Note: This page deals with the emotional manipulation of the population by the media.
If you're looking for the statistical manipulation of the COVID19 numbers, please see Part 2: Cooking the Numbers
If you get your "news" from big corporations, either by watching a lot of television, or consuming TV media's corresponding Youtube channels, then you might be shaking and shivering on your couch, obsessively repeating in your mind phrases like:
"The hospitals are overwhelmed!"
"Doctors and nurses are exhausted!"
"People are dying everywhere!"
"Body-bags are piling up!"
Please, folks, you have to get wise to how the media operates. Their whole job is to manipulate your emotions.
Are people dying out there? Of course. But that does not mean there's a "pandemic."
Hospitals always have sick people, and people have been dying in hospitals every day, of every year, for centuries. Stress and chaos have always flourished within their walls.
The pertinent question is how many, and how often.
It's a matter of proportion.
This is what determines whether there's a "pandemic", an "emergency", a "crisis", and so on.
And as we saw in Part 2: Cooking the Numbers, the numbers are not at pandemic levels.
"But I saw the footage! Hospitals are overwhelmed! Doctors are breaking down and crying! People are dying! Are you saying the footage is fake?"
It doesn't need to be fake in order to be misleading.
This principle is called outlier hyperfocus.
It involves picking a few statistical outliers (rare events), and then focusing all of the cameras on them, and thereby making it seem like what's happening to them is happening everywhere, to everyone.
Let's recall some historical examples.
Remember how they spent decades scaremongering us about "drugs"?
All they had to do was find a few people who smoked weed, and also committed crimes...
...just a few people...
- and they could make weed-induced crime look like a pandemic.
They would bring in the cameras and focus all their attention on a small number of people, make tear-jerker films about them, complete with sobbing family members and sad music... and these stories all over the airwaves, in documentaries and public service announcements and commercials.
...ignoring the fact that, when it comes to potentially lethal drugs like heroin, the illegality is what makes them lethal in the first place (since you can't measure an accurate dose if you're getting it from the black market)...
Logic is always the first victim of media sensationalism. But not the last.
These commercials actually caused more people to die, since they caused prohibition to continue, which prevented users from being able to accurately measure their doses.
But that doesn't matter. All that matters is crafting the narrative.
Did some people already have latent psychological problems, which drug-use triggered? Sure.
But these are a tiny minority.
And it doesn't matter how tiny that minority is! All it takes is a few. That's all the media needs, in order to make it seem like everyone who uses any illegal herb is going on a crime-spree.
And when it comes to LSD, all they needed was one person. Literally, one person who took LSD and then jumped off a roof because he thought he "could fly", and they made it look like LSD sends everyone jumping off the roof.
And the technique worked. It manufactured consent for the "war on drugs" for 50 years.
Let's fast-forward to 9/11 and terrorism:
All they had to find was one guy sneaking a bomb somewhere in his shoe, and one guy mailing anthrax letters, they can make it seem like there are terrorists lurking around every corner.
And it worked. It manufactured consent for the "war on terror" - a new wave of civil-rights repression and imperial conquest of half the globe, for 20 years, and counting.
This is what the media does. This is its job. This is what it's good at.
A responsible citizen does not allow
themselves to be fooled by this.
And if ever there were a time
to be responsible citizens,
And now we come to the COVID19 mass-hysteria.
Let's go through the components of the narrative, one by one, and expose their distortions:
Narrative Component A:
"Hospitals in the USA and everywhere are overwhelmed with a gigantic flood of patients! There has to be a pandemic, if the hospitals are this inundated with patients!"
There are three problems with this narrative.
First of all, if hospitals are flooded, this can be attributed to the media - not to a virus.
The media is scaring everyone shitless, to the point that every person with a temperature or a cough is heading directly to the hospital.
Of course this is overwhelming the hospitals.
The mass-panic going on right now would be enough to overwhelm hospitals, even in a normal year, even if there were no special new virus.
What do you think would happen even in a normal year if EVERYONE WITH A TEMPERATURE headed straight to the hospital?
They'd be overwhelmed.
You don't need a novel pandemic for that to happen. All you need is a media scaring the shit out of everyone.
Secondly, "overwhelmed hospitals" is not a new thing. It happens. Just a couple of years ago, hospitals were overwhelmed from the seasonal flu.
Notice the year. 2018.
Here's the article, in case you want to read it.
This begs the question: If we weren't going crazy about overwhelmed hospitals in any other year, why did we suddenly start this year?
If hospitals treating patients in tents was not "news" last year, why does it suddenly become news this year?
Why does it suddenly become a "justification" for the most massive expansion of fascistic government powers since 9/11?
(Don't worry - these questions will be answered as you read on)
Most hospitals are not even flooded.
In fact, very few of them, it seems.
The hashtag #FilmYourHospital has been trending. In it, citizen journalists venture to the hospitals in their cities that the news-media says are "overwhelmed", only to find that they're virtually empty, or operating normally. They capture this on camera, so it's hard to argue that it's "fake news."
Here's a handy compilation, to get you started:
Here's some more:
New York City Man does his own checks asks questions ??
"But I also saw footage on CNN of hospitals that ARE overwhelmed!"
Again, this exemplifies the media's outlier hyperfocus.
All it takes is one or two overwhelmed hospitals in the entire country, and if billion-dollar-funded networks converge on them, they can make it seem like it's the every hospital in the world.
Citizen journalists are filming the exact hospitals that the news-media tells us are crowded, and showing that they're not.
Crowded hospitals are apparently so hard to find, that some networks, like CBS, are using fake footage from other hospitals, in other countries!
CBS later admitted it:
They say they "made a mistake." But was it, really?
The original clip (from Italy) has a Sky News logo in the upper left corner. (Look at it - you can see it). In order to produce their own plagiarized version, CBS would have needed to remove the logo.
They knew exactly what they were doing.
Why did they need to do something like this? Were they unable to find an actual overwhelmed hospital in New York?
Perhaps that was exactly the problem!
Former US Naval Intelligence Officer John Jordan says "hospitals aren't being overrun" in direct contravention to what US experts were saying and projected numbers of sick people "just aren't materialising".
"A lot of these hospital expansions and field hospitals are empty," he said. "They've turned convention centres into field hospitals and there are no patients in there; the US Navy hospital ships only have a few patients on board."
Narrative Component B:
"I saw footage of patients laying in beds with tubes in their mouths!"
Remember, all it takes to make a "story" is a few people.
And they don't even need a "novel virus" in order to do this. They could do this with flu patients, in a normal year, if they were motivated to do so. Flu patients often require intubations.
Narrative Component C:
"People have died!"
People die of respiratory ailments every year. Including from the flu.
In a normal year, the media *could* (if they wanted to) go into hospitals, film flu patients dying, (because 0.1% of flu patients do die) and use the footage to scare the shit out of you. They could even seek out the handful of "young, otherwise healthy patients" (the statistical outliers) who are having complications (like pneumonia) from the flu, (because they do exist) and then use that to make everyone think that ALL young, healthy people are in "imminent mortal danger."
They can do this even in a normal year. It does not require the presence of a novel monster-plague!
And is this a monster plague? To answer that question, we have to look at actual numbers. Actual data.
And as we showed in Part 2: Cooking the Numbers , the answer is no.
Narrative Component D:
"Doctors and nurses are dying!"
Every year, doctors and nurses die. They work with people who have various infections, and sometimes they catch those infections themselves, and sometimes they die. This happens every year. The difference is, it never used to be filmed. It didn't get splashed all over the news.
When it's splashed all over the news, outlier hyperfocus makes you think that it's a "new thing."
Remember, all it takes is a few... and the media can work with it, to blow it up like a balloon, and make you think it's happening to "everyone, everywhere."
Narrative Component E:
Bodybags Piling Up
"But there are bodybags piling up! There are so many bodies, they don't have anywhere to put them all!"
The reason the bodies are "piling up" is not because there are "more" of them - it's because the protocols for disposing of them have changed.
Governments have instructed hospitals to treat all bodies as potential biohazards, which requires different methods of disposal.
Normally, the funeral homes simply come in each day to collect bodies of the deceased. They come in, pick them up, load them into the vehicle, and take them to the funeral home.
But now, they can't do that. They now need special refrigerated trucks, special protective gear, and so forth. This is difficult to do, and it's slowing down the process. Thus, they're "piling up."
Did CNN mention this information in their "Oh my gosh, bodybags" report that you watched? Betting they didn't.
Narrative Component F:
"I saw on the news they're digging mass graves!
MASS FUCKING GRAVES!!!!!!!!!"
Who is this "they"?
It's actually one city - New York - and the phenomenon is not new - it's 150 years old.
They're talking about Hart Island - a place where the city buries people who had no next-of-kin to claim them. People without families. Or, more importantly, people whose families didn't come to claim their body. Who didn't come in time.
"But the numbers have ramped up! They used to bury 25 a week! Now they're burying 25 a day!"
Are you talking about articles like this one?
First of all, it's 25 a day 5 days a week - so really, it's more like 17 per day.
But more importantly, there is a reason for the increase, and it's not an increase in deaths.
Normally, NYC hospitals keep a cadaver for 30-60 days, waiting for it to be claimed, and if it's not claimed in that time, they send it to Hart Island.
And guess what: The City changed that time frame, reducing it down to 6 days.
That'll do it.
If you reduce the time window for people to claim bodies, then obviously you will have many more of them unclaimed, sending them off to the "mass grave" on the island.
Did the article/broadcast you read/watched mention that?
Didn't think so.
To be fair, they did re-raise the time-window back up again - up to 14 days - still less than half (or a quarter) of the normal window.
"But they increased the time-window from 6 days back up to 14 days. Not the full 30-60 days, admittedly... but still, it's no longer just 6. They brought it up to 14."
But not before they had time to collect the shocking statistics from the period with the 6-day window! They collected those statistics, published them in fear-porn articles FIRST, and THEN raised the time-window back up again (sort of).
See how they do it?
Narrative Component H:
"But I keep seeing Twitter tweets by people who lost friends/family to the virus."
Twitter has an algorithm that determines which tweets you see. It can easily be programmed to elevate tweets with certain "keywords" to the top, so that you see them.
Let's look at numbers.
There are 68 million Americans on Twitter.
That's about 1/5 of the U.S. population.
As of April 2nd, there have been about 4500 deaths in the USA attributed to COVID.
Even if everyone on Twitter who knows a COVID victim makes a tweet about their loss, that's still a very small number of tweets, in a pool of 68 million users.
What is the likelihood of that small number making it constantly to the top of everyone's feed, every day, just by chance, by a fair and un-biased algorithm?
It's far more likely that Twitter has modified its algorithm to elevate tweets that mention "COVID" and "loss" or "died" in the same tweet.
And it's also very likely that if you asked them about this, they'd say "Yes, that's exactly what we're doing", and use the excuse of "we need to, in order to showcase the severity of what's going on." They do this kind of stuff openly, counting on the public to fail to connect the dots.