Covid-19 debate should be about whether lockdown is proportional and necessary , the media focus on scare stories , lack of equipment for health service staff , and blaming China .
The government and media also build a ‘ unifying ’ theme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and constant TV adverts telling us to “ stick together to see it through ” .
But the mask slips when dealing with the dissenters .
Heavy-handed policing of lockdown and outright censorship of those who question the necessity for lockdown , even extending to the views of respected but non-government experts .
Twitter mobs sucked into the frenzy of fear and the new ‘ unity ’ emerge to smear and insult those questioning the government position .
These tactics have been used prior to every war and during every crisis , only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A sign that these people are wrong is that if their position had merit , they wouldn ’ t censor and would debate .
One of their tactics is to label anyone who questions the prevailing narrative as “ conspiracy theorists ” .
Unfortunately , some dissenters , rather than stick to the position that the government has serious questions to answer , go on to speculate and develop theories which can ’ t be proven .
This provides the opportunity for those pushing official narratives to dismiss powerful arguments based on one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from experience that experts are often wrong — possibly due to a bias , an under- or over- emphasis on certain evidence , a method , or an inability to think a little outside of their field .
The results can be seen in all professions , for example , in miscarriages of justice and the experts which advised governments on WMDs , chemical weapons use in Syria , and Covid-19 .
As such , the government messages of “ trust the experts ” should be treated with caution .
[ Especially when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an “ expert ” , and ignore prominent figures who disagree – ed . ]
We all have conscious and unconscious prejudices or accepted viewpoints based on peer pressure .
One example which comes to mind is among some even in alternative media circles .
They say , “ Assad is a brutal dictator , but didn ’ t gas his people ” .
They ’ ve looked at the evidence to establish the latter , but have unconsciously swallowed the unsubstantiated media propaganda on Assad as a person .
Peer pressure , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to independent thinking .
But just being mindful of these pitfalls when reviewing evidence helps to get to a more open-minded mindset .
To those who ’ ve researched and studied evidence and applied this to global events , it ’ s apparent that mainstream thinking at all levels doesn ’ t resemble the reality .
Nowadays , a mainstream position on the most important events can be ripped to shreds .
Covid-19 and lockdown are by far the biggest event which has affected all our lives .
Therefore , I ’ d @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risks and proportion to gather pace .
In the meantime , we should spend the time in lockdown looking at the evidence in the round .

Kevin Smith
Today, in the background of the risk of world conflict and threat to health and our way of life arising from Covid-19, it’s never been more important to be sceptical and understand evidence. Earlier in my career, I used to adjudicate financial disputes between two parties, weigh up the evidence, and decide the most likely scenario.
So, in terms of what’s going on in the world, I’m interested in narratives which are open to challenge and the thinking and motives of those in power, the media, and experts behind them. And particularly how the public watching and listening process these messages.
In the last 30 years, there have been many big events which have been questioned. Iraq is the classic example of where a relative few questioning the pretext of that invasion (Weapons of Mass Destruction – WMDs) were insulted and smeared but later vindicated.
Today, in the background of the risk of world conflict and threat to health and our way of life arising from Covid-19, it’s never been more important to be sceptical and understand evidence.
Earlier in my career, I used to adjudicate financial disputes between two parties, weigh up the evidence, and decide the most likely scenario.
So, in terms of what’s going on in the world, I’m interested in narratives which are open to challenge and the thinking and motives of those in power, the media, and experts behind them. And particularly how the public watching and listening process these messages.
First, before reading on, watch this clip, which I think is hilarious and vaguely relevant to what I’m going to say:
For those not familiar with the actors, this was a press conference held by Eliot Higgins of Bellingcat in 2018. Bellingcat is an Atlantic Council-funded online investigative website which has looked into the shooting down of the MH17 passenger plane, alleged chemical attacks in Syria, and the Sergei Skripal incident.
Graham Phillips, who crashed the event, is an independent UK journalist. He was there to ask Higgins what evidence he had for concluding Russia was responsible for the Skripal incident.
Someone unfamiliar with the background watching the clip might view Phillips as an amusing but disruptive, perhaps even unhinged, character who should have been escorted away by the police sooner.
Yet appearances can be deceiving. Those aware of Bellingcat, Higgins, and their highly suspect investigations, will know that the some of the questions Phillips was posing about the evidence for Skripal were pertinent.
Secondly, many people think they are not qualified to research or question the politics or science behind government decisions.
I can understand people with busy lives accepting narratives about events in far-away parts of the world. But Covid-19 should really change that given the impact that lockdown may have on our lives for years to come.
This is what Lord Sumption, former member of the English Supreme Court, said about Covid-19 on BBC Radio 4 recently:
What I say to them is I am not a scientist but it is the right and duty of every citizen to look and see what the scientists have said and to analyse it for themselves and to draw common sense conclusions. We are all perfectly capable of doing that and there’s no particular reason why the scientific nature of the problem should mean we have to resign our liberty into the hands of scientists. We all have critical faculties and it’s rather important, in a moment of national panic, that we should maintain them.
Lord Sumption is right. I often didn’t have expert knowledge of the area I was adjudicating on. It wasn’t necessary as we would rely on expert evidence, typically independent or from two sources. What I did was just weighing up information — an ability most of us have when applying ourselves.
Evidence comes in many forms: testimony, circumstantial, documents, and research or expert studies.
Below are some established concepts of assessing evidence as well as some pointers about the reality of today’s global scene that’s relevant when reviewing sharply conflicting narratives.
History And Track Record
This is a good initial indicator. Similar to detectives investigating a murder, they will be guided towards a suspect who has a criminal record.
In the case of Western governments, their advisors, and media, a look at their previous record on a whole range of important issues will show they’ve been wrong.
However, we should be mindful that just because they’ve always been wrong, that it doesn’t follow they are this time around.
For example, based on their past track record, we should certainly view governments’ response to Covid-19 with scepticism initially and ask questions. The information which flows from this and other material will make up the main body of evidence.
Onus Of Proof
Taking Covid-19 as just one example, it amazes me when someone says, “you seem to think lockdown is not necessary, it states on the news that it’s working, so what proof do you have that it isn’t?”
I probably don’t need to elaborate on this lazy thinking except to say that the onus is on those who assert to prove. So, the duty is on the government to show that lockdown is working by directly reducing infection, and most importantly, is necessary in the big scheme.
The media is a main channel to communicate such evidence, but statements of “we don’t know” or “it’s too early to tell” or “trust the science”, contradictions, and scare stories have been typical of the entire Covid-19 response.
Meanwhile, many sceptical experts and independent commentators have brought much to the table in terms of scientific studies and the questioning proportionality of lockdown measures.
The sceptics as yet have not had the same air-time to put forward their case. But people need to remember that the government has not discharged the onus of proof over Covid-19, and historically, rarely do over other events.
Motives
We go back again to our detectives. Who has most to gain from pushing a certain narrative? With Iraq, there were clear agendas in Washington to go to war, so much so that stories appeared in the press of links between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. When this nonsense was dismissed, we moved to the threat of WMDs. We went to war out of a determination by Bush and Blair.
Today, I believe that the UK government is realising their lockdown response was driven by blind panic after receiving incorrect advice on potential mortality rates from their scientists.So, their main motive now is to prevent an angry backlash against the damage caused by lockdown.
Mixed up in all events from Iraq to Covid-19 are the combined interests of numerous parties such as NATO-funded NGOs and investigative sites such as Bellingcat, career journalists, arms industry lobbies, and big pharma. These vested interests include money, career advancement, power, and ideology.
For example, in deciding whether to get involved in Syria, selfish interests worked together. This is why one war after another has been a disaster.
Independent journalists and activists don’t generally have the same motivations and therefore their opposition to their government’s Syria policy is based on the horror of the destruction and threat to world peace.
Thus, understanding the main players and their motives is crucial to understanding evidence.
Tactics
I recall when adjudicating disputes, the lengths one party would go to, to mislead or pressurise me.
The government, in pushing the narrative of the day, is no different, and has many tools in its armoury, not least a compliant media.
Blaming others, dumbing-down debate, and distracting their audience towards less important issues are classic tactics. For example, when the Covid-19 debate should be about whether lockdown is proportional and necessary, the media focus on scare stories, lack of equipment for health service staff, and blaming China.
The government and media also build a ‘unifying’ theme, encouraging weekly clapping for health workers and constant TV adverts telling us to “stick together to see it through”.
But the mask slips when dealing with the dissenters. Heavy-handed policing of lockdown and outright censorship of those who question the necessity for lockdown, even extending to the views of respected but non-government experts.
Twitter mobs sucked into the frenzy of fear and the new ‘unity’ emerge to smear and insult those questioning the government position.
These tactics have been used prior to every war and during every crisis, only for the narrative to later collapse.
A sign that these people are wrong is that if their position had merit, they wouldn’t censor and would debate.
One of their tactics is to label anyone who questions the prevailing narrative as “conspiracy theorists”. Unfortunately, some dissenters, rather than stick to the position that the government has serious questions to answer, go on to speculate and develop theories which can’t be proven. This provides the opportunity for those pushing official narratives to dismiss powerful arguments based on one error or supplementary theory.
Experts Aren’t Always Right
I know from experience that experts are often wrong — possibly due to a bias, an under- or over- emphasis on certain evidence, a method, or an inability to think a little outside of their field. The results can be seen in all professions, for example, in miscarriages of justice and the experts which advised governments on WMDs, chemical weapons use in Syria, and Covid-19.
As such, the government messages of “trust the experts” should be treated with caution.
[Especially when they are selective about who qualifies as an “expert”, and ignore prominent figures who disagree – ed.]
Prejudice
We all have conscious and unconscious prejudices or accepted viewpoints based on peer pressure. One example which comes to mind is among some even in alternative media circles. They say, “Assad is a brutal dictator, but didn’t gas his people”.
They’ve looked at the evidence to establish the latter, but have unconsciously swallowed the unsubstantiated media propaganda on Assad as a person.
Peer pressure, pre-determined positions, and ideology are barriers to independent thinking. But just being mindful of these pitfalls when reviewing evidence helps to get to a more open-minded mindset.
Final Thoughts
To those who’ve researched and studied evidence and applied this to global events, it’s apparent that mainstream thinking at all levels doesn’t resemble the reality. Nowadays, a mainstream position on the most important events can be ripped to shreds.
Covid-19 and lockdown are by far the biggest event which has affected all our lives. Therefore, I’d expect the important questions about the real risks and proportion to gather pace.
In the meantime, we should spend the time in lockdown looking at the evidence in the round.
Originally published on One World Press


