GOP's Astroturfing defeated by Consciousness

On Facebook it's plenty of anti-conservative groups and social pages publishing cartoons or funny images portraying the latest devilish outburst of these "wingnuts", as Right Wing Extremists are usually called by the liberal media.

You can read the latest Bill O' Reilly's nonsensical rant about "Obamacare promoting selfishness" or Ken Cuccinelli raving that "oral sex is a communist plot". 

For some reason, wingnuts use harsh and blatant tones like if they're always addressing a brawling crowd in a night cellar.

Instead this is not something to laugh at. These people's communication strategy is extremely and carefully pondered. Their nonsensical rants over extremely sensitive social issues are all part of a nefarious strategy to attract the sympathy of their audience segment and beyond. 

The GOP's communication strategy is basically focused on one single keyword: Emotions. 

Playing with emotions is the key to reach the people's emotional sphere bypassing their consciousness and rationality.

By Doing so they make people let them into their emotional sphere so that they can prop up their huge clashing contradictions, because average people's mind relies on the very basic principle that "seeing is believing". 

Just an example: after having tried to repeal for 42 times the Healthcare reform which aims at saving the lives of about 50.000 people each year and tried to cut $40 bn of food stamps which support 40 millions of American citizens and after having threatened to shut down the government to defund Obamacare, Republican Senator Ted Cruz was portrayed while praying hand in hand with other "people" in front of the White House. A real display of hypocrisy indeed.

However instead of having bystanders spitting on his face, (they probably hired an army of policemen plus private security) he made himself the opportunity to take this picture:

What he was praying for? These are the kind of questions average people don't ask themselves, as average people only see the exterior side: "this humble politician asks for the help of god". It doesn't matter if he's a mass killer. He's praying hand in hand with an elderly citizen, a woman, a pastor and a black man. This picture is a flashy postcard that aims at representing a stereotyped old fashioned image of a society, (which doesn't exist anymore), tied-in by the faithful Republican man. 

Although in this picture there's nothing of today's real society, there is no same-sex family and there are no children. This picture is Astroturfing(1) at its best. 

First of all this picture lacks authenticity because these propaganda amateurs made two major mistakes: 

1) the first is they "forgot" to include children and they did it on purpose because otherwise the attention would have been focused on the kids instead of Ted Cruz whose face is the missile that has to reach the emotional side of the audience. 2) The biggest mistake is represented by the fact that praying is a very intimate moment and such a public display of "faith" is at least anachronistic, because people today do not pray in public and it belongs more to a psychiatric environment rather than politics. 

Praying is a moment of intimacy between yourself and God, so the public display of faith is something that only prophets and saints have done in the past and Republicans chose to present a medieval setting which confirms their refusal to accept reality and their living in total denial. 

The intentions of this very-non-subliminal message is "Ted Cruz is a prophet". A prophet that aims at cutting people's food stamps and healthcare assistance. Amen. 

However in order to be successful, such a public performance needs extremely talented players because otherwise, (like in this case) the outcome can be a total disaster and it can produce opposite effects of what you desired in the first place.

While Astroturfing is a wonderful idea, you always have to consider that human beings are substantially "living Consciousness", who carry values and beliefs, (unless they are complete sociopaths).

Unfortunately for these amateurs, Consciousness is unable to lie and you can't hide it in a box and unless you hire professional actors, Consciousness always outs to manifest its real feelings, despite what the script says. Nonetheless even if these people perfectly knew it, they insisted using non-professional actors for these public display of religious faith.

Archetypal postures is a subject of study within the discipline of Anthropology, the science that studies human behavior. If you look at the praying picture above and focus your attention on the green-dressed woman kneeling on the right side of the picture, you will notice that her head does not bow down straight ahead but it's clearly turned to her lower-left, while usually when you pray you bow the head down as a sign of submission to God, not towards the left or the right. 

Why this woman turns her head to her left-down side instead of bowing her head straight ahead? 

Shame. 

Despite what she's been told to do, this woman's consciousness made its way up to the surface and she's actually not even looking left, she's looking away in sign of shame. She feels ashamed of what she's doing because she knows what she's doing is not ethical and not moral according to the values she grew up with. 

This posture not only is able to literally kill the picture, but to completely destroy the whole plan of showing faith, because the picture thanks to this woman, acquires a new meaning and the new meaning is "the revolt of Consciousness". You can tell her attitude is coherent because she's the only one who doesn't hold the hand of the fellow next to her, interrupting the human chain while the old man next to her he's hiding himself too, but he's not displaying the same level of shame she is.

Unfortunately for these "Astroturfing amateurs", Consciousness always outs, and what's even worse is that the photographer (just for pure luck) was able to catch one of those rarest moments in life in which you see Consciousness in action. 

That woman's unique pose indeed represents the moment in which Consciousness embodies an archetypal feeling that is already present in the collective imagery, which is something that takes place once in a million times. And that feeling is Shame. But not simple shame, Universal Shame. The Archetypal Shame. The picture was probably taken by chance or by a unique combination of factors that happen when the Universe collides together with Consciousness.

That picture will go down in history as a  legendary iconic image of Consciousness Awakening and its value is incommensurate. 

What really makes it a bad-luck event for Ted Cruz and his gang is the fact that Archetypal Shame is universally recognizable because archetypal postures are the most powerful way to transmit a message to an universal audience. 

Indeed while trying to Astroturfing religious faith and submission to God, Ted Cruz managed to do something that completely destroyed the chance of any future attempt towards that direction by anyone. 

Because that woman, (whose identity is unknown) will be remembered in history books as the manifesto of  the power of Human Consciousness. That means "you can't lie to your own Consciousness", you can't stage a fake feeling such as compassion or faith because Consciousness will always out and completely destroy your pathetic attempt to stage the most desperate of human acts: praying. 

Humans pray when they are desperate, when they need the help of a superior force. These people are not desperate for help, (indeed they are but in another sense). These are just political cyborgs who are told what to do and they do it, but one among them has some Consciousness left. And that's when the real miracle happens!

This is the greatest lesson these "people" could have ever received: if you carry things too far that's what happens: you get punished by your own meanness! That's what Consciousness usually does...and you can tell this is exactly what happened here because the effect that this picture produces is the exact opposite of its initial intentions.   

Indeed all the Democratic forces on the planet should say "Thank you" to Ted Cruz, because thanks to his hypocritical initiative and his absolutely contradictory nefarious intentions, once again Consciousness prevailed. And that's a lesson these people won't forget. 

This picture in my opinion not only represents the end of these people's Astroturfing Politics, but the starting point of a new era, the era of the inevitable truth of Consciousness.

E Pluribus Unum

(1) Astroturfing is the practice of masking the sponsors of a message (e.g. political, advertising, or public relations) to give the appearance of it coming from a disinterested, grassroots participant. The term astroturfing is a derivation of AstroTurf, a brand of synthetic carpeting designed to look like natural grass.

Gianluca D’Agostino is an Italian journalist and Scholar has a Ph.D in Theory of Information and Communication. He worked as Researcher at the Department of English of Stanford University and was Visiting Scholar at the Media and Communication Department of Fordham Uniersity NY an at the Film Studies Program of UC Berkeley. He also worked for CNN and Associated Press. 

GOP’s objective is to kill 45.000 Americans each year

According to a Harvard Medical study, since the year 2000, 45.000 Americans have been dying each year for a lack of healthcare coverage. 

After Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was signed into law on 2010, Republicans made 42 attempts to repeal the law that aims at saving the lives of these 45.000 and of 150 million Americans who are under-insured within the private healthcare regimen. 

Since the law has been approved, these Republican “patriots” did not accept to save the lives of millions so they kept trying to repeal the law with all of their forces. For 42 times. 

I think the only other organization on this planet that couldn't be more happy of repealing such a crucial lifeline for the American people, is the terrorist network known as “Al Qaeda”, whose main objective has always been to kill as many Americans as possible. 

