French Police Recorded Threatening Anti-Macron Protesters Amid Rising Tensions

Police in France have reportedly been recorded threatening protesters demonstrating against the country’s President, Emmanuel Macron.

French police officers have reportedly been recorded making graphic threats against members of the public protesting against the country’s embattled President, Emmanuel Macron.

Sparked by a highly-unpopular increase in the state pension age, demonstrations may be spiralling out of control, with rioting now a frequent sight in many parts of the European Union member-state.

Such violence appears to have resulted in a deterioration in the relationship between protesters and some members of the French police, with various forces in the country being accused of using excessive force against some demonstrators.

At least some of these claims now appear to have been substantiated with hard evidence, with Le Monde reporting that some members of the Motorized Brigades for the Repression of Violent Action (BRAV-M) were secretly recorded violently threatening protesters after arresting them.

According to the French publication, around six young people arrested by the force were subjected both to detailed threats of violence as well as “sexual remarks”, with one individual reportedly being told that they had a “slappable face”.

“You’re so lucky to be sitting there, now that we’ve arrested you,” one officer was reportedly recorded saying. “I swear, I’d have broken your legs, literally. I can tell you, we’ve broken elbows and faces… but you, I’d have broken your legs.”

The recordings have now reportedly sparked a judicial investigation into members of the BRAV-M unit, with Paris’ prefect of police, Laurent Nuñez, describing the recorded comments as “unacceptable” and adding that they “ethically pose very serious problems”.

For politicians in the country, however, what so far appear to be isolated cases of police brutality are not the main concern, with the combination of 66 days of protests and debilitating trade union strikes starting to take their toll on the country’s ruling elite.

Some in the country have even begun questioning whether the crisis is something the Macron government can reasonably survive, though opposition attempts to see the current administration removed from office have so far failed.

Others are looking further ahead, with POLITICO pondering on Friday what will happen to France once Macron is eventually forced to leave office, either due to a political coup or his term ending in 2027.

While extremely unpopular himself, Macron and his shakey neoliberal alliance have managed to just barely hold onto power over the last six years, with many in the country opting to reluctantly vote for him and his Renaissance political party just to keep supposedly more extreme elements on the left and right out of power.

However, the publication notes that as French politics becomes ever more polarised, there has so far been no sign of a new centrist force emerging in the country to take Macron’s place when he is eventually forced to abdicate his throne.

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2023/03/26/french-police-recorded-threatening-anti-macron-protesters-amid-rising-tensions/

The future is here: Brain-computer Interface Systems

As many know, I have written and spoken extensively about the dangers of transhumanism, also rebranded by the military as human augmentation or human enhancement. One of my more recent essays was titled Physicals, Virtuals, Machines and Overlords: Is the dark vision of a new caste system for the fourth revolution inevitable?

The constraints on this research currently lie solely with the informed consent and normal bioethics regulations needed on any clinical trial. In fact, the SIENNA report was commissioned to study the ethical guidelines of such research, and the report essentially falls back on the same regulatory processes currently in place, which can be found in my essay “Ethical Parameters for Human Enhancement?”.

The fact is that despite the current clinical trial processes already in place, these rapidly developing technologies fall under that old saying, “Just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should do something.”

We do not need more guidelines or regulations that can be broken in times of duress or “public health emergencies” to decide whether these technologies are for the good of society or not. Such “process oriented” procedures miss the point.

What we need are politicians and/or governments to sit down, commission studies without conflict of interest from biotech and the military to determine if mankind will benefit from these inventions, or whether mankind is more likely to be harmed. We need a nationalized and globalized response, even a treaty, regarding the ever increasing emphasis on the evolution of human augmentation in our military and civilian life which is now an accepted reality. As a world, we can just say no. The world has rejected many technologies as too dangerous or morally wrong. Humankind has a choice to make. Let’s make that choice, let’s ban human augmentation or, at the very least, put restrictions on these technologies. True guidelines that assess benefit and risk to humankind. My bet is that a true assessment would shut down much of this research in its tracks.

Just think about all the decisions that the world has made because something is ethical. We don’t reuse the bodies of our dead for food or even fertilizer. We don’t generally allow incest. We don’t allow murder or human sacrifice or allow people to be used as unwilling organ transplants. The list goes on and on.

Even technologies have been banned because they have been determined to be morally or environmentally detrimental. In the USA, we almost never allow new dams on major rivers for hydro electric power. We don’t allow mustard gas to be used in war. Offensive biowarfare is not allowed. We have nuclear treaties. Human civilizations have shown that they can say no.

Likewise, many technologies have been determined to be too dangerous. At least for now, we do not allow our cars to be powered by nuclear fission. After the Hindenburg accident of 1937, the idea of hydrogen vessels for air travel was abandoned. Human society can and has said enough when technologies are not safe.

So, why is there so little push-back to the idea that altering humans for either individual, military or societal benefit is ok? Even though ethicists have been warning about the abuse and potential catastrophic consequences of these technologies for generations. Dystopian visions of the future abound with what the horrific consequences of these technologies could do to mankind. Yet still “we” persist.