offguardian--2020-05-30--WATCH: Perspectives on the Pandemic #7

WATCH: Perspectives on the Pandemic #7

Using the “ bio-weapon ” theory as jumping off point , veteran journalist Sam Husseini discusses anthrax , bio-labs and “ gain-of-function ” research Investigative journalist Sam Husseini has had a storied career asking world leaders questions they would prefer to dodge , on subjects ranging from missing weapons of mass destruction to very real nuclear stockpiles .
Now he takes on the “ elephant in the room ” : the extreme dangers posed by bio-research facilities not just in China , but all over the world… The Intervieweee : Sam Husseini is a Jordanian-Palestinian writer and political activist .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Institute for Public Accuracy , a Washington DC-based nonprofit group that promotes progressive experts as alternative sources for mainstream media reporters .
The Interviewer : John Kirby is the director of FOUR DIED TRYING , a feature documentary and series on the major assassinations of the 1960 ’ s and their calamitous impact on the country .
To join the struggle for justice for Dr King , Malcolm X , and John and Robert Kennedy .
Follow Journeyman Pictures on youtube or visit their website for more of their award-winning factual content .

Using the “bio-weapon” theory as jumping off point, veteran journalist Sam Husseini discusses anthrax, bio-labs and “gain-of-function” research
Investigative journalist Sam Husseini has had a storied career asking world leaders questions they would prefer to dodge, on subjects ranging from missing weapons of mass destruction to very real nuclear stockpiles. Now he takes on the “elephant in the room”: the extreme dangers posed by bio-research facilities not just in China, but all over the world…
The Intervieweee: Sam Husseini is a Jordanian-Palestinian independent journalist. You can read his work, as well as a transcript of this interview, on his website heusseini.org.
The Interviewer: John Kirby is the director of FOUR DIED TRYING, a feature documentary and series on the major assassinations of the 1960’s and their calamitous impact on the country. To join the struggle for justice for Dr King, Malcolm X, and John and Robert Kennedy.
Follow Journeyman Pictures on youtube or visit their website for more of their award-winning factual content.


