December 22, 2019
Ecclesiastes 9:12 For man also knoweth not his time: as the fishes that are taken in an evil net, and as the birds that are caught in the snare; so are the sons of men snared in an evil time, when it falleth suddenly upon them.
“DRAGANfly, really could it not be any more in our face? From Mask to Mark; -swordofthespiritmind
“the act of blanking out, the willful suspension of one’s consciousness, the refusal to think - not blindness, but the refusal to see; not ignorance, but the refusal to know. It is the act of unfocusing your mind and inducing an inner fog to escape the responsibility of judgment - on the unstated premise that a thing will not exist if only you refuse to identify it, that A will not be A so long as you do not pronounce the verdict ‘It is.” – John Gault; Atlas Shrugged
“Police in Westport, Conn., said they will be testing a "pandemic drone" that can scan the body temperatures of residents to determine if they have fevers or other health symptoms in an effort to combat the coronavirus. Aerospace company Draganfly announced in a news release the drones will be equipped with a specialized sensor and computer vision systems that can display heart and respiratory rates. They can also detect people coughing in crowds, police said.”
“Police also plan to monitor how residents are social distancing in public areas where groups may be congregating, including beaches, train stations, parks, and shopping centers. The technology can detect certain infectious conditions from 190-feet away, the release added.”
Revelation 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: 17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
May 3, 2020
China has been doing such heat monitoring of crowds for COVID-19 detection for some time...
Coronavirus control: Drones with thermal imaging technology adopted in central China
Feb 16, 2020
New China TV
But should the USA be blindly following China's authoritarian practices? I think not!
One thing that really bothers me lately is the use of the term "social distancing." I wonder who proposed this destructive, inaccurate term? Even the World Health Organization (WHO) advocates *not* using the term, but rather advocates the more accurate term "physical distancing"...
The WHO announced that it was moving away from the term "social distancing" in a briefing on March 20. Maria Van Kerkhove, an infectious diseases epidemiologist with the WHO, reiterated that stance in a news conference on Wednesday.
"We've been saying 'physical distancing' because it's important to remain physically separate but socially connected," Van Kerkove said, adding that people should be looking after their mental health and that of their loved ones during the pandemic.
Yet nowhere in real life have I seen or heard the term "physical distancing". In fact, *every* sign I've seen on every door of every business where I live uses the inaccurate term. Did someone order them to use that term? Or are all businesses in town managed by dummies who just copy what other businesses do, without any thought? Is the media promoting that term, and managers just blindly repeat what they hear, as if the media can be trusted? Some people say that this promotion of misused terminology is intentional, to keep the public from working together, which will of course benefit those in power who are much more organized. I would not be at all surprised to find this is why yet another inaccurate term is being pushed on the public, like the inaccurate terms "conspiracy theorist", "assault weapon", "quantum supremacy", etc. have been pushed in the past.
Another major problem with the term "social distancing" is that it is almost the same as the term "social distance," which is a term with a very different meaning, which supports the claim that government is hoping people will subconsciously confuse the two so that people will tend to look down on one another, as if we don't have enough of that already...
Social distance describes the distance between different groups in society, such as social class, race/ethnicity, gender or sexuality. Different groups mix less than members of the same group. It is the measure of nearness or intimacy that an individual or group feels towards another individual or group in a social network or the level of trust one group has for another and the extent of perceived likeness of beliefs.
The Elites definitely fear the power of an organized public. Organization is what keeps the Elites always in control, and keeps the general public in the state of always being controlled.
Long Live the Revolution!
History provides ample evidence for the crucial importance of
large-scale cooperation. Victory almost invariably went to those
who cooperated better--not only in struggles between Homo
sapiens and other animals, but also in conflicts between different
human groups. Thus Rome conquered Greece not because the
Romans had larger brains or better toolmaking techniques, but
because they were able to cooperate more effectively. Throughout
history, disciplined armies easily routed disorganized hordes, and
unified elites dominated the disorderly masses. In 1914, for example,
3 million Russian noblemen, officials and business people lorded
it over 18 million peasants and workers. The Russian elite knew
how to cooperate in defence of its common interests, whereas the
180 million commoners were incapable of effective mobilisation.
Indeed, much of the elite's efforts focused on ensuring that the
180 million people at the bottom would never learn to cooperate.
All this happened live on Romanian television, as three-quarters
of the populace sat glued to the screens, their hearts throbbing
wildly. The notorious secret police--the Securitate--immediately
ordered the broadcast to be stopped, but the television crews dis-
obeyed. The cameraman pointed the camera towards the sky so
that viewers couldn't see the panic among the party leaders on
the balcony, but the soundman kept recording, and the techni-
cians continued the transmission. The whole of Romania heard
the crowd booing, while Ceausescu yelled, 'Hello! Hello! Hello!'
as if the problem was with the microphone. His wife Elena began
scolding the audience. 'Be quiet! Be quiet!' until Ceausescu turned
and yelled at her--still live on television--'You be quiet!' Ceausescu
then appealed to the excited crowds in the square, imploring them,
'Comrades! Comrades! Be quiet, comrades!'
But the comrades were unwilling to be quiet. Communist
Romania crumbled when 80,000 people in the Bucharest central
square realized they were much stronger than the old man in the
fur hat on the balcony. What is truly astounding, however, is not
the moment the system collapsed, but the fact that it managed
to survive for decades. Why are revolutions so rare? Why do the
masses sometimes clap and cheer for centuries on end, doing
everything the man on the balcony commands them, even though
they could in theory charge forward at any moment and tear him
Ceausescu and his cronies dominated 200 million Romanians
for four decades because they ensured three vital conditions. First,
they placed loyal communist apparatchiks in control of all net-
works of cooperation, such as the army, trade unions and even
sports associations. Second, they prevented the creation of any
rival organizations--whether political, economic or social--which
might serve as a basis for anti-communist cooperation. Third, they
relied on the support of sister communist parties in the Soviet
Union and eastern Europe. Despite occasional tensions, these par-
ties helped each other in times of need, or at least guaranteed that
no outsider poked his nose into the socialist paradise. Under such
conditions, despite all the hardship and suffering inflicted on them
by the ruling elite, the 200 million Romanians were unable to organ-
ise any effective opposition.
Ceausescu fell from power only once all three conditions no
longer held. In the late 1980s the Soviet Union withdrew its protec-
tion and the communist regimes began falling like dominoes. By
December 1989 Ceausescu could not expect any outside assistance.
Just the opposite--revolutions in nearby countries gave heart to the
local opposition. The Communist Party itself began splitting into
rival camps. The moderates wished to rid themselves of Ceausescu
and initiate reforms before it was too late. By organising the
Bucharest demonstration and broadcasting it live on television,
Ceausescu himself provided the revolutionaries with the perfect
opportunity to discover their power and rally against him. What
quicker way to spread a revolution than by showing it on TV?
Yet when power slipped from the hands of the clumsy organiser
on the balcony, it did not pass to the masses in the square. Though
numerous and enthusiastic, the crowds did not know how to organ-
ise themselves. Hence just as in Russia in 1917, power passed to a
small group of political players whose only asset was good organisa-
tion. The Romanian Revolution was hijacked by the self-proclaimed
National Salvation Front, which was in fact a smokescreen for the
moderate wing of the Communist Party. The Front had no real ties
to the demonstrating crowds. It was manned by mid-ranking party
officials, and led by Ion Iliescu, a former member of the Communist
Party's central committee and one-time head of the propaganda
department. Iliescu and his comrades in the National Salvation
Front reinvented themselves as democratic politicians, proclaimed
to any available microphone that they were the leaders of the revo-
lution, and then used their long experience and network of cronies
to take control of the country and pocket its resources.
Harari, Yuval Noah. 2017. Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.