45.000 people: 15 times the number of casualties of September the 11th. 

The GOP is being doing a better job than Osama Bin Laden himself.

How can a political party call itself  “patriotic” or even "American " whilst trying to repeal a Law that aims at saving the lives of millions of American fellow citizens?

The answer is: it can’t. 

The real paradox is that according to the Brookings Institute, under the private insurance system, the US, federal and state agencies were increasingly involved in healthcare spending, by paying about 45% of the $2.2 trillion the nation has spent on medical care, almost 10 times more of other country governments like Canada, Australia, Japan, France and Italy, which all have a government-funded healthcare. Nonetheless despite the highest spending on the planet, 40% of Americans were not able to receive healthcare assistance. 

The U.S. government spent more on healthcare than on Social Security and national defense combined, while under the Affordable Care Act the government is not only going to save trillions of dollar but probably the law will provide a new boost to the U.S economy because a study in Health Affairs concluded that under the private regulated system, half of personal bankruptcies involved medical bills. You know what that means? That under Obamacare, Americans won't have to worry of getting bankrupt because of their medical bills, they will have more money on their pocket and consequently the economy will recover much quicker.

So a natural question comes into mind: "in whose interest Republicans are acting when they try to repeal the law?" Certainly not in the government’s best interests nor in the American Taxpayer's because the U.S. Government is going to save not billions but Trillions under the new provisions. And for sure Republicans did not act in the interest of the majority of the American people who is uninsured or under-insured.

Let’s see: maybe the interests pursued by the Republican Party in repealing Obamacare is the one of the Private Insurance sector? Maybe, because under the private regimen they made more money, by squeezing the Government subsidy to cure… sorry, not to cure American citizens because of pre-existing conditions...

If that is the case, in practice the Republican Party acted like a contract killer. 

Although what’s even more incredible, is the fact that these “people” they are still considered as legitimate political representatives of the American people.  

Go figure: A bunch of Contract Killers are the Political Representatives of their own victims. They are not happy about having killed 45000 people a year since the year 2000, they want to kill more while being their own political representatives. 

These people's stated objective is to kill more Americans as possible but they want to run the country.

Sounds good.

The subsequent logical question  is: “Who is going to vote Republican at the next elections?”. 

I would really love to know one reason, that is able to explain me why in the world a registered voter would want to vote for the Republicans?  How did they manage to get a double digit result at the latest elections with a mass-killing agenda?

And even more: ”who is going to publicly affirm of being Republican from now on?”

The less dramatic aspect is that since these people have been in business the world has changed and these “people” still haven’t realized how their own situation has changed, which could  be summarized in the sentence “naked in front of a tv camera in world live”. 

In other words, being under the spotlight without being aware of it.

In today’s world, “not only the kings but the whole world is naked”, because if you steal an ice cream in Rome, Mumbai or Wichita, after one second you show up on Facebook and Twitter and every single person on the planet is going to know your name in an instant. 

On the contrary, these “scientists” keep propping up their selfish attitude, like Neanderthals in the Stone Age, without being aware that the whole world is watching them. They think they still are in the XIX century when the only media was the horse. 

However what really amazes me, is the lack of reaction towards these mass-killers. I mean what really confuses me is the fact that traditional media still consider these dregs of society like legitimate people who deserve respect. 

A weird phenomenon is occurring indeed: some independent media, actually fill their daily news stream with the latest “crazy rant” of Glen Beck, Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh or Bill O’ Reilly, like if they were “funny”, because they're raving about social issues while hypocritically invoking religious beliefs, like Satan, the Devil, the bible etc.

This is the saddest aspect of this whole story: the fact that these people are not ditched in the garbage as the scum of society but they still preserve some public dignity because they are considered  “funny”.

It doesn’t matter if they want to kill 45.000 American citizens a year, the “liberal media” call them  “wingnuts” and each of their daily outburst is considered “a joke” and at the end of the day, they are back on track and almost considered “nice people”, or this is what some independent media want us to believe. 

Because these "people" are everything but funny. Last week after having passed the motion to repeal Obamacare for the 42nd time, they were not satisfied and approved a $40 billion food stamps cut, which is the only support of about 150 million Americans.

With 4 out of 5 U.S. Citizens struggling with poverty and joblessness, why a political party would ever want to cut the  basic support of millions of American Families?   

If you look at the general picture, it is enough clear that the real objective of this “Political Party” is not only the one of killing as many Americans as possible, but to keep them in poverty, which in today’s world means keep them in slavery. 

Why in the world a political party would ever will to keep millions of its fellow citizens in a condition of slavery? 

Maybe to exploit them in a much easier way as under-paid workers in Fast Food chains and Wal Marts?  

Just saying. Maybe this is the new economy, the economy of Slavery. 

Sounds good!

I vote Republican because I am an American Patriot!

E Pluribus Unum

Facebook's new restrictions disprove Zuckerberg's "More sharing"

Why Facebook is making it more difficult for its users to share information?

Messages to non friends, and now Recent Posts by others and text-only posts cannot be shared anymore on Facebook Social Pages.

Why?

In the past few months, Facebook has introduced a series of restrictions to prevent its 1 billion users from sharing their posts on the social media and in a wider spectrum to freely communicate with each other and with the social pages they like.

The immediate consequence was that many of its users started to question why Facebook introduced this new series of restrictions, given that still at today, its founder Mark Zuckerberg, keeps claiming his personal goal in life is "to bring more people to share and access more information, and help build a “better social fabric".

In fact while Zuckerberg keeps affirming his inclusive attitude, we are witnessing a progressive reduction of freedom within Facebook as a free communication media.

It all started months ago when Facebook limited the possibility of sending messages to people who are not friends..

Before Facebook introduced this restriction, if you didn't like receiving communications from folks you didn't know, you just had to turn off the message button on your profile. Quick, Easy, Freedom.
So if this function was already provided, why you had to completely shut down the possibility of messaging new people? They didn’t shut it down, just made it more difficult for people to make new acquaintances.

Indeed the new settings strongly limited communications among Facebook users and the chance to interact and meet new people through private messages, which was instead the initial purpose of Facebook: making new friends, making more friends, making as many friends as possible!

However Facebook did not completely cut off the chance for its users to contact people outside their network of friends. Another mailbox was added: the "Other Messages" mailbox, which despite being a little bit blurred than the average mailbox, it still gives you the chance of sending and receiving messages to/from people you don't know. (To be frank with you, that's the only mailbox I check as the most interesting messages I receive are dropped from people I don't know in the "other messages" mailbox).

The new layout indeed, discourages people from sending messages to people who are not in your network of friends, because the message goes into a sort of hidden/blurred mailbox, that when you see it, it gives you the idea of undesired messages, like a sort of spam box. So whoever decides to use that mailbox definitely has a bad sensation. If you are the sender you feel like being an annoying stalker, while if you are the recipient you feel your privacy is being almost violated. Although it’s only a psychological barrier, not a real one, but still works out its purpose of discouraging people from contacting “others”.

At the beginning of this "initiative", Facebook made a  promotional campaign affirming this new layout that limited user's communications had in fact a commercial purpose, as famous people like Mark Zuckerberg and other VIPs would have allowed paying users to contact them by paying a petty fee of about 50c. So basically this first restriction was justified as an incentive to make people spending more money on Facebook while having the chance of contacting famous VIPs…

Today, one year or so after this "great initiative" the payment system has been turned off and we are back at square one, with the only difference that Facebook users have to check two mail boxes instead of one...with most of the people completely ignoring the "other messages" mailbox. Mission Accomplished!

Discouraging people from networking.

I am not sure this was Mark Zuckerberg’s initial idea when he made Facebook

Maybe this was the ultimate goal since the beginning? To make it more difficult for Facebook users who are not friends to communicate with each other?

Even today, Zuckerberg's position has not changed: "to enlarge Facebook's possibilities". Maybe Mark Zuckerberg has lost control over Facebook' settings? Indeed it would be very interesting to know who, among the Facebook management had this genius-like intuition of limiting people's interaction and communication. I would love the Facebook CEO to say something about this, although I am completely hopeless he ever will.

But this is just one of the many restrictions Facebook has introduced without you even realize.

After the message restriction, the latest initiatives to decrease Freedom of Speech within Facebook, concerned the user's interaction with social pages, which as we are going to see hereafter, is the very target of all the attacks to freedom of speech on Facebook.

Indeed the most number of restrictions affects the Social Pages, as if someone behind the curtains of Facebook does not like people interacting with pages.

From now on, any Social Page Admin cannot share on the Social page-timeline, text-only content posted by page-users on the page-timeline.

Regarding the text-only posts, Page Admins only have two choices: Like and Comment. These posts  cannot be shared on the page timeline. Not anymore.

????

The highest numbers of posts that a social page receives are text-only posts. Why Facebook is restricting the chance of a Social Page to share the most common type of user-generated-content on Facebook? Is this happening for real? Why Facebook is making it more difficult for people to share basic information?

It would have made more sense if they restricted the sharing of  posts containing images, maybe for memory saving purpose, but denying a Page admin to share a text-only post can only be considered as "totally meaningless". Again the question is always the same: Why?

There is more: Since April 2013, IOS mobile users started having no more access to the "Recent Posts by others" section, while some social pages have seen their Recent-Posts-by-Others box completely disappearing from their admin panel and the same thing happened to the Page subscribers.

I warmly invite you to search google for: "What happened to "Recent Posts by Others"

Then, it was the escalation: a few social pages started seeing their "Recent Posts by Others" completely disappearing.

Among the pages that underwent such a substantial limitation there is a page called "Support Dr. Steven Greer and the Disclosure Project".

A supporting page of Dr. Steven Greer, a South Carolina Medical Doctor who is also the Director of The Disclosure Project, a nonprofit research project, whose goal is to disclose to the public, the government’s alleged knowledge of Life in the Universe and advanced energy and propulsion systems.

A very sensitive subject, which has been always ridiculed by the traditional media but that thanks to Facebook is taking a new turn because being Facebook a confrontational mechanism and not a one-way megaphone it gives you more chances to understand complex subjects.

Another attempt to seclude Facebook Social Pages was made with a tool called “Graph Search”, which one morning appeared out of the blue on the Facebook layout. The Graph Search was a drop-down menu that took over the old search box. The only difference was the fact that the Graph Search did not include Social Pages in its search results. Would you believe it? Yes because it’s the absolute truth.

I also have published an article on this. Obviously right after the Graph Search kicked in, Facebook Users around the world went absolutely crazy, because it completely screwed the whole searching activity without any apparent reason nor any pre-existing need for change.

The Facebook Help Center was literally filled with questions on how to get rid of that “thing”. Indeed if you are still “trapped” in the Graph Search, you can easily get rid of it by switching the account language from “US English” to “UK English”. Emblematic, isn’t it?

Whose idea was the introduction of the Graph Search? Total mystery.

The problem is most of the people perceives these “initiatives” like “marketing differentiation initiatives”, instead than real attacks to people’s freedom. And they are not going to stop.

Maybe it is a coincidence but if we combine all these restrictions with the major "initiative" that started to decrease Facebook's attractiveness, the whole picture makes more sense. I am talking about Edward Snowden' statement that "NSA violated the privacy of Facebook Users."

That's a normal reaction. When people are told they are under surveillance they start restraining themselves. NSA privacy violations caused people to flee Facebook and about half the people who left Facebook cited Edward Snowden's revelation on privacy concerns.

This also seems to confirm that Edward Snowden's goal was not to reveal something crucial for our lives, but just to spread more fear among Facebook users, so that they would have left the social media or completely restrained themselves.

Here we need to ask ourselves a major question which always matters in these things: Cui Prodest?  "to whose benefit?". Who is going to benefit from a massive escape of users from Facebook?

Is Facebook a nest of dangerous terrorists whose lives have to be constantly eavesdropped?
Well I don’t think any terrorist would use Facebook at all!!! As the main objective of the Facebook user is SHARING. What’s wrong about sharing? Sharing ideas is against the law maybe?

Why would someone be against people sharing ideas? Why Mark Zuckerberg publicly affirms he wants more sharing while putting more restrictions on Facebook sharing mechanisms?

In the past few articles published on this blog, we warmly praised the great importance of Facebook as the first example of global consciousness. Indeed having Facebook 1.15 billion users, it's the largest connected community in world's history and if we consider the fact that these users can exchange ideas, opinion and views in real time, you understand that Facebook looks pretty much like the very same idea of Consciousness, the hugest consciousness in world's history: the World's consciousness.

It doesn’t sound like something bad or dangerous to me. So why restricting human beings from sharing ideas? It doesn't make sense!

Individual consciousness is the fabric that defines human presence and makes us different from animals. It's what defines the dignity of our species and it represents the very meaning of Human Life itself.

For the first time in History we have the chance to achieve a primitive form of a higher level of consciousness: the world's consciousness, which according to the principle of Oneness, it represents the next step in human evolution. (For those who still ignores it, Consciousness is the greatest sign of Evolution).

My spontaneous question is: "Why in the world is someone willing to stop this process to go on with our evolution process?"

On Facebook, people have the chance to confront each other on all kind of issues and to understand subjects much better than with the old media system, because you can see the whole complexity of a subject throughout the mechanism of dialectics, which is the very basis of the Western Culture way of thinking since the beginning of our civilization. Indeed it represents the ancient Agorá, which is Greek for “Square”.

Apparently some people are not happy with Human Evolution as they are willing to stop such a process by putting more restrictions among us to prevent humans from interacting with each other. 

However even if you manage to completely shut down Facebook or make its users leave it because of privacy issues or because you make it more difficult to share information (like they are doing now) and even if you shut down the Internet, history tells us that Human Evolution acts on the very same basis of the communicating vessels principle, that means that if it's not Facebook that embodies the world's consciousness there will be another social media to cover this crucial role for human evolution.

Making people leave Facebook is not just meaningless, it's completely dumb.

E Pluribus Unum

GOPs agenda is against Human Rights and Evolution itself

House Republicans passed a bill to cut $40 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) criticized the initiative by saying the cuts will snatch food out of the hands of millions of neediest children and their families."

At the same time House Republicans will vote today on a stopgap spending measure that would defund the Affordable Healthcare for America Act. Its direct consequence would mean 50% of American citizens will be without Healthcare insurance

Why Republicans act like reckless sociopaths with no empathy for their own American fellow citizens?
Why in the civilized world someone would ever want to cut welfare benefits to those in need?

Right after the Affordable Care America Act became the law, the House Republicans made 42 attempts to repeal it. A law that allows 100 millions fellow American citizens to be granted the right to have healthcare assistance. It’s 1/3rd of the U.S. population.

According to a study conducted by Harvard Medical School nearly 45,000 people died in the United States each year since 2000.— One American citizen every 12 minutes -- in large part because they lacked health insurance and could not get appropriate care. 45.000 dead people means 15 times the number of casualties of 9/11 each year.

It’s like having 15 terrorist attacks the size of 9/11 each year. More than one a month. Albeit these dead people have not the same dignity of the 9/11 victims so they don’t’ deserve any attention nor cannot be remembered, celebrated or even mentioned. They deserve no respect.. They didn’t deserve to live and they are completely forgotten once they’re dead. This is more than shameful.

Even more shameful is the way this issue is dealt by the American media and the Political Organizations. Instead of throwing eggs and spit in the face of each Republican expressing his Anti-American view, each day you witness the so called “liberal media” smiling at their lunatic outbursts. In doing so, you tolerate the most basic violation of Human Rights in the country that is supposed to be the first and largest Democracy in the world.

Human Rights must be undisputed. Healthcare assistance is a basic Human Right because it concerns the Human Dignity of each man or woman living on this planet who has the right to be cured.