offguardian--2020-05-30--Covid19 & the denial of veridical reality

It probably hasn ’ t passed anyone by that the covid19 crisis , whether manufactured or exploited , has caused great schisms in the alternative media .
Almost from day one there was a divide between those who opted to accept and even endorse the rollout of authoritarian measures by governments around the world as ‘ necessary evils ’ ( or even as harbingers of a world socialist revolution ; beats me how that is supposed to work but still ) , and those who pointed out that this rollout was at best flagrantly disproportionate and opportunistic , and at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or cynically manipulated ‘ pandemic ’ .
Over the last few months the position of the latter has become stronger by the day , while that of the former has been weakened to the point of collapse .
As we have pointed out many times the official data has never supported the panic memes .
In fact the two entities , data and narrative , co-exist almost independently of one another , telling mutually contradictory stories , without anyone in the Panic-sphere ( to coin a phrase ) seeming to notice or mind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if on this topic some very smart people have been hypnotised or vaccinated against fact .
They see the numbers , they read the data , but it just does not compute .
When invited to discuss with us these people become hostile , even aggressive .
They bluster , they accuse us of manipulation and deceit , of being uncaring about the sick and dying , even of working for the capitalists ( because apparently it is now a truth universally acknowledged that the best way to start a revolution is to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bill Gates and the WHO the key ) .
And when pushed into a corner , these otherwise smart people simply deny the facts staring them in the face .
A good illustration of this happened the other day one Twitter .
Tim Anderson , one of those otherwise very smart and focused guys , has been firmly lodged in the Panic-sphere from the outset .
He is fairly careful to avoid fact-based discussion , but does indulge heavily in purple-tinged emotional condemnations of those evil people ( like us ) who are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infection and fatality rates .
A couple of days ago he tweeted some of that condemnation : And , for once , we replied , as so… Tim did not respond to these questions so far as we are aware , but Moon of Alabama ( another otherwise insightful and respected commentator ) did .
This is what he said .
Now there is of course only one major objection to this – namely that it is not true .
Or at least some of it is not true and the rest is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while seeming to deny it .
We responded to MoA with two tweets .
In the first we linked him directly to Chris Whitty , UK Chief Medical Officer and lockdown proponent , emphatically and clearly restating the facts about covid19 ’ s absolute and unambiguous non-lethality to the vast majority of human beings .
In the second we tried to point out that he is condemning us for ignoring science while clearly doing just that himself… This exchange is pretty typical of many others .
Is this ideology trumping objectivity ?
Is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Left seem to have developed that the lockdown is going to bring about revolution or some other form of benign new world order , simply overriding their common sense ?
How do you become so inured to veridical reality ?
And where do we go from here ?

Catte Black
It probably hasn’t passed anyone by that the covid19 crisis, whether manufactured or exploited, has caused great schisms in the alternative media.
Almost from day one there was a divide between those who opted to accept and even endorse the rollout of authoritarian measures by governments around the world as ‘necessary evils’ (or even as harbingers of a world socialist revolution; beats me how that is supposed to work but still), and those who pointed out that this rollout was at best flagrantly disproportionate and opportunistic, and at worst a planned response to a planned or cynically manipulated ‘pandemic’.
Over the last few months the position of the latter has become stronger by the day, while that of the former has been weakened to the point of collapse.
As we have pointed out many times the official data has never supported the panic memes. In fact the two entities, data and narrative, co-exist almost independently of one another, telling mutually contradictory stories, without anyone in the Panic-sphere (to coin a phrase) seeming to notice or mind very much.
It’s as if on this topic some very smart people have been hypnotised or vaccinated against fact. They see the numbers, they read the data, but it just does not compute.
When invited to discuss with us these people become hostile, even aggressive. They bluster, they accuse us of manipulation and deceit, of being uncaring about the sick and dying, even of working for the capitalists (because apparently it is now a truth universally acknowledged that the best way to start a revolution is to lock everyone in their houses and give Bill Gates and the WHO the key).
And when pushed into a corner, these otherwise smart people simply deny the facts staring them in the face.
A good illustration of this happened the other day one Twitter.
Tim Anderson, one of those otherwise very smart and focused guys, has been firmly lodged in the Panic-sphere from the outset. He is fairly careful to avoid fact-based discussion, but does indulge heavily in purple-tinged emotional condemnations of those evil people (like us) who are uncaring enough to cite the data on infection and fatality rates.
A couple of days ago he tweeted some of that condemnation:
Time will judge harshly those ignorant but know-it-all commentators who joined the pandemic deniers, anti-science and anti-vax crowds, swinging from 'no worse than a common cold' to 'a plot to poison us all'. Why would people trust them on any other real social issues, in future? — tim anderson (@timand2037) May 25, 2020
And, for once, we replied, as so…
Are you claiming #covid19 is NOT symptomless to >80% of those infected? Are you claiming it does NOT give the vast majority who get symptoms nothing more than a cold or mild flu? Will you give a straight answer for once? https://t.co/1pc4SCiXKr — OffGuardian (@OffGuardian0) May 25, 2020
Tim did not respond to these questions so far as we are aware, but Moon of Alabama (another otherwise insightful and respected commentator) did. This is what he said.
Covid-19 is NOT symptomless for most grown ups who get it. 80% only present 'mild'
symptoms i.e. they do not develop pneumonia. It
is NOT mild to 20% of cases and very dangerous for 5%. Some 1% of infected die.
Your rejection of current science is embarrassing.@timand2037 — Moon of Alabama (@MoonofA) May 25, 2020
Now there is of course only one major objection to this – namely that it is not true.
Or at least some of it is not true and the rest is simply re-stating exactly what we already said while seeming to deny it.
We responded to MoA with two tweets. In the first we linked him directly to Chris Whitty, UK Chief Medical Officer and lockdown proponent, emphatically and clearly restating the facts about covid19’s absolute and unambiguous non-lethality to the vast majority of human beings.
In the second we tried to point out that he is condemning us for ignoring science while clearly doing just that himself…
What you, MoA call 'science' is mostly speculation & data-free fear memes in the media. We focus instead on solid official data & expert testimony. Given your recent output do you really want to open up a discussion about who is or is not embarrassing themselves right now? — OffGuardian (@OffGuardian0) May 25, 2020
He didn’t reply.
This exchange is pretty typical of many others.
Is this ideology trumping objectivity? Is the bizarre belief that many on the Left seem to have developed that the lockdown is going to bring about revolution or some other form of benign new world order, simply overriding their common sense?
How do you become so inured to veridical reality?
And where do we go from here?
Answers on a postcard please.


offguardian--2020-05-31--“It’s all Bullsh*t” – 3 Leaks that Sink the Covid Narrative

In recent days a series of leaks across the globe have further shown the “ official line ” on coronavirus does not hold water The science of the coronavirus is not disputed .
It is well documented and openly admitted : • Most people won ’ t get the virus .
• Most of the people who get it won ’ t display symptoms .
• Most of the people who display symptoms will only be mildly sick .
• Most of the people with severe symptoms will never be critically ill. • And most of the people who get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ borne out by the numerous serological studies which show , again and again , that the infection fatality ratio is on par with flu .
There is no science – and increasingly little rational discussion – to justify the lockdown measures and overall sense of global panic .
Nevertheless , it ’ s always good to get official acknowledgement of the truth , even if it has to be leaked .
Here are three leaks showing that those in power know that the coronavirus poses no threat , and in no way justifies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the livelihoods of so many .
On May 26th Dr Alexander Myasnikov , Russia ’ s head of coronavirus information , gave an interview to former-Presidential candidate Ksenia Sobchak in which he apparently let slip his true feelings .
Believing the interview over , and the camera turned off , Myasnikov said : 2 .
“ covid-19 can not be described as a generally dangerous disease ” According to an e-mail leaked to Danish newspaper Politiken , the Danish Health Authority disagree with their government ’ s approach to the coronavirus .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here ( For those who don ’ t speak Danish , thelocal.dk have covered the story too ) .
There ’ s a lot of interesting information there , not least of which is the clear implication that politicians appear to be pressing the scientific advisors to overstate the danger ( they did the same thing in the UK ) , along with the decision of some civil servants to withhold data from the public until after the lockdown had been extended .
But by far the most important quote is from a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : On March 12th the Danish parliament passed an emergency law which – among many other things – decreased the power of the Danish Health Authority , demoting it from a “ regulatory authority ” to just an “ advisory ” one .
Earlier this month , on May 9th , a report was leaked to the German alternate media magazine Tichys Einblick titled “ Analysis of the Crisis Management ” .
The report was commissioned by the German department of the interior , but then its findings were ignored , prompting one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ non-official channels .
The fall out of that , including attacks on the authors and minimising of the report ’ s findings , is all very fascinating and we highly recommend this detailed report on Strategic Culture ( or read the full report here in German ) .
We ’ re going to focus on just the reports conclusions , including [ our emphasis ] : • The dangerousness of Covid-19 was overestimated : probably at no point did the danger posed by the new virus go beyond the normal level .
• @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that of many other viruses .
There is no evidence that this was more than a false alarm .
• During the Corona crisis the State has proved itself as one of the biggest producers of Fake News .
After being attacked in the press , and suspended from his job , the leaker and other authors of the report released a joint statement , calling on the government to respond to their findings .
If the current crisis was being approached rationally by all parties , these leaks would seal the debate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people in charge knew , from the very beginning , that the virus was not dangerous .
The question remaining is : Why are these leaks happening now ?

In recent days a series of leaks across the globe have further shown the “official line” on coronavirus does not hold water
Kit Knightly
The science of the coronavirus is not disputed. It is well documented and openly admitted:
Most people won’t get the virus.
Most of the people who get it won’t display symptoms.
Most of the people who display symptoms will only be mildly sick.
Most of the people with severe symptoms will never be critically ill.
And most of the people who get critically ill will survive.
This is borne out by the numerous serological studies which show, again and again, that the infection fatality ratio is on par with flu.
There is no science – and increasingly little rational discussion – to justify the lockdown measures and overall sense of global panic.
Nevertheless, it’s always good to get official acknowledgement of the truth, even if it has to be leaked.
Here are three leaks showing that those in power know that the coronavirus poses no threat, and in no way justifies the lockdown that is going to destroy the livelihoods of so many.
1. “It’s all bullshit!”
On May 26th Dr Alexander Myasnikov, Russia’s head of coronavirus information, gave an interview to former-Presidential candidate Ksenia Sobchak in which he apparently let slip his true feelings.
Believing the interview over, and the camera turned off, Myasnikov said:
It’s all bullshit […] It’s all exaggerated. It’s an acute respiratory disease with minimal mortality […] Why has the whole world been destroyed? That I don’t know,”
2. “covid-19 cannot be described as a generally dangerous disease”
According to an e-mail leaked to Danish newspaper Politiken, the Danish Health Authority disagree with their government’s approach to the coronavirus. They cover it in two articles here and here (For those who don’t speak Danish, thelocal.dk have covered the story too).
There’s a lot of interesting information there, not least of which is the clear implication that politicians appear to be pressing the scientific advisors to overstate the danger (they did the same thing in the UK), along with the decision of some civil servants to withhold data from the public until after the lockdown had been extended.
But by far the most important quote is from a March 15th e-mail [our emphasis]:
The Danish Health Authority continues to consider that covid-19 cannot be described as a generally dangerous disease, as it does not have either a usually serious course or a high mortality rate,”
On March 12th the Danish parliament passed an emergency law which – among many other things – decreased the power of the Danish Health Authority, demoting it from a “regulatory authority” to just an “advisory” one.
3. “A Global False Alarm”
Earlier this month, on May 9th, a report was leaked to the German alternate media magazine Tichys Einblick titled “Analysis of the Crisis Management”.
The report was commissioned by the German department of the interior, but then its findings were ignored, prompting one of the authors to release it through non-official channels.
The fall out of that, including attacks on the authors and minimising of the report’s findings, is all very fascinating and we highly recommend this detailed report on Strategic Culture (or read the full report here in German).
We’re going to focus on just the reports conclusions, including [our emphasis]:
The dangerousness of Covid-19 was overestimated: probably at no point did the danger posed by the new virus go beyond the normal level.
The danger is obviously no greater than that of many other viruses. There is no evidence that this was more than a false alarm .
. During the Corona crisis the State has proved itself as one of the biggest producers of Fake News.
After being attacked in the press, and suspended from his job, the leaker and other authors of the report released a joint statement, calling on the government to respond to their findings.
*
If the current crisis was being approached rationally by all parties, these leaks would seal the debate.
Evidence is piling up that the people in charge knew, from the very beginning, that the virus was not dangerous.
The question remaining is: Why are these leaks happening now?


offguardian--2020-06-02--WATCH: Anna Brees interviews Prof. Robert Endres

Prof Robert Endres is leader of the biological physics group and the physics of life network at Imperial College London @ @ @ @ @ independent journalist Anna Brees to discuss his issues with the Imperial Model .
“ I @ @ @ @ @ who uses his quantitative physics background to analyse biological data and to develop predictive models @ @ @ @ @ the cellular scale .
In this interview , I discuss the importance of a broad @ @ @ @ @ health crisis , which should encompass the various scientific opinions , as well as their @ @ @ @ @ economy .
Regarding scientific approaches , I would like to see the same rigorous scientific @ @ @ @ @ we expect our students to use on a daily basis , in particular the critical @ @ @ @ @ the methods and obtained results .
”

Prof Robert Endres is leader of the biological physics group and the physics of life network at Imperial College London. He sits down with independent journalist Anna Brees to discuss his issues with the Imperial Model.
“I am a fundamental research scientist who uses his quantitative physics background to analyse biological data and to develop predictive models, mostly for processes at the cellular scale. In this interview, I discuss the importance of a broad public debate of the Covid-19 health crisis, which should encompass the various scientific opinions, as well as their implications for our society and economy.
Regarding scientific approaches, I would like to see the same rigorous scientific criteria applied as the ones we expect our students to use on a daily basis, in particular the critical assessment of the limitations of the methods and obtained results.”


offguardian--2020-06-02--Are we about to see a Colour Revolution in the United States?

The familiar tropes are out in force , Trump may not weather this storm .
Are we about to see a Colour Revolution in the United States ?
It started with peaceful protests .
It always does .
Oppressed , poor or otherwise desperate people take to the streets because they don ’ t know what else to do .
Because their neighbours are doing it .
Because the world is unfair to so many people .
Because attention should be paid .
The reasons don ’ t matter .
The peacefulness does .
Nobody who is marching for justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a bakery or steal some trainers from a Nike store .
But then it starts happening .
Windows are broken .
Bricks are thrown .
Civilians are sprayed with mace .
Bystanders are caught up in the throng .
People get hurt .
It doesn ’ t need to happen , but it does .
Sometimes police panic in the face of intimidating crowds .
Sometimes protesters let their anger boil over .
A small minority of people just enjoy violence and chaos .
Others stand to benefit from it , they stoke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ molotov cocktails are flying and the snipers are shooting people on both sides .
There ’ s blood in the streets and barricades are going up and the whole thing has its own momentum .
And , through all this , the media is churning out the noise .
Partisan and dehumanising .
“ criminals ” on one side “ Fascists ” on the other .
Both sides are called thugs .
Fox News and CNN tell the same stories with reversed points of view , slashing society down the centre .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do something , so he calls in the army .
Now the press are calling him a fascist and a dictator .
They say he ’ s violated his office and he has to resign or be removed or be arrested .
I ’ m not talking about the United States .
I ’ m talking about Ukraine in 2014 .
Or Egypt and Syria in 2011 .
Or Libya in 2010 .
Or Bolivia just last winter .
Or Venezuela every year for decades .
If the events currently unfolding in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in any other country in the world , a lot of us would already have said that the US Deep State was behind it .
All the hallmarks are there .
The constructed narratives .
The handy props .
The agents provocateur .
The hysterical media .
The stench of agenda .
Consider , for a moment , that what is happening in Minneapolis and New York and Los Angeles has been happening in Paris and a host of other French cities for nearly two years .
The Guardian never called Macron a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stream about that .
Compare the coverage of the Gilets Jaunes to Black Lives Matter , and then to the Maidan protests .
The rubber bullets and tear gas are the same .
The headlines are not .
CNN has one host calling Trump a “ thug ” who ’ s “ hiding in his bunker ” , and another saying “ Trump declared war on Americans ” .
Robert Reich , writing in the Guardian , says : The Washington Post has an op-ed headlined : The corporations are all on board @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of solidarity and heartfelt Instagram posts and sending money to all the right places .
Nike had their famous ad .
Because the same companies paying slave-wages to 10-year-old Indonesian kids in vast sweatshops just hate racism and inequality , honest .
We ’ ve seen this before , haven ’ t we ?
Doesn ’ t this look like a play for an exchange of power ?
A colour revolution in the offing ?
I suppose we should ask “ why now ?
” Trump is up for re-election in just five @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t really stand a chance , but they could have him suffer “ ill health ” and pull out , replace him with a Harris or a Warren or Michelle Obama .
Hell , they could just rig it .
They ’ ve done it before .
But then maybe it ’ s not about Trump per se , maybe it ’ s about the process of elections and the office of President in general .
Maybe it ’ s about getting martial law in place well before the Covid19 backlash kicks in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coming down the pipe that will make it clearer .
Supposing the plan is to get rid of Trump , what happens next ?
Well , maybe one of a few things .
Firstly , it ’ s possible it all just dies down .
But if 2020 has taught us anything it ’ s that the Deep State doesn ’ t fold a bad hand , they just up the ante and hope to bluff it out .
Second , there ’ s the possibility Trump introduces full-on martial law and becomes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sure he has no moral compunctions about that , it ’ s hard to see he would have the ( vital ) support of the Pentagon and the intelligence agencies in that endeavour .
They ’ ve shown their colours throughout the last four years .
However useful Trump has been , he is not an insider and he is entirely disposable .
Third , and final , Trump goes .
Whether there ’ s an impeachment or a trial or an early election or a civil war…I don ’ t know .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump weathering this storm .
If I had to guess , I ’ d say the protests and pressures mount until Trump does something stupid .
If he makes any Yanukovych-style attempts at appeasement ( he probably won ’ t ) , they will be ignored or minimised or the goalposts will be moved ( we already saw that , when the arrest of Derek Chauvin went almost totally unnoticed ) .
If soldiers fire on civilians – whether Trump orders it or not , or whether mercenaries frame the army ( like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
The military will resign en masse , turn on Trump and he will be ousted .
From there could emerge an appointed “ temporary ” President , a middle-of-the-road type with support from both parties , whose job is to “ unify the country ” and “ heal the divides ” .
The emergence of a totally unelected President will , of course , be called something like “ a triumph of the democratic spirit ” in The Guardian .
The riots will be blamed for a constructed “ second wave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for one of the new POTUS ’ first announcements to be that “ America will start taking Covid19 seriously ” .
Stronger lockdown rules , mandatory track-and-trace…the full Monty .
This will naturally earn him/her good-boy points all across the mainstream media , with the ( totally accidental ) bonus that anyone who dares protest the coup will be breaking the law , being selfish and risking lives ( and probably a racist ) .
This is all just my supposition .
I could be wrong , I hope I ’ m wrong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in that direction .
And the idea should worry everyone .
Not out of any latent concern for Donald Trump , obviously .
Just for the stability of the world .
Coups or impeachments or other non-democratic power-changes are not good .
They don ’ t end well .
They don ’ t end well for the leaders being removed , who almost universally end up exiled or hanged or poisoned or shot .
Sometimes worse .
More importantly , they don ’ t end well for the ordinary people , who always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on its head .
And , in this instance , it may not end well for the world , which suddenly has a nuclear-armed superpower in a severe state of flux to worry about .
We should all be concerned .
Q : Why has there never been a military coup in the United States ?
A : Because there ’ s no American Embassy there .
It looks like maybe that no longer applies .

The familiar tropes are out in force, Trump may not weather this storm.
Are we about to see a Colour Revolution in the United States?
Kit Knightly
It started with peaceful protests. It always does. Oppressed, poor or otherwise desperate people take to the streets because they don’t know what else to do. Because their neighbours are doing it. Because the world is unfair to so many people. Because attention should be paid.
The reasons don’t matter. The peacefulness does.
Nobody who is marching for justice and change really wants to burn down a bakery or steal some trainers from a Nike store.
But then it starts happening.
Windows are broken. Bricks are thrown. Civilians are sprayed with mace. Bystanders are caught up in the throng. People get hurt.
It doesn’t need to happen, but it does.
Sometimes police panic in the face of intimidating crowds. Sometimes protesters let their anger boil over. A small minority of people just enjoy violence and chaos. Others stand to benefit from it, they stoke conflict and spread blame.
Then the molotov cocktails are flying and the snipers are shooting people on both sides. There’s blood in the streets and barricades are going up and the whole thing has its own momentum.
And, through all this, the media is churning out the noise. Partisan and dehumanising. “criminals” on one side “Fascists” on the other. Both sides are called thugs. Fox News and CNN tell the same stories with reversed points of view, slashing society down the centre.
And the chaos builds. The President has to do something, so he calls in the army.
Now the press are calling him a fascist and a dictator. They say he’s violated his office and he has to resign or be removed or be arrested.
I’m not talking about the United States.
I’m talking about Ukraine in 2014. Or Egypt and Syria in 2011. Or Libya in 2010. Or Bolivia just last winter. Or Venezuela every year for decades.
If the events currently unfolding in cities across the United States were happening in any other country in the world, a lot of us would already have said that the US Deep State was behind it. All the hallmarks are there.
The constructed narratives. The handy props. The agents provocateur. The hysterical media. The stench of agenda.
Consider, for a moment, that what is happening in Minneapolis and New York and Los Angeles has been happening in Paris and a host of other French cities for nearly two years.
The Guardian never called Macron a fascist. CNN never had a live stream about that.
Compare the coverage of the Gilets Jaunes to Black Lives Matter, and then to the Maidan protests.
The rubber bullets and tear gas are the same. The headlines are not.
CNN has one host calling Trump a “thug” who’s “hiding in his bunker”, and another saying “Trump declared war on Americans”. Robert Reich, writing in the Guardian, says:
[Trump] is no longer president. The sooner we stop treating him as if he were, the better.
The Washington Post has an op-ed headlined:
Trump must be removed. So must his congressional enablers.
Slate magazine:
Remove Trump Now
The corporations are all on board. Every one of them releasing statements of solidarity and heartfelt Instagram posts and sending money to all the right places. Nike had their famous ad.
Because the same companies paying slave-wages to 10-year-old Indonesian kids in vast sweatshops just hate racism and inequality, honest.
We’ve seen this before, haven’t we? Doesn’t this look like a play for an exchange of power? A colour revolution in the offing?
I suppose we should ask “why now?” Trump is up for re-election in just five months after all. Biden doesn’t really stand a chance, but they could have him suffer “ill health” and pull out, replace him with a Harris or a Warren or Michelle Obama. Hell, they could just rig it. They’ve done it before.
But then maybe it’s not about Trump per se, maybe it’s about the process of elections and the office of President in general. Maybe it’s about getting martial law in place well before the Covid19 backlash kicks in. Maybe there’s something else coming down the pipe that will make it clearer.
Supposing the plan is to get rid of Trump, what happens next?
Well, maybe one of a few things.
Firstly, it’s possible it all just dies down. But if 2020 has taught us anything it’s that the Deep State doesn’t fold a bad hand, they just up the ante and hope to bluff it out.
Second, there’s the possibility Trump introduces full-on martial law and becomes a quasi-dictator. While I’m sure he has no moral compunctions about that, it’s hard to see he would have the (vital) support of the Pentagon and the intelligence agencies in that endeavour. They’ve shown their colours throughout the last four years. However useful Trump has been, he is not an insider and he is entirely disposable.
Third, and final, Trump goes. Whether there’s an impeachment or a trial or an early election or a civil war…I don’t know. But it’s hard to see Trump weathering this storm.
If I had to guess, I’d say the protests and pressures mount until Trump does something stupid. If he makes any Yanukovych-style attempts at appeasement (he probably won’t), they will be ignored or minimised or the goalposts will be moved (we already saw that, when the arrest of Derek Chauvin went almost totally unnoticed).
If soldiers fire on civilians – whether Trump orders it or not, or whether mercenaries frame the army (like in Ukraine) – that will be it. The military will resign en masse, turn on Trump and he will be ousted.
From there could emerge an appointed “temporary” President, a middle-of-the-road type with support from both parties, whose job is to “unify the country” and “heal the divides”.
The emergence of a totally unelected President will, of course, be called something like “a triumph of the democratic spirit” in The Guardian.
The riots will be blamed for a constructed “second wave” of Covid19. Just in time for one of the new POTUS’ first announcements to be that “America will start taking Covid19 seriously”. Stronger lockdown rules, mandatory track-and-trace…the full Monty.
This will naturally earn him/her good-boy points all across the mainstream media, with the (totally accidental) bonus that anyone who dares protest the coup will be breaking the law, being selfish and risking lives (and probably a racist).
This is all just my supposition. I could be wrong, I hope I’m wrong. But I can see it heading in that direction. And the idea should worry everyone. Not out of any latent concern for Donald Trump, obviously. Just for the stability of the world. Coups or impeachments or other non-democratic power-changes are not good. They don’t end well.
They don’t end well for the leaders being removed, who almost universally end up exiled or hanged or poisoned or shot. Sometimes worse.
More importantly, they don’t end well for the ordinary people, who always suffer when the Deep State turns society on its head.
And, in this instance, it may not end well for the world, which suddenly has a nuclear-armed superpower in a severe state of flux to worry about.
We should all be concerned.
There’s an old joke:
Q: Why has there never been a military coup in the United States?
A: Because there’s no American Embassy there.
It looks like maybe that no longer applies.


The Minneapolis Putsch

Well , it looks like the Resistance ’ s long-anticipated “ Second Civil War ” has finally begun … more or less exactly on cue .
Rioting has broken out across the nation .
People are looting and burning stores and attacking each other in the streets .
Robocops are beating , tear-gassing , and shooting people with non-lethal projectiles .
State National Guards have been deployed , curfews imposed , “ emergencies ” declared .
Secret Servicemen are fighting back angry hordes attempting to storm the White House .
Trump is tweeting from an “ underground bunker.
” Opportunist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the political spectrum are whipping people up into white-eyed frenzies .
Americans are at each other ’ s throats , divided by identity politics , consumed by rage , hatred , and fear .
Things couldn ’ t be going better for the Resistance if they had scripted it themselves .
Actually , they did kind of script it themselves .
Not the murder of poor George Floyd , of course .
Racist police have been murdering Black people for as long as there have been racist police .
No , the Resistance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just spent the majority of the last four years creating and promoting an official narrative which casts most Americans as “ white supremacists ” who literally elected Hitler president , and who want to turn the country into a racist dictatorship .
According to this official narrative , which has been relentlessly disseminated by the corporate media , the neoliberal intelligentsia , the culture industry , and countless hysterical , Trump-hating loonies , the Russians put Donald Trump in office with those DNC emails they never hacked and some division-sowing Facebook ads that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come out and vote for Clinton .
Putin purportedly ordered this personally , as part of his plot to “ destroy democracy.
” The plan was always for President Hitler to embolden his white-supremacist followers into launching the “ RaHoWa , ” or the “ Boogaloo , ” after which Trump would declare martial law , dissolve the legislature , and pronounce himself Führer .
Then they would start rounding up and murdering the Jews , and the Blacks , and Mexicans , and other minorities , according to this twisted liberal fantasy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ roll-out and dissemination of this official narrative since 2016 , and have documented much of it in my essays , so I won ’ t reiterate all that here .
Let ’ s just say , I ’ m not exaggerating , much .
After four years of more or less constant conditioning , millions of Americans believe this fairy tale , despite the fact that there is absolutely zero evidence whatsoever to support it .
Which is not exactly a mystery or anything .
It would be rather surprising if they didn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re talking about the most formidable official propaganda machine in the history of official propaganda machines .
And now the propaganda is paying off .
The protesting and rioting that typically follows the murder of an unarmed Black person by the cops has mushroomed into “ an international uprising ” cheered on by the corporate media , corporations , and the liberal establishment , who don ’ t normally tend to support such uprisings , but they ’ ve all had a sudden change of heart , or spiritual or political awakening , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ damage , and looting , and preventative self-defense , if that ’ s what it takes to bring about justice , and to restore America to the peaceful , prosperous , non-white-supremacist paradise it was until the Russians put Donald Trump in office .
In any event , the Resistance media have now dropped their breathless coverage of the non-existent Corona-Holocaust to breathlessly cover the “ revolution.
” The American police , who just last week were national heroes for risking their lives to beat up , arrest , and generally intimidate mask-less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fascist foot soldiers of the Trumpian Reich .
The Nike corporation produced a commercial urging people to smash the windows of their Nike stores and steal their sneakers .
Liberal journalists took to Twitter , calling on rioters to “ burn that shit down !
” … until the rioters reached their gated community and started burning down their local Starbucks .
Hollywood celebrities are masking up and going full-black bloc , and doing legal support .
Chelsea Clinton is teaching children about David and the Racist Goliath .
John Cusack ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I haven ’ t checked on Rob Reiner yet , but I assume he is assembling Molotov cocktails in the basement of a Resistance safe house somewhere in Hollywood Hills .
Look , I ’ m not saying the neoliberal Resistance orchestrated or staged these riots , or “ denying the agency ” of the folks in the streets .
Whatever else is happening out there , a lot of very angry Black people are taking their frustration out on the cops , and on anyone and anything else that represents racism and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America from time to time .
America is still a racist society .
Most African-Americans are descended from slaves .
Legal racial discrimination was not abolished until the 1960s , which isn ’ t that long ago in historical terms .
I was born in the segregated American South , with the segregated schools , and all the rest of it .
I don ’ t remember it — I was born in 1961 — but I do remember the years right after it .
The South didn ’ t magically change overnight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the North ’ s variety of racism , which , yes , is subtler , but no less racist .
So I have no illusions about racism in America .
But I ’ m not really talking about racism in America .
I ’ m talking about how racism in America has been cynically instrumentalized , not by the Russians , but by the so-called Resistance , in order to delegitimize Trump and , more importantly , everyone who voted for him , as a bunch of white supremacists and racists .
Fomenting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s strategy from the beginning .
A quote attributed to Joseph Goebbels , “ accuse the other side of that which you are guilty , ” is particularly apropos in this case .
From the moment Trump won the Republican nomination , the corporate media and the rest of the Resistance have been telling us the man is literally Hitler , and that his plan is to foment racial hatred among his “ white supremacist base , ” and eventually stage some “ Reichstag ” event , declare martial law and pronounce himself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us this story over and over , on television , in the liberal press , on social media , in books , movies , and everywhere else they could possibly tell it .
So , before you go out and join the “ uprising , ” take a look at the headlines today , turn on CNN or MSNBC , and think about that for just a minute .
I don ’ t mean to spoil the party , but they ’ ve preparing you for this for the last four years .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ m not talking to you .
I wouldn ’ t presume to tell you what to do .
I ’ m talking to white folks like myself , who are cheering on the rioting and looting , and are coming out to “ help ” you with it , but who will be back home in their gated communities when the ashes have cooled , and the corporate media are gone , and the cops return to “ police ” your neighborhoods .
OK , and this is where I have to restate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ readers ) that I ’ m not a fan of Donald Trump , and that I think he ’ s a narcissistic ass clown , and a glorified con man , and … blah blah blah , because so many people have been so polarized by insane propaganda and mass hysteria that they can ’ t even read or think anymore , and so just scan whatever articles they encounter to see whose “ side ” the author is on and then mindlessly celebrate or excoriate it .
If you ’ re doing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ … whichever side you ’ re on , I ’ m not on it .
I realize that ’ s extremely difficult for a lot of folks to comprehend these days , which is part of the point I ’ ve been trying to make .
I ’ ll try again , as plainly as I can .
America is still a racist country , but America is no more racist today than it was when Barack Obama was president .
A lot of American police are brutal , but no more brutal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t radically change the day Donald Trump was sworn into office .
All that has changed is the official narrative .
And it will change back as soon as Trump is gone and the ruling classes have no further use for it .
And that will be the end of the War on Populism , and we will switch back to the War on Terror , or maybe the Brave New Pathologized Normal … or whatever Orwellian official narrative the folks at GloboCap have in store for us .
CJ Hopkins @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and political satirist based in Berlin .
His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing and Broadway Play Publishing , Inc. His dystopian novel , Zone 23 , is published by Snoggsworthy , Swaine & Cormorant .
Volume I of his Consent Factory Essays is published by Consent Factory Publishing , a wholly-owned subsidiary of Amalgamated Content , Inc .
He can be reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org .

CJ Hopkins
Well, it looks like the Resistance’s long-anticipated “Second Civil War” has finally begun … more or less exactly on cue. Rioting has broken out across the nation. People are looting and burning stores and attacking each other in the streets. Robocops are beating, tear-gassing, and shooting people with non-lethal projectiles.
State National Guards have been deployed, curfews imposed, “emergencies” declared. Secret Servicemen are fighting back angry hordes attempting to storm the White House. Trump is tweeting from an “underground bunker.”
Opportunist social media pundits on both sides of the political spectrum are whipping people up into white-eyed frenzies. Americans are at each other’s throats, divided by identity politics, consumed by rage, hatred, and fear.
Things couldn’t be going better for the Resistance if they had scripted it themselves.
Actually, they did kind of script it themselves. Not the murder of poor George Floyd, of course. Racist police have been murdering Black people for as long as there have been racist police. No, the Resistance didn’t manufacture racism.
They just spent the majority of the last four years creating and promoting an official narrative which casts most Americans as “white supremacists” who literally elected Hitler president, and who want to turn the country into a racist dictatorship.
According to this official narrative, which has been relentlessly disseminated by the corporate media, the neoliberal intelligentsia, the culture industry, and countless hysterical, Trump-hating loonies, the Russians put Donald Trump in office with those DNC emails they never hacked and some division-sowing Facebook ads that supposedly hypnotized Black Americans into refusing to come out and vote for Clinton.
Putin purportedly ordered this personally, as part of his plot to “destroy democracy.”
The plan was always for President Hitler to embolden his white-supremacist followers into launching the “RaHoWa,” or the “Boogaloo,” after which Trump would declare martial law, dissolve the legislature, and pronounce himself Führer. Then they would start rounding up and murdering the Jews, and the Blacks, and Mexicans, and other minorities, according to this twisted liberal fantasy.
I’ve been covering the roll-out and dissemination of this official narrative since 2016, and have documented much of it in my essays, so I won’t reiterate all that here. Let’s just say, I’m not exaggerating, much.
After four years of more or less constant conditioning, millions of Americans believe this fairy tale, despite the fact that there is absolutely zero evidence whatsoever to support it. Which is not exactly a mystery or anything. It would be rather surprising if they didn’t believe it. We’re talking about the most formidable official propaganda machine in the history of official propaganda machines.
And now the propaganda is paying off. The protesting and rioting that typically follows the murder of an unarmed Black person by the cops has mushroomed into “an international uprising” cheered on by the corporate media, corporations, and the liberal establishment, who don’t normally tend to support such uprisings, but they’ve all had a sudden change of heart, or spiritual or political awakening, and are down for some serious property damage, and looting, and preventative self-defense, if that’s what it takes to bring about justice, and to restore America to the peaceful, prosperous, non-white-supremacist paradise it was until the Russians put Donald Trump in office.
In any event, the Resistance media have now dropped their breathless coverage of the non-existent Corona-Holocaust to breathlessly cover the “revolution.”
The American police, who just last week were national heroes for risking their lives to beat up, arrest, and generally intimidate mask-less “lockdown violators” are now the fascist foot soldiers of the Trumpian Reich.
The Nike corporation produced a commercial urging people to smash the windows of their Nike stores and steal their sneakers.
Liberal journalists took to Twitter, calling on rioters to “burn that shit down!” … until the rioters reached their gated community and started burning down their local Starbucks. Hollywood celebrities are masking up and going full-black bloc, and doing legal support. Chelsea Clinton is teaching children about David and the Racist Goliath. John Cusack’s bicycle was attacked by the pigs.
I haven’t checked on Rob Reiner yet, but I assume he is assembling Molotov cocktails in the basement of a Resistance safe house somewhere in Hollywood Hills.
Look, I’m not saying the neoliberal Resistance orchestrated or staged these riots, or “denying the agency” of the folks in the streets. Whatever else is happening out there, a lot of very angry Black people are taking their frustration out on the cops, and on anyone and anything else that represents racism and injustice to them.
This happens in America from time to time. America is still a racist society. Most African-Americans are descended from slaves. Legal racial discrimination was not abolished until the 1960s, which isn’t that long ago in historical terms.
I was born in the segregated American South, with the segregated schools, and all the rest of it. I don’t remember it — I was born in 1961 — but I do remember the years right after it. The South didn’t magically change overnight in July of 1964. Nor did the North’s variety of racism, which, yes, is subtler, but no less racist.
So I have no illusions about racism in America. But I’m not really talking about racism in America. I’m talking about how racism in America has been cynically instrumentalized, not by the Russians, but by the so-called Resistance, in order to delegitimize Trump and, more importantly, everyone who voted for him, as a bunch of white supremacists and racists.
Fomenting racial division has been the Resistance’s strategy from the beginning. A quote attributed to Joseph Goebbels, “accuse the other side of that which you are guilty,” is particularly apropos in this case. From the moment Trump won the Republican nomination, the corporate media and the rest of the Resistance have been telling us the man is literally Hitler, and that his plan is to foment racial hatred among his “white supremacist base,” and eventually stage some “Reichstag” event, declare martial law and pronounce himself dictator.
They’ve been telling us this story over and over, on television, in the liberal press, on social media, in books, movies, and everywhere else they could possibly tell it.
So, before you go out and join the “uprising,” take a look at the headlines today, turn on CNN or MSNBC, and think about that for just a minute. I don’t mean to spoil the party, but they’ve preparing you for this for the last four years.
Not you Black folks. I’m not talking to you. I wouldn’t presume to tell you what to do. I’m talking to white folks like myself, who are cheering on the rioting and looting, and are coming out to “help” you with it, but who will be back home in their gated communities when the ashes have cooled, and the corporate media are gone, and the cops return to “police” your neighborhoods.
OK, and this is where I have to restate (for the benefit of my partisan readers) that I’m not a fan of Donald Trump, and that I think he’s a narcissistic ass clown, and a glorified con man, and … blah blah blah, because so many people have been so polarized by insane propaganda and mass hysteria that they can’t even read or think anymore, and so just scan whatever articles they encounter to see whose “side” the author is on and then mindlessly celebrate or excoriate it.
If you’re doing that, let me help you out … whichever side you’re on, I’m not on it.
I realize that’s extremely difficult for a lot of folks to comprehend these days, which is part of the point I’ve been trying to make. I’ll try again, as plainly as I can.
America is still a racist country, but America is no more racist today than it was when Barack Obama was president. A lot of American police are brutal, but no more brutal than when Obama was president. America didn’t radically change the day Donald Trump was sworn into office.
All that has changed is the official narrative. And it will change back as soon as Trump is gone and the ruling classes have no further use for it.
And that will be the end of the War on Populism, and we will switch back to the War on Terror, or maybe the Brave New Pathologized Normal … or whatever Orwellian official narrative the folks at GloboCap have in store for us.
CJ Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and political satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing and Broadway Play Publishing, Inc. His dystopian novel, Zone 23, is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. Volume I of his Consent Factory Essays is published by Consent Factory Publishing, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Amalgamated Content, Inc. He can be reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org.