As I have been tracking the evolution of these technologies, I was recently directed to news story in Science Daily quoted below.

https://youtu.be/8Iz_i18n9P0

https://www.blacklistednews.com/article/84289/the-future-is-here-braincomputer-interface.html

Marburg virus kills 5 in Tanzania; over 100 feared to be infected

The World Health Organization (WHO) has confirmed the death of five individuals in Tanzania due to Marburg virus, with three others being treated in hospital. The cases were reported in the northern city of Bukoba, Kagera province, which is home to 120,000 people.

More than 100 residents were also feared to be infected with the deadly pathogen that has a 90 percent kill rate. They are now being monitored by health workers.

Marburg is an Ebola-like disease that causes fever, vomiting and major bleeding from the eyeballs, nose and gums. It is endemic to areas of central Africa, including Angola and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and has previously cropped up in Kenya.

The cases were diagnosed following testing carried out in the country’s main laboratory in the capital Dar Es Salaam.

A rapid response team, which includes workers from the WHO, had been deployed to contain the outbreak.

“We are working with the government to rapidly scale up control measures to halt the spread of the virus and end the outbreak as soon as possible,” said Matshidiso Moeti, WHO’s regional director for Africa.

“The lessons learned, and progress made during other recent outbreaks, should stand the country in good stead as it confronts this latest challenge.”

While Tanzania had not previously faced Marburg, Moeti noted that the country had recently coped with a number of health emergencies, including Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19), cholera and dengue fever.

WHO: Marburg virus is next big pandemic threat

The WHO considers Marburg virus as the next big pandemic threat.

It can jump into humans from fruit bats that live across central Africa and can also be spread between people via contact with bodily fluids from an infected person. People can also catch the disease by touching towels or surfaces that have also come into contact with an infected person.

Marburg virus can incubate in people it infects for two to 21 days before causing symptoms. Warning signs initially look similar to other tropical diseases like Ebola and malaria.

Infected patients often develop deep-set eyes and expressionless faces. In later stages, the virus triggers bleeding from multiple orifices, including the nose, gums, eyes and vagina.

There are no vaccines or treatments approved for the virus, with doctors instead having to rely on drugs to ease symptoms and fluids to hydrate patients.

Just weeks ago, Equatorial Guinea also confirmed its first outbreak of the Marburg virus. The WHO announced that at least nine people were killed by the disease.

The small Central African country quarantined more than 200 people and restricted movement in its Kie-Ntem province after detecting the virus.

Local health authorities initially reported an unknown illness causing hemorrhagic fever cases on February 7. They sent samples to a laboratory in Senegal, which was able to confirm one as positive for the Marburg virus disease.

According to Equatorial Guinea Health Minister Mitoha Ondo’o Ayekaba, the deaths were initially linked to a funeral ceremony in the Kie-Ntem province’s Nsok-Nsomo district.

http://www.womensystems.com/2023/03/marburg-virus-kills-5-in-tanzania-over.html

Bill Gates warns that artificial intelligence can attack humans

While Gates acknowledges that AI has the potential to do great good, depending on government intervention, he is equally concerned by the potential harms.

Bill Gates, billionaire businessman and philanthropist, expressed concern that Artificial Intelligence (AI) could take over the world in a recent post on his blog, GatesNotes.

In his blog post, Gates drew attention to an interaction he had with AI in September. He wrote that, to his astonishment, the AI received the highest possible score on an AP Bio exam.

The AI was asked, “what do you say to a father with a sick child?” It then provided an answer which, Gates claims, was better than one anyone in the room could have provided. The billionaire did not include the answer in his blog post.

This interaction, Gates said, inspired a deep reflection on the way that AI will impact industry and the Gates Foundation for the next 10 years.

The positive potential for AI

As a philanthropist, Gates chose to focus on how AI technology could be used to reduce inequality.

“The evidence shows that having basic math skills sets students up for success, no matter what career they choose. But achievement in math is going down across the country, especially for Black, Latino, and low-income students. AI can help turn that trend around,” wrote Gates.

“AI will enhance your work—for example by helping with writing emails and managing your inbox,” he promised.

He stated that AI will improve the efficiency of everyday workers and suggested that it is beneficial to see AI as a “digital personal assistant.” He acknowledged that populations will need to be retrained as AI takes on new roles and that governments will need to be responsible for overseeing this.

More specifically, Gates predicted that AI will have a strong impact in reducing the burden on care workers. If AI were able to undertake tasks like “filing insurance claims, dealing with paperwork, and drafting notes from a doctor’s visit” then more time can be allocated to patient care.

https://www.jpost.com/business-and-innovation/all-news/article-735412

Philadelphia Officials Tell Residents Not To Drink Tap Water After A Chemical Spill In The Delaware River

Officials in Bristol, located in Bucks County, are monitoring the release of hazardous material into Otter Creek. The discharge of latex finishing material into the creek was initially observed on Friday evening, according to the Coast Guard.

As cleanup measures are underway, authorities advise the public to avoid the water and surrounding area.

While Philadelphia officials state that there is no evidence of contamination, they urge people to avoid consuming or using tap water as a precautionary measure.

Michael Carroll, the deputy managing director for transportation, infrastructure, and sustainability for the city of Philadelphia, confirms that the low levels of exposure to the pollutants do not pose an immediate health risk.

Officials also state that having skin contact with it presents no danger. Therefore, it is safe to bathe and shower with the water.

Additionally, Pennsylvania American Water, Aqua, and the Lower Bucks Joint Municipal Authority have stated that the drinking water in Bucks County is not presently adversely affected.

The following statement was issued by Michael Carrol, Deputy Managing Director for the City’s Office of Transportation, Infrastructure and Sustainability (OTIS):

“As has been reported, on Friday night, a chemical spill occurred in Bristol Township, Bucks County which released contaminants into the Delaware River. The Philadelphia Water Department (PWD) became aware of this through the Delaware Valley Early Warning System (EWS) and has been evaluating the situation since that time to understand potential impacts to the public. Although early indications have not revealed contamination, we are still monitoring the situation and conducting testing.

https://breaking911.com/breaking-philadelphia-officials-tell-residents-not-to-drink-tap-water-after-a-chemical-spill-in-the-delaware-river/

Pelosi attacks Abp. Cordileone over opposition to abortion, same-sex ‘marriage,’ calls for women priests

The former Democratic House Speaker slandered Abp. Cordileone and discussed her attraction to the ‘power’ of the priesthood at a Georgetown University event.

During a recent event at the Jesuit-run Georgetown University, self-professed “Catholic” Rep. Nancy Pelosi picked back up her fight with Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone and expressed support for the idea of women priests.

At a Thursday forum put on by Georgetown’s Center on Faith and Justice, the pro-abortion former Speaker of the House bizarrely claimed that her political advocacy is “pro-life,” relying on a sort of “seamless garment” argument that elevates issues like homelessness and immigration to the moral equivalency of abortion.

Similarly, Pelosi claimed that bishops like Cordileone, the Archbishop of San Francisco, are “willing to abandon the bulk” of Catholic social teaching by allegedly focusing on abortion at the expense of other issues.

Cordileone banned Pelosi from receiving Holy Communion in his archdiocese last May. He wrote in a letter that she must first “repudiate [her] advocacy for the legitimacy of abortion and confess and receive absolution of this grave sin in the sacrament of Penance.” Scandalously, Pelosi has continued to receive Communion in the Archdiocese of Washington, with the tacit approval of Cardinal Wilton Gregory.

“I figure [abortion is Cordileone’s] problem, not mine, because I had five children in six years and one week,” Pelosi said, per the heterodox National Catholic Reporter.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pelosi-attacks-abp-cordileone-over-opposition-to-abortion-same-sex-marriage-calls-for-women-priests/

Minnesota Lawmakers Advance Transgender Rep’s Legislation That Could Strip Custody From Parents Who Don’t Support Child’s Transition

Minnesota lawmakers have advanced legislation introduced by a transgender representative that could strip custody from parents who do not support their child changing genders.

The bill, HF 146, moved forward with a vote of 68-62, along party lines.

The bill says that the state can claim temporary emergency jurisdiction over a child if they are in the state and “the child has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care.” It is meant to prevent law enforcement from removing a child from parental custody based on an order made outside the state.

The legislation was introduced by Rep. Leigh Finke of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, who is transgender.

“Gender-affirming care is lifesaving health care,” Finke told reporters ahead of debate on the bill, according to a report from Fox News. “Withholding or delaying gender-affirming care can have a dramatic impact on the mental health of any individual who needs it. Rates of depression, suicide, substance abuse are dramatically higher in transgender and gender-expansive individuals who lack access to care.”

Fox News explains, “this legislation is meant to ensure that children undergoing gender transition procedures allowed under Minnesota law cannot be governed by child protection laws of other states. It’s a direct response to neighboring South Dakota, where Republican Gov. Kristi Noem signed a law banning puberty blockers, cross-sex hormone treatments, and sex-change operations for transgender individuals under the age of 18.”

However, conservative legal experts and advocacy organizations are warning that the way that it is written means that Minnesota parents can lose custody of their children if they do not consent to sex change procedures, puberty blockers, or hormones.

“The most insidious aspect of this bill is the language that adds children who are being denied ‘gender-affirming care’ (defined as everything from therapy to hormone blockers, to transition surgery) to what amounts to the definition for a child ‘in need of protection or services’ in Minnesota, allowing the courts to take ‘emergency custody’ of the child,” Bob Roby, a licensed attorney in Minnesota with more than 30 years experience in family and juvenile court, told the network.

“This kind of court power has a long-standing precedent in Minnesota for keeping children safe. When a child is at risk of being harmed by a parent or custodian, the State has immediate authority to remove and protect the child from harm. Without this, there would be no way to protect children in those situations,” Roby continued. “To add children who are being denied ‘gender affirming care’ to the definition of children in need of this kind of drastic emergency action is obviously unwarranted.”

The bill is now being sent to the Minnesota state Senate, where Democrats have a one-seat majority.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/03/minnesota-lawmakers-advance-transgender-rep-s-legislation-that-could-strip-custody-from-parents-who-dont-support-childs-transition/

>>18585296