THE NHS has a rather lovely, colourful, ‘easy to read’ form to be handed to people receiving Covid-19 vaccines. It explains in simple language why you should get it, what to expect when you’ve had it and how it will protect you from Covid. You sign your name to indicate that you have read the form, and that you understand and agree that you have given informed consent.
The only side-effects the easy-to-read form mentions are a sore arm, fatigue or headaches. Nowhere does it talk about blood clots that you can develop after the AstraZeneca shot, Bell’s palsy, which is facial paralysis that Pfizer has just added to its list of adverse reactions, or anaphylaxis that you can suffer if you’re allergic to any of the ingredients in any of the shots.
Sight of the form is as rare as a balanced BBC Covid report. According to a straw poll of ten people who suffered serious adverse reactions, none had been asked to sign a consent form, which means informed consent was not given. Most get to read about potential serious side effects only after they’ve received the shot.
One woman, who does not want to be identified but let’s call her Julia, whose pro-vaccine father died after receiving the Pfizer vaccination in January, secretly filmed the ‘informed consent’ process at one of the UK’s biggest vaccine hubs. The 12-minute video, taken at the Greater Manchester Vaccination Centre, shows how little information you can expect before receiving what could be a life-changing jab.
It is no secret now that the AZ can cause vaccine-induced thrombosis (VITT), but official vaccinators say that it’s as rare as being struck by lightning, with a one in four million chance of developing blood clots. We know that the Medicine and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the body set up to protect us from Big Pharma, has recorded 73 deaths from VITT, with most occurring in the 50-59 age range, although it is still recommended to that group. Only under 40s are advised not to get the AZ jab.
Julia waits in line for 45 minutes to see the triage nurse. During that wait she could have been reading the public information leaflet that she must be given. At the triage booth a nurse tells Julia she is receiving the AstraZeneca vaccine but will not give her the ‘What To Expect After Your Covid-19 Vaccination’ leaflet beforehand. She tells her: ‘Once you’ve had your injection, you’ll be given an information leaflet, the important information is on page 5.’ (This is information about severe headaches, blurred vision, difficulty with speech, drowsiness, seizures and blood clots. All quite important information.)
Anxious, Julia asks about blood clots and side effects and is told: ‘I see thousands a week, half have side effects half don’t.’ The nurse does not say whether these were serious reactions or the 48-hour flu-like symptoms you might expect.
Julia is asked some basic questions about whether she is taking blood thinners, has suffered an allergic reaction to any vaccine or has ever taken part in a vaccine trial, then proceeds to the vaccine booth. The leaflets she would like are piled high, but Julia has to ask three times before she is given one, though she is allowed no time or space to read it. A team leader is called to reassure her. ‘The side effects you have from the AstraZeneca are the same as for the Pfizer and Moderna,’ she says. ‘They’re all the same.’ Wait though, the all-important page 5 contradicts that and says: ‘Not all Covid-19 vaccines are the same – some tend to cause more side effects at the first dose, others cause more side effects at dose two.’ It does not elaborate on which vaccine causes which.
The UK Medical Freedom Alliance (UKMFA), a campaign group that includes health professionals, scientists and lawyers, are outraged and concerned at the lack of informed consent. They have produced a fully referenced letter which says what information you should expect to receive before receiving a vaccination or any medical procedure. They are clear that the courts have decided that informed consent is part of English law, that you should be given information about treatment options available, what they involve and their risks and benefits. You must then base your decision on that advice. Your decision should be voluntary and not influenced by pressure from medical staff, friends or family.
Senior UK lawyer and retired army officer Anna de Buisseret, who is the head of the campaign group Lawyers For Liberty, says the whole thing is a shambles. She said: ‘We have had lots of reports that people are not being given the patient information leaflet that actually contains a lot of warnings about the side effects and what you need to do to ensure you have had a clinical individual risk assessment prior to going along for your injection.
‘The Pfizer leaflet says you should get an allergy test for all the ingredients, including the active one. You cannot be informed of that if you’re given the patient leaflet after you’ve had the injection, which is what is happening all over the place.
‘I went to clinics in my local community and have sufficient evidence that they were not obtaining informed consent from people and that people were dying and being seriously injured by the vaccine.
‘If you are injecting another person with this substance, it is entirely upon you [nurse, doctor or health practitioner] as the individual, because it is personal, civil and criminal liability you’re facing [if it goes wrong], to make sure you have obtained fully informed consent, freely given.
‘The problem is that an awful lot of vaccinators are not obtaining informed consent.
‘We [Lawyers For Liberty] are working with a senior NHS whistle-blower who is a surgeon who trains people in informed consent. I asked him to check the protocols that were being given to the vaccinators. He examined them and he said there was nothing in them about the law and informed consent. It was all about how to administer the injection.
‘Nurses and doctors are not routinely taught about the law or routinely taught about Nuremberg and what happened there. It appears the whole informed consent thing is being pretty roundly ignored.’
De Buisseret has tried, and failed (so far), to get the police to investigate the many Covid crimes she is looking into. She said: ‘The Covid response has not been legal, lawful, ethical or moral. So many different laws are being broken us lawyers are absolutely gobsmacked at the number being trashed. Nobody seems to care to uphold them. It is a crisis.’
August 13, 2021
Posted by aletho |
Timeless or most popular | COVID-19 Vaccine, UK |
Leave a comment
THERE are three Covid-19 vaccines in use in the UK, but none is causing more havoc than the Oxford/AstraZeneca jab, now known as the ‘clotshot’ because it can cause vaccine-induced thrombosis (VITT). By July 28, 73 VITT deaths had been reported to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the body that makes sure new pharmaceuticals are safe. Deadly blood clots are not the only side-effects; there are many more affecting one in 110 people according to official figures. Some last for months and could be permanent even if they aren’t fatal.
Neurological occupational therapist Carla Freitas, 31, who works for the NHS, took part in the original AZ trial and is one of 11 women and men who reacted to the same batch of AstraZeneca Covid vaccine, batch number PV46671, earlier this year. The group are countrywide as it is common practice to distribute a batch to different areas. The PV46671 injured found each other on Twitter so there may be more victims not using social media out there. I talked to seven of them.
All seven received the jab before the MHRA began investigating adverse events reported to the Yellow Card Scheme, not originally flagged up by AstraZeneca. Carla said: ‘I was deemed fit enough to join the Oxford trial after thorough medical examinations. In December 2020, I was told I had been given the placebo and offered the jab once it was available, so I did not hesitate to take it. I was fine after the first injection but two weeks after the second one everything changed. I have been off work for five months since March trying to find solutions to my health problems. The doctors from the AZ trial have been unhelpful.’
BBC food broadcaster Jules Serkin, 63, from Canterbury, whose original tweet alerted the others, was ‘desperate for the vaccine’ but she has also suffered horrific side effects. She said: ‘My doctor agreed my reaction was from the vaccine. I contacted AstraZeneca and I’ve had five emails from them asking if they can contact my GP. I responded yes, of course. They never have.’
This close-knit, previously healthy group, aged from their early 30s to early 60s, have all developed chronic illnesses since vaccination. Some experienced symptoms within minutes of the jab being administered while others received PV46671 as their second jab. And while some are recovering slowly, others are getting worse.
Rachael Matthews, 31, and Claire Hibbs, 48, both developed heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) (blood clots usually caused by the anticoagulant drug heparin, typically used in the treatment of heart attacks but AZ victims seem to develop it despite the fact they are not taking heparin) and have tested positive for the heparin-PF4 antibody.
Other symptoms include heart problems, low blood platelets, palsy, excruciating headaches, insomnia, tinnitus, muscle pain, dizziness, disorientation, inflammatory autoimmune disease, pins and needles in hands, feet and face, fatigue, brