- What to do now?
- Why the reopening has proven to be safe (and necessary)
- The need to attribute responsibility to the institutions
«THE PROTAGONISTS OF THE CATASTROPHE
OF THE measures TAKEN FOR THE CORONAVIRUS 2020I
REFUSE THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES:
the experts say
“We didn’t make the decisions,”
the rulers say
“it’s not our fault because
we have been ravaged by incapable consultants”»
So that the catastrophe created by the measures
of the “Coronavirus 2020 emergency”
does not happen again, it is necessary
to be able to attribute the responsibilities
of these disastrous choices
to the Rulers and to the “Experts”who have
in some way participated in this action.
Whoever made a mistake (creating catastrophic damage without having any real justification on the part) must be identified and
1) must lose the possibility of operating again in the scientific and government institutions.
Above all, it must become clear to the voters what are the serious faults of the people who have adopted the “emergency measures” for Coronavirus 2020 – the main problem is that these people have moved on the basis of interests (financial, ideological, etc.) that are in conflict with those of the Citizens for whom they work: and that this way of operating conditions their choices in any other aspect of their activity (the same mechanisms used for the Coronavirus 2020 epidemic are used to manage public finances, to manipulate elections, to give an ideological direction to public education, etc …).
2) must somehow pay for the damage created.
One of the principles of modern Justice is that the people responsible for creating harm must also be punished for it to be clear to everyone else that there is no convenience in doing so – the absence of punishment, on the other hand, would make this harmful action an example of reference for those who want to develop their own specific interests through such an action.
In addition, there must do:
3) a clarification of the responsibilities of the Media
so that it is clear to the Public which Media are capable of lying shamelessly (even when they cannot be unaware of spreading false news).
4) an initiative that leads to re-found some aspects of the Government system (of Democracy) in the direction of:
● greater participation of Citizens in government issues; a mode that can only work is obtained:
● a greater diffusion of “free information” (up to now there is a censorship made not only by social channels such as Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, but also by the deprivation of some channels of the possibility of self financing).
Analysis of the problems created by government and scientific institutions
The facts that emerge from the experience of Coronavirus 2020:
■ the Scientific Commissions (those that are based on truly scientific demonstration processes) have clarified how it was an epidemic of a normal flu (no more dangerous than those of previous years).
■ government Institutions have taken measures such as the Society lockdown for no valid reason: the “Coronavirus danger” was already a fake news from the beginning (a pure narrative such as that of the Martian Invasion, invented by Orson Wells, was taken as a pretext, who panicked USA in the 1930s <see Article>).
● the measures imposed by the Governments have produced more damage than the influence COVID-19 would have created see Source As early as March 17th on the New York Times «The irony of successful social distancing is that fewer will develop immunity. That means that social distancing 2.0, 3.0 and, who knows, maybe even 4.0 will very likely have to occur. The next round of social distancing will be activated more rapidly, because officials — and the public — will be more prepared. It should also be shorter, because we can assume that most of the people who were initially infected are likely to be immune next time around. But it will still disrupt people’s lives and the economy. We will still have canceled conferences and sporting events. People will not frequent restaurants and will not travel. The service industry will be severely curtailed. And it’s going to happen again and again.» < see Article >
As early as March 17th on the New York Times «The irony of successful social distancing is that fewer will develop immunity. That means that social distancing 2.0, 3.0 and, who knows, maybe even 4.0 will very likely have to occur.
The next round of social distancing will be activated more rapidly, because officials — and the public — will be more prepared. It should also be shorter, because we can assume that most of the people who were initially infected are likely to be immune next time around. But it will still disrupt people’s lives and the economy. We will still have canceled conferences and sporting events. People will not frequent restaurants and will not travel. The service industry will be severely curtailed. And it’s going to happen again and again.» < see Article >
● it emerged as (and this is the determined point):
– there is an institutional Power that aims to achieve political ends by acting “outside the rules”.
– this action – “illegal” according to modern Constitutions – is also based on the transmission of bogus information by “authoritative” institutions such as scientific ones (that is, it emerged how we live in a culture in which truth has been replaced with a form authoritatively created by institutions and media).
That is, in the experience of Coronavirus 2020 it emerged how government institutions in the future can – “outside the rules” – impose measures of the same type on citizens, suppressing the fundamental human rights guaranteed by the Constitutions, such as the right to choose the treatment (as is the case where mandatory vaccination is required).
Measures that can seriously affect people’s health and social well-being conditions.
For this reason
it is necessary to investigate in depth the events related to Coronavirus 2020.
That is, among other things, it is necessary to understand:
● the responsibilities of the institutions and people in the catastrophic “mistakes” committed.
● why this could have happened: only then will it be possible to understand how to remedy:
– “reforming” the Government mechanisms to bring them back to a dimension of real Democracy.
– creating alternative information channels that can allow the disclosure of information capable of countering the false information disclosed by the institutions (today this is impossible due to the censorship applied by social media in favor of the “official” institutions).