If we don’t supply 100 million American with basic healthcare we will witness a domestic humanitarian emergency.

In 2009 Remote Area Medical, a non profit medical association that provides free medical care to people in remote areas around the world Remote organized a free healthcare session in Los Angeles in August 11 at the Inglewood forum where the medical staff have met with 14,561 patient encounters. Matt Hendrickson, a doctor working for RAM spoke to Italian journalist Daniela Roveda:"I have worked in the worst world areas and I never thought one day I would have provided assistance right here in the United States."

                                                     

 

It was not Damascus or Mumbai, it was Los Angeles, California where an estimated 8 million people are today out of the healthcare coverage”.

This is not a political matter anymore, this is a Human Rigths emergency and it belongs to the basic ethical spectrum.Whoever allows this to happen has to be treated like the worst enemy of  the American People.

Tomas and MadolineTuba hold their son John, 8, while waiting 
on a sidewalk for tickets into a free health clinic on August 13, 2009 

in Inglewood, California. Tuba, a department manager at a grocery 

store, said he has health insurance but cannot afford the co-pay fees
for medical procedures for his family. 

You can't have a democracy if a political party represents Corporation rights and the other one represents Human Rights. It just can't work out. The people's interests concern Human Life which is the most sacred good on earth and consequently it must always be represented. The Republican Party does not represent the interests of the American people, it represents the interests of Corporate America and they consider Human life at the same level of material objects. How can such an organization be tolerated within a country whose flag is the world’s landmark of Democracy?

Where is political representation? Whose interests represent the Republican Party? Why the American People tolerate the existence of the GOP being the worst enemy of the American people’s health?

You can’t put human life and material objects on the same level because this is how reckless sociopath and criminals see the world. In practice the very existence of the Republican Party is an hymn to criminal behavior. As long as this issue is not questioned under the moral and the ethical point of view there won't be Democracy in America.

The GOP’s main objection is “Where do you think the money to run the country comes from?”

Alicia P.Melis, a researcher from Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, in Germany went to Ngamba Island in Uganda to study chimpanzee behavior.

In the wild, chimps are not in an evolution process because of their selfish attitude, a sort of natural instinct that push them to “exploit” their fellows to achieve food and not to share it. The experiment consisted of two chimps in a cage and food put in front of them outside of the cage. A rope passes along a wood stick where the food is. In order to get the food the chimp needs the help of his fellow. He calls his fellow and they cooperate to get the food. That’s intelligence. However when they get it if this is not enough for both of them, only the alpha fellow between the two get to eat. The second time the food is put on the stick the second fellow do not cooperate because he knows he won’t get any reward. This is where evolution arrests for chimpanzees.

And this is the exact same destiny we are going to share with the chimps if we allow this primitive behavior not only to exist but to lead the world. Selfishness stops evolution. Can you hear me?

Selfishness attitude won’t ever help a civilization to move forward as a whole. We are missing a main point here that is called Oneness. Before Religion, here on this planet we, as a civilization we should act like a single person, a single consciousness. That’s the very beginning of real Human Evolution.

The GOP’s agenda instead is not only against human rights but aims at leading our world back to the Stone Age. 

Good Luck Everybody!

E Pluribus Unum

Dutch King cuts welfare to keep his royal privileges

While the world's major trend is empowering the welfare state and the principle of "Resource Sharing", occasional selfishness pops up here and there. Like for example the GOP's 42nd attempt to repeal the Affordable Care Act, whilst they are more than aware that Universal Healthcare is a point of no-return. Why? Well simply because the wild unregulated trickle-down economics, the highest symbol of wild capitalism which they still represent has blatantly failed over the years.

Supply-side “trickle-down” economics -- starting with Reagan's giant tax-cuts on the rich, continuing through George W. Bush's tax cuts on the rich, combined with wild deregulation like the subprime mortgage, they led us to the most gigantic economic recession in world's  history and today we are in a situation in which four out of 5 U.S. adults struggle with joblessness, near poverty or reliance on welfare for at least parts of their lives. 

Nonetheless the GOP's agenda keep propping up the Tricky Down Ponzi scheme, which is dragging the Republican Party to its political death, because today people know the voodoo economics is a fairy tale which is only supported by the Republican propaganda machine whose main megaphone is Fox News. 

Although these Republican Con-Artists still struggle to realize that today things have completely changed: we live in a Social Media and the whole world is inside Facebook and Twitter. 

Being everybody in the world within the same room, you inevitably form a giant single Consciousness which obviously can’t hide anything to itself and where the global exchange of ideas, views, facts and opinions can only lead to truth and righteousness, because that’s the human evolution’ spontaneous and most genuine attitude. 

Within this picture there he goes the Dutch King, Willem-Alexander. The total amount of his privileged lifestyle amounts to 40 million euros. Money that he has received from its fellow citizens without working a single day. 

Nonetheless his Royal Highness had the shameless impudence to deliver a message to the Dutch people from the government Tuesday in a nationally televised address: "the welfare state of the 20th century is gone".

In its place a "participation society" is emerging, in which people must take responsibility for their own future and create their own social and financial safety nets, with less help from the national government.”

His Royal Highness had the impudence to call the cut of the welfare state as “participation society” while the truth is he needs to cut the citizen's welfare only to prop up his privileges. 

While the rest of the world, even the United States of America is engaged in implementing the welfare state , this privileged Official wants the government to cut the welfare state to keep his royal privileges and has the impudence to call it “participation society”  

"The shift to a 'participation society' is especially visible in social security and long-term care," the king said, reading out to lawmakers a speech written for him by Prime Minister Mark Rutte's government. The AP reported today.

A series of recent polls have shown that confidence in Rutte's government is at record low levels, and that most Dutch people — along with labor unions, employers' associations and many economists — believe the Cabinet's austerity policies are at least partially to blame as the Dutch economy has worsened even as recoveries are underway in neighboring Germany, France and Britain. 

After several consecutive years of government spending cuts, the Dutch economy is expected to have shrunk by more than 1 percent in 2013, and the agency is forecasting growth of just 0.5 percent next year.

Not much of a surprise the economy kept shrinking. Tax cuts never work but for the rich and the Royals, obviously!

To show his good will to the "participation society" Willem-Alexander's salary will be cut from around 825,000 euros ($1.1 million) this year to 817,000 euros in 2014. Maintaining the Royal House — castles, parades and all — costs the government around 40 million euros annually. So the story's moral is "you guys have to work to pay my lunch and uh...sorry but if I want to keep my Royal Privileges you have to give up your healthcare insurance because we can't afford it anymore!"

It’s already unacceptable and morally questionable the fact that the King of Nederland is fully financially supported by its own citizens while they are struggling with joblessness and poverty, and at the same time he wants to cut the citizens healthcare assistance to sustain his royal privileges. 


E Pluribus Unum

Elisabeth Thieriot: the dark figure who hid evidence of Life in The Universe

           Forces of Darkness: Elizabeth Thieriot claims to be "A Philanthropist" 

What happened to the Mayan documentary called "Revelations of the Mayans 2012 and Beyond"? 

For almost 80 years, the state of Guatemala, like Mexico, home to the ancient-yet-advanced Mayan civilization had kept certain provocative archaeological discoveries classified, but as 2012 was approaching the Governments of Mexico and Guatemala decided that it was time to bring forth this information in a documentary. 

The documentary  was sponsored by the Guatemala Minister of Tourism Guillermo Novielli Quezada and the Minister of Tourism for the Mexican state of Campeche: Luis Augusto García Rosado. The operation had also the blessing of Álvaro Colom Caballeros, then President of Guatemala.

The Documentary was “Revelations of the Mayans 2012 and Beyond,”  and it was produced among others by Raul Julia-Levy, son of Hollywood actor Raul Julia. 

Executive Producer of the Documentary Production was a woman who claimed to be nothing less than the "President of Lions Gate Entertainment" and a San Francisco-based philanthropist Elisabeth Thieriot. As we'll see further on, this woman isn't either the President of Lions Gate nor is she a philanthropist whatsoever. 

In an interview to Wrap Magazine, Producer Raul Julia-Levy said he'd been made aware of the secret Mayan information by former Mexican president Vicente Fox -- a friend of his family -- and that it took four years of phone calls to finally get the OK by then-Mexican President Felipe Calderon.

"This is very important for humanity, not just for Mexico," said Julia-Levy. "This information has been protected for 80 years, and now it's important for people to understand the series of events that are coming, and the consequences for all of us." 

“Mexico will release codices, artifacts and significant documents with evidence of Mayan and extraterrestrial contact, and all of their information will be corroborated by archaeologists,” Julia-Levy said. 

"A new documentary about Mayan civilization will provide evidence of extraterrestrial contact with the ancient culture”, according to a Mexican government official and the film's producer.

It became clear that the documentary Revelations of the Mayans 2012 and Beyond, claimed the Mayans had contact with extraterrestrials supported by undeniable archaeological evidence.

In a release to TheWrap, Luis Augusto Garcia Rosado, the minister of tourism for the Mexican state of Campeche, said new evidence has emerged "of contact between the Mayans and extraterrestrials, supported by translations of certain codices, which the government has kept secure in underground vaults for some time."

To direct the documentary was hired Director Juan Carlos Rulfo, who won the Humanitas Prize for "Those Who Remain" in 2009 and the Sundance Grand Jury Prize for International Documentary for "In the Pit" in 2006. 

Eventually, the crew went to Mexico and Guatemala, they filmed hundreds of hours of footage in both countries, until something happened out of the blue. 

The story detailed that Elisabeth Thieriot literally “stole” the footage from "Revelations of the Mayans 2012 and Beyond," and fled the country right away.

Thieriot was accused of fleeing with two dozen hard drives and 10 computer towers containing the film's footage, according to documents obtained by TheWrap.

The documents are based on complaints filed by the film's producer, Raul Julia-Levy, who also accused three others, Eduardo Vertiz Mascarenas, Emiliano Chaparro Martinez and Eduardo de la Cerda, of stealing footage and equipment.

"She ran away with the footage," Julia-Levy told TheWrap. "She was informed not to leave the country, but she did. We are extremely sad and disappointed that Mrs. Thieriot did this, and we will pursue this with all the arms of the law."

Now the question we ask ourselves is “why an Executive Producer should ever do such a thing like stealing a documentary she financed and executive-produced?”

This series of events was immediately and carefully buried under a cloud of mystery.

What's worse it opened the way to the gratuitous speculation that the artifacts were fake. 

Known disinformation Outlets like View Zone magazine or Abovetopsecret.com immediately exploited the story to put into discussion the authenticity of both the Mexican and the Guatemalan artifacts, because trailers and videos showing the artifacts were already circulating on the Internet.

Now they circulate on the Internet associated with the adjective “fake”. Instead they are absolutely authentic and real. 

Power of the disinformation machine. 

  

Sometimes it happens that certain people who lack culture, sensitivity and mostly consciousness, do not realize how much their little stupid actions can affect something far greater than themselves, like for example the goodness of humankind. This is one of those cases in which the action of a single little person like Mrs. Thieriot affected the knowledge and consequently the freedom of the whole population of our planet. 

Mrs. Thieriot who claims to be a “Philantropist” is instead a very dark figure who, claims to be the President of Lions Gate Entertainment while she's not. She's obviously not a philanthropist either because a philanthropist does not snitch the video footage of a documentary video which is crucial for the knowledge of humankind and make it disappear.

So the question is: "who is this woman?"

Maybe this woman works for another kind of Movie Production company, maybe it's something along the line of  “Uncle Sam Productions”, a well known organization which has been fighting with all its means since 1947 to prevent Disclosure of Life in the Universe to happen. Although only a total idiot might think of being able to hide such a huge undeniable phenomenon like Life in the Universe. 

There is no doubt that in the past 70 years all the attempts made to officially acknowledge the existence of Intelligent Life in the Universe have been somehow rejected with great resistance by some dark forces. Although, even a child understands that in the long term you can’t deny the existence of something huge like Life. It’s impossible.

Despite all the attempts made by these "dark forces", disclosure will happen, no question about it. The Mayan artifacts have not been stolen, only the documentary that portrayed them. This brilliant idea of stealing the documentary by Mrs. Thieriot has only increased the people's interest to these Mayans artifacts which sooner or later will be displayed in some other documentary, other than in the national museums of Mexico and Guatemala. 

Indeed all the governments of earth and the whole landscape of world’s media combined, cannot manage to hide such an undeniable force to be seen and acknowledged. Even a mentally disturbed person knows that hiding Life is an impossible task. Simply because Life, together with Love, are the greatest forces in the whole Universe and cannot be stopped nor hidden by anyone, especially a prokaryote like Mrs. Thieriot.  

Mrs. Thieriot pretends to be a philanthropist but she’s just a vile little person who will go down in history as one of those dark figures who prevented, or better tried to prevent, or even better, made every effort to delay the revelation of the archaeological evidence of the historical connection between the ancient Mayans and visitors from somewhere in the Universe. 

She probably did not consider that acting for the Forces of Darkness by denying the whole humankind something like the world most important heritage which also represents our connection to the Universe, isn’t exactly something that will support the credibility of her being a Philantropist. 

Quiet the contrary. From now on, calling Mrs. Thieriot “a philanthropist” will sound like a joke to say the least….  

Life in the Universe can be perceived throughout the Universal consciousness by all the conscious beings who inhabit our Universe. Those who are not able to feel such a huge powerful force are those who are not in touch with themselves and with the very nature of life. 

One of the greatest U.S. President ever elected in history was Abraham Lincoln, one of his most famous say was: "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time"

The moral of this story is “You can stop a documentary to be released but you can’t stop history from unfolding, nor consciousness to stop connecting people throughout the Universe”

E Pluribus Unum

Governor Deval Patrick must immediately end Christopher McCowen' shameful conviction

    Patsy: Christopher McCowen 

Christopher McCowen's wrongful conviction is not just a shame for the State of Massachusetts. It's a shame for America and its entire legal system.

Christa Worthington was stabbed to death at her home in Truro, Massachusetts (on Cape Cod). Her body was found on January 6, 2002, with her two-year-old daughter, Ava, clinging to her body

Cape Cod District Attorney Michael O'Keefe was quoted in Maria Flook's book "Invisible Eden: A Story of Love and Murder on Cape Cod," as saying that Christa Worthington was "an equal opportunity employer as she'd (expletive) the husbands of her female friends. The butcher or the banker." 

The remark outraged Christa's family. Nonetheless, it became increasingly clear that there were a lot of people who "intimately knew" Christa that could have had motive to kill her. 

Not long after her move to Truro, Christa began a relationship with a shellfish constable and married father of six, Tony Jackett, 51. The affair lasted off and on for around two years. Then, in 1998, what Christa would later describe as "a miracle" happened: She learned that she was pregnant.

When Tony was informed about the pregnancy, he was deeply concerned that it would spell doom for his marriage. An article by Franci Richardson in the Boston Herald quoted Tony, who said, "I wasn't looking to end my marriage but I am human. It was her choice to have the baby." Consequently, he ended his relationship with Christa.

Not long afterwards, Christa became involved with book author Tim Arnold who also happened to be her neighbor and the first person who found her body.

Tim was quoted in the Boston Herald saying that he thought she was "really intelligent and sometimes caustic and quick and wittyjust really full of life." However, the relationship did not last, because Christa believed they were incompatible. They remained good friends.

Because the crime scene offered no major lead, Police detectives began interviewing those who knew Christa hoping to find new information that might provide more insight into her death. Persons of Interest in this case were:  Elizabeth Porter  (the mistress of Christa's father), Tony Jackett (the shellfish constable) and Tim Arnold the book author/former lover/neighbor/the person who found her body.

What detectives discovered was a series of complex relationships that put some of the individuals in a more questionable light. Although at the end of the the investigation, the police had no break nor the smallest lead, so they decided to rely upon the only existing physical evidence. Even if it was not the kind of evidence that supported a murder theory albeit a fairy tale of the old west, or better from the old south.

The suspect is a black male.

We don't want to blame the victim here. Not at all. Nor we want to blame the Prosecutor because being himself a politician he represents the will of the local community But the local community is indeed the only place where we have to look for the real guilty party.

Because other than killing Christa, the second major crime committed in Truro, Massachusetts it was the conviction of Christopher McCowen to a life sentence while everybody knew he's absolutely and completely innocent. 

Christa Worthington had a happy sexual life that by adopting an euphemism could have been defined as "libertine". 

Although both the investigators and the family, despite the hyper sexual activity of the victim, they both refused to consider the possibility that McCowen, a black garbage hauler, had a consensual sexual relationship with the white, Vassar-educated victim. 

Basically the whole burden of proof against Christopher McCowen was based upon the impossible scenario that Christa Worthington could ever had sex with an African-American man. Simply because that would mean to put into discussion Newton's principle of gravity and that the sky is blue. 

Christopher McCowen was convicted of murder because a black male with an IQ of 78 cannot have sex with an "educated" white woman. 

The major force propping up the evil black man who rape and kills the white well educated woman was Christa Worthington's family.

That same family that soon after McCowen's arrest, began a lawsuit against Cape Cod Disposal Co. for $10 million, for employing McCowen even though he had a criminal record. 

The same family whose credibility was put in doubt by Christa Worthington's cousin, Jan Worthington, 54, whose testimony was called into question because of the deal she struck up with HBO, who was filming the court proceedings, and Lifetime, that covered the murder in a documentary and teleplay.

In practice Jan Worthington fully exploited her cousin by profiting from her murder. Even though Jan Worthington admitted to profiting, she said that she was mainly trying "to protect Christa's image". 

In addition, it seems that the same Jan Worthington being one of the first persons on the crime scene, not only contaminated the scene but provided different accounts of what she did when she showed up at her cousin's home..

There were contradictory reports made by Jan Worthington: at one time she told a reporter that she touched Christa's body to feel a pulse and an even earlier admission made to police where she said she "'freaked out' upon seeing the body and never touched or even approached it,". Jan Worthington claimed that the accurate version of events was that given to a reporter, an account which had been filmed for an HBO documentary in which she was also professionally involved.

Jan Worthington was the person who pointed the finger towards Christopher McCowen because on her opinion it would have been impossible that her promiscuous cousin would have slept with a man of a different complexion.

The real guilty party here is Christa Worthington's family, the worst example of human beings on this planet.

Christopher McCowen was sentenced to life in prison for first degree murder, sexual assault and robbery.
The only evidence upon which the whole case was based it was the dna found on Christa Worthington body, despite the fact that the medical examiner found no trace of sexual violence whatsoever.

Eventually McCowen defense team obtained a hearing to consider racial bias allegations among jurors during Christopher McCowen's murder trial. that  was held in Barnstable Superior Court. Although the motion requesting a new trial was rejected by the Court.

The village of Truro is 37 miles from John Kennedy's memorial, but the way this trial has been conducted seems more suitable to Birmingham, Alabama.

After the trial to Christopher McCowen ended, it was discovered Christa Worthington died in a different time respect to the time assumed by the Medical Examiner. This says all about how the Christa Worthington investigation was conducted.

We warmly invite Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick to take into serious consideration the opportunity to grant his pardon to Christopher McCowen because he's the greatest living sign that American Justice is now more dead than Christa Worthington.

E Pluribus Unum

The huge hole in Edward Snowden' Screenplay

Nobody can dispute the fact that in the past few years the news we have been sold by the media has acquired a more sophisticated and appealing narrative, like in the best Hollywood tradition. 

From Wikileaks to Bradley Manning to Edward Snowden, the mythological pantheon of patriots and heroes we have been presented by the mainstream media is full of legendary characters whose only goal is to save the world, while the price they are ready to pay is sacrificing their own life without any hesitation or doubt.

These reckless heroes once they are introduced to the audience, they immediately establish a direct emotional connection with the segment they want to target: the Armchair Protesters.

Armchair Protesters are Internet users who stand for freedom within their armchair perimeter. They are into Democracy and Justice but they are too busy to get directly involved into the political arena. Not to mention the questioning of a message authenticity. That's way too far from their status of motionless warriors.

Although they feel they must do something to show their political commitment, that's why Snowden and Manning are the perfect marketing products to calm their thirst for truth and justice.
These new government leakers perfectly represent the new fronteer of political activism, without much effort required but a Facebook Like.

Edward Snowden cannot be touched, interviewed nor being questioned on anything by anyone. Crowds of reporters have been chasing him inside the Moscow Airport but none of them was even able to spot him. Only Whistleblower-exclusive-monopolist-controller-(and journalist)-Glenn-"I-know-real-Leakers"-Greenwald is the only human being who ever had the chance to see Snowden in real life.

Like Plato with Socrates, or the holy bishop of Delfi with the Oracle, Greenwald is the Demiurge who is able to translate the divine message into human intelligible language. Thank god.

This aura of mystery and the great distance from the ordinary world, helped to create Snowden's image and characterization as  mythological and legendary.

We certainly don't want to diminish the greatness of these new Gods or their Revelation powers. Indeed we have to acknowledge their ability to establish such an immediate connection with the world's audience is really impressive.

Maybe one of the reason behind such an immediate success is based on the fact they are presented as "government worst opponents". Quiet fair: having the government zero credibility when it's about security matters whoever claims to be a government leaker is absolutely credible.

Then it doesn't matter if eventually what they reveal is just by chance reaffirming in toto the State Department's agenda. Like for example the problem of the Taliban connection within the Pakistani Intelligence.

First it was the State Department that raised the issue with the Pakistani government and that happened when General Pervez Musharraf was still in office. Although the State Department had no meaningful results and certainly the Armchair Protesters suffer of too short-memory to remember a news that was just a small paragraph in a 2008 issue of Foreign Policy Magazine. We are asking them too much!

Then it was the time of Wikileaks, whose revelations have put new emphasis on the issue but once again the message went under-noticed. Now it's the time of Edward Snowden Bond who brought the world's attention back on the problem. Even if the possible outcome is still uncertain.

Like in the (best?) Hollywood movies, this happy company of leakers have inconsistent controvesial backgrounds and lack of characterization to say the least. After having been sentenced to 35 years in prison (of which he will eventually spend only 8 and of these 8 he already spent 3), Bradley Manning decided to become nothing less than a woman and disappeared from the public radar.
The world knew him as a convicted male soldier, but having become Chelsea Manning, we are "not sure" under what name he could be found at the military detention center or in any other government facility. Total darkness.

Let's keep in mind that nobody on this planet has ever seen Bradley Manning in real life. Exactly like in Barry Levinson's movie, Wag the Dog, Bradley Chelsea Manning's story looks every minute like Sergeant William "Old Shoe" Schumann. Hollywood meets Government news. Maybe Bradley Manning is not reachable because he's in a military detention facility, so maybe we are a little bit to much conspiratorial and paranoid.

Ok let's take a look at another interesting character of this comedy show: Sarah Harrison, the assumed former lover/assistant of Julian Assange and one of Wikileaks main contributors. When the echo of State Department's cables and war logs ended, also the enthusiasm of the Wikileaks devoted "Armchair Protesters" fell apart and a blue mood kicked in.

With perfect timing, Edward Snowden jumped on the public stage to shake the Armchair Protesters boredom with his new explosive leak-show. Immediately Wikileaks factotum Mrs.Sarah Harrison, the former creepy assistant of Julian Assange, became Edward Snowden's Personal Assistant and escorted him to China. Voilà! By the way....who is Sarah Harrison? Sarah Harrison is a more fictional character than Bradley Manning, Julian Assange and even of Edward Snowden himself all combined.

First of all Sarah Harrison is a bog-common name like Catherine Fitzpatrick. She has no twitter, no facebook account and all the facts mentioned in her Wikipedia page are all disputed in the talk section one by one by dozens of different users. Although she's the one who managed the High Court of London to release Julian Assange on bail, for which she paid a £5000 bond, which she eventually lost because he did not show up.

After knowing all this, one simple question comes to my mind: Who are these people?

Fantasy characters who prop up each other on the stage in which they play, to make their story credible under the media narrative point of view.

Nonetheless these fantasy characters are very powerful players. They come out of nowhere but they are able to immediately saturate the mainstream media landscape. They get on stage with the sensational news of their defection and their assumed security breaches. But it's just hot air.

The following are the main pre-requisites of these characters:

1) Former government officials who are ready to talk
2) They oppose the government's policy and ethics
3) They are Freedom Fighters who fight for the people's knowledge and freedom
4) Consequently whatever they would tell us is Holy Gospels and we become a world of believers.
5) What they reveal is just a bunch of nonsense that has no value in terms of disclosure

Obviously the audience gets impressed by the initial stunning easy concept, which can be summarized in two words: Swapping Team. Snowden went from working as a private contractor for the Darkest Federal Spy Agency in the world (the NSA) to the Armchair Protesters who oppose the government but they don't know why.

You have to consider Narrative is always composed both by a conscious level and an unconscious one. The emotional connection between the audience and the character on the screen is established thanks to many psychological factors. Indeed the human brain always works on an energy-saving basis which by default relies entirely on its memory. So while processing new information coming in, our brain works on mental associations longing for familiar concepts and images.

Hence on the unconscious level, the first information to process is the Story Premise: Team Swapping.

In the world's public imagery, the most obvious and recent stories that carried such a narrative premise were: Avatar by James Cameron and Dance with the Wolves. In both cases a psychologically battered military changes team and goes helping the Natives who are the highest symbol of Freedom in the American public imagery. The human brain doesn't question nor it is able to process every bit of information to verify the flow's coherence by comparing it to the whole picture. The viewer's brain gets impressed by the emotional connection established with the first piece of information: Swapping Team. That's it. The rest are non-relevant details because once the emotional state kicks in, the brain is ready to buy whatever you want to sell. The emotional situation introduced by the Swapping Team premise completely distracts the audience from the message that is eventually revealed by the character (Snowden) so that you won't be able to recognize that same message was propped up by the State Department and by Wikileaks more than a year before Snowden.

In addition, these "leakers" are not poor underdogs who fight to make ends meet. These people stay at 5 stars hotels and travel in Private jets.

Talking of private jets, another very interesting character orbiting around this comedy show is Ólafur Sigurvinsson, who claims to be an Icelandic Entrepreneur and the owner of DataCell, a Web Hosting farm who offered Edward Snowden the chance of travelling with a private flight from three different locations in China.

The funny thing is in all the official company documents of DataCell, the official owner results to be Andreas Fink and not Mr. Olafur Sigurvisson. Although maybe Mr. Sigurvisson is probably the right man to call if you call Team Swapping, you are stuck in Hong Kong and need a private jet to fly out of trouble.

What's really odd is the fact that on the company's website, under the "system status" section there's an eloquent message that says:

30 April 2013. "We have experienced fibre connection problem on the our international link at the moment. Our cable operator is currently working to fix the problem. The connection will be resumed as soon as the problem is fixed. We will monitor the progress closely. If your have more questions, please do not hesitate to contact us."

Below this improbable message there is another section:

Upcoming planned maintenance: No scheduled maintenance work currently.

In practice, their hosting system is not working but they are not taking any action to solve this little problem. This is kind of weird for a hosting company that wants to stay in business with today's aggressive competition. It seems that DataCell is used as a sort of blank-check bank, a permanent financial support for this happy company of leakers.

Apparently the Casting Director didn't spend much time on the development of secondary characters and extras and this negligence killed the audience suspension of disbelief, which is instead a key factor within the audience identification process. This story of this private jet reminds me of another story, in which another private jet was involved. I am talking about Liverpool FC and Red Sox tycoon Philip Morse who used to make some extra pocket money by renting his private jet out to the CIA for extraordinary renditions or "torture flights". A European Parliament report linked the jet directly to the abduction of Abu Omar.

You realize these Leakers are fictional characters because once they complete their narrative mission, they disappear in that same darkness from where they came from. Like Bradley Manning, who was "killed" in the story by swapping to Chelsea Manning. We have had other leakers in the past but nothing was able to saturate the media like the Edward Snowden Show.

Take Gary McKinnon for example, he was interviewed a couple of times but he did not puke out millions of boring-to-death State Department documents, nor two Pulitzer prize winners rushed to interview him on the other side of the world and certainly no entrepreneur would have provided him a private jet. That's because McKinnon was a real leaker and not a fictional character.

How do you tell a fake leaker from a real one? Very simple: a real leaker is not desperately seeking credibility like Snowden. A real leaker is threatened, he's scared he's confused and certainly is not able to saturate the media with his only presence, certainly he doesn't talk to the media only to scare people with generic stories of government's controlling programs and a vomit of scripted nonsense talk.

This is the main problem for Edward Snowden's credibility: it began when he started revealing his "family jewels", which basically were a bunch of annoying nonsense in the best tradition of disinformation. In fact Edward Snowden's only revelation was that "we are all spied" and "the government controls everyone and everything". Well first of all if the government controls everyone and everything why they were not able to control Edward Snowden boarding a flight to Hong Kong? Why they weren't able to prevent Gary McKinnon from shutting down the United States Army's Military District of Washington network of 2,000 computers for 24 hours?

To tell the truth I expected Edward Snowden to reveal the most kept secrets of the United States government, like some evidence of Life in the Universe (which is the only secret left in the vault of the US government together with some vintage sport model flying discs) or that he would have taken out from his pocket the fourth and fifth bullets that hit JFK's car in Dallas. These could have been considered real revelations. That's why we believe Gary McKinnon is a real leaker, because he testified he saw the picture of a flying disc in the computers of the NASA (other than the little detail that he's been interviewed by the Police three years before releasing his first media interview)

The main problem with the Snowden's screenplay is always the same: characterization, motivation and the extras used in this sort of B movie. Take for example his motive: In real life there is only one major force that can lead a man taking such an overwhelming choice like the one of Snowden. This major force is one of a kind: Consciousness which is fuelled by love.
On a narrative level or better in the screenwriting lexicon, professional screenwriters define such a force as the "lover's energy". Meaning that the enormous energy he received from someone close to him pulled the trigger that led him to become the greatest leaker in world's recent history.

In fact whoever wrote the Snowden story, decided to completely rely on the figure of James Bond, who in the public imagery is always surrounded by beautiful exotic dancers who are more sexual characters than love-energy characters. Hence the energy they carry with them is sexual energy and not love. They are two completely different things because such a characterization completely affects the whole meaning of the story and the protagonist's ethics that consists of his main values. They needed the character of Snowden to have the maximum credibility and as they wanted you to believe he is a spy they choose James Bond as the main imaginative association for our simple brain to buy.

You have to consider that every story you see at the movies it's always the story of a transformation, that carries with it a major psychological change. From bad to good, from weak to strong etc. Hollywood movies always tell the story of a hero who at the end of the day has always changed respect to what he was at the beginning. And in order to change he has to struggle with the worst possible enemy: Himself. Especially in a story like the one of Snowden it is absolutely implicit that he's being undergoing a major transformation because it has been reported that sometimes before his defection, he published a series of comments on Facebook, affirming that "leakers have to be shot in the balls". You don't write such a statement and after six months you go to Hong Kong and call up a couple of Hack writers like Glenn "I know real Leakers" Greenwald and the other guy from the Wash Post and tell them about your disappointment over Obama's agenda. That's not credible.

Where's the inner struggling forces? Where is Snowden's internal conflict? Something must have happened because Snowden completely changed his weltanschauung (Vision of the world). Most important he changed the ethical values he believes in. Although his screenwriter wants us to believe that Snowden was just "disappointed with Obama's policy". This is the screenplay's hugest hole: if you have a James Bond's characterization you can't have that ethical change. Why? Well simply because James Bond is a superhero and superheroes do not enter any transformation or psychological change because they never lose. Snowden has a James Bond characterization but they want us to buy the fact he was able to enter a psychological transformation without undergoing any psychological injury nor any sentimental involvement with anyone. It doesn't work this way,

Team swapping is not a simple game that happens like that. You need a psychological injury, you need an inciting incident, you need the lover's energy. But the Snowden's screenwriters forgot to put this on the screen, because they thought the audience wouldn't go that in depth in analyzing his background story! Indeed in the media it was reported that Snowden went out with an Hawaian pole dancer, who knew absolutely nothing about him and his job and who was not involved in his choice.

Lindsay Mills, (the Pole Exotic dancer who Snowden used to date) doesn’t look exactly like someone who carries such powerful energy to transform a grey bureaucrat into a popular hero. She doesn't work for Amnesty International, nor did she follow him to Russia and she did not escort him to Hong Kong nor she did reveal anything meaningful about Snowden's personality or about their love-story. She's just part of his scenery because in all of its movies James Bond hangs out with an exotic lonely dancer.(See Bond Girls for all the character's references) One of the main psychological traits of the Bond girls there's her loneliness and just by chance the only statement made by Lindsay Mills was "you are leaving me lost at see without a compass". That's it. That's the big love energy of Lindsay Mills.

In his video interview with Whistleblowers monopolist controller Glenn "I know real leakers" Greenwald, when Snowden spoke about his job, his voice suddenly broke and that happens when you feel extremely happy and proud of what you're saying and you have an emotional breakdown like when you see a movie and you start crying. Or it can happen when you are very very proud of something you did, which is objectively acclaimed and acknowledged by others. This particular voice-tune-behavior is caused by the most secure of feelings that is the one of "being comfortably home". The voice breaks into an emotional state that reveals an almost narcissistic self-accomplishment, because you know you did the right thing and you re surrounded by friends and loved ones who fill your life with unconditional love and compensation of all kind. That sensation can be summarized in "A great brilliant future is waiting ahead of you, tomorrow will be Christmas and all of your family and your friends will be here with you and you just won a million dollars at the lottery.." Certainly that's not the way I would feel while interviewed for the first time by the major world's newspapers to let them know I am a government leaker who wants to denounce the evil conduct of the largest and most secretive spy agency in the world.

Nor was the same attitude that real leaker Gary McKinnon had when he first met the press. Also because Gary McKinnon did not need to be interviewed by two Pulizer prize winners to acquire credibility. The Federal government went immediately after Gary McKinnon as he's been interviewed by Police on March 19 2002 while the first interview McKinnon released to the media was three years and four months after he was interviewed by authorities.

McKinnon released his first interview on July 9, 2005 to Guardian reporter Jon Ronson who hasn't won a Pulitzer yet. Instead Snowden became a media sensation right away, he requested the presence of two Pulizer winning reporters and completely saturated the world's media with the only news of his team swapping, while being escorted by a team of fictional characters like Sarah Harrison and Travel Agent Olafur "Sharky" Sigurvisson.

My only comment regarding the whole Edward Snowden story can be summarized in one single expression: "wow!". This guy is Harry Thomas Anderson "Neo" Potter. I have no problem in admitting I would never ever had the guts to do what he did. Never Ever. Only if my life was threatened maybe or if I had no other choice or if Kate Moss had promised me her eternal love in exchange for becoming a leaker...but being Italian I'd rather deceive her than choosing of being haunted by the devil in person or by Joubert from the three days of Condor.

In any case the only circumstance under which a rational average human being would have done what he did, would be an incredible unprecedented pressure exercised over him by an external or internal entity which left him no choice but to come forward and step on the world stage.

This "entity" though will never be revealed to the public simply because it doesn't exist as Snowden's characterization does not fit that picture.

Who in the world would risk his own life for something like "Obama's disappointed me".

You give up your life, your relatives, your friends, your home, your job, your money, your homeland, your security for what? Public acknowledgement? Gratitude? Fame? No my friend. A person who choose to give up his whole material life to change the world for better is the highest moral example in the ethical scheme. His ethics and moral can be compared to those of Saint Francis (who just by chance is the new Pope's inspirational figure) or Jesus Christ but these Historical Freedom fighters have been struggling for real both inner daemons and external enemies. Snowden's only struggle was deciding what five star hotel he would check in. Nor he showed any real motivation in exposing what he knew. He sounded like reading the White Pages. A real freedom warrior doesn't behave that way. A real freedom warrior is fueled by an overwhelming force that is called PASSION. Something that Edward Snowden will never have because he's got no guts being just a fake puppet.

We have to realize that in a world made of media, narratives is the main form under which historical events are told to the public. This way it would be easier for the lazy audience to receive the message in the clearest and quickest way possible. For the same reasons, narratives is the only key to crack what you see in today's world, which is undoubtedly a media world. Although at the same time someone can use the narrative tools to deceive the audience. Someone who is able to saturate the media, create fake characters and borrow private jets.

One way or another Narrative has become the King of today's new reality. Take for example the September 11 attacks, when reality reached the peak of its narrative power. Even the day that the terrorists chose for the attack is a story in itself as it can be summarized in the emergency number: 911. Under the narrative point of view this is defined as "perfection". That's Narratives at its top level. Indeed in the past ten years we have seen major changes occurring in everyone's lives and even criminals started to adapt themselves to this new scheme of things. Middle East terrorists started video recording their attacks and suicide bombers they redacted their will in form of video message. It's like if you are not into the media narrative scheme of things, your actions won't ever exist, because the only reality is the one you see on the screen of your PC or your tv set. And the best the narrative the more powerful the message. Whoever made up the Snowden story did not put enough effort in filling up the narrative holes in Snowden's character. The Swapping Team was not justified by an external pressure or by an  internal one

His James Bond's superficial characterization with his exotic Pole-dancer is the major contradiction in this whole story, because it completely destroys the chance that he's a freedom warrior who is fueled by the most powerful energy in the universe: Love. The Snowden story is a typical Redemption Plot, where the story arcs on a moral change within the protagonist (Snowden) from bad to good. because he turned from working as a "dark grey" government contractor employee to becoming a whistleblower whose only goal in life is to free the world from the darkness of ignorance.

Although what's missing in Snowden's background is the event that justifies such a major change to happen. The "turning point". When, where and what pulled Edward Snowden to turn himself to the major world's media to reveal he worked for the NSA and we all are spied by the government? Nothing. Zero. An exotic pole dancer means sex and not eternal love. Besides, with all due respect, Edward Snowden is not the playboy kind of guy. He looks more like a nerd who learned sex through porn movies rather than walking naked in the woods with Mary Jane and Peggy Sue.

Like all this B-movie dark creepy-sneaky characters, from Sarah Harrison to Ólafur Sigurvinsson, Edward Snowden is a fake science fiction character like the rest of his happy company. These people showed no emotional side and a major lack about their real motivation, other than a huge contradiction within their own behavior.

Nothing in his life or in his professional background or in his recent history is consistent with his life-changing decision.

Nor he did reveal to Whistleblower scientist Glenn Greenwald what pulled him to take such a mind-blowing decision that completely destroyed his bourgeois-lifestyle.

Snowden just puked a salad of meaningless words, like "I felt this was not the world I wanted to live in, I was disappointed by Obama". This means nothing. A lot of talk and a badge.

This is where the professional narratives kicks in and amateurs get kicked out.

E Pluribus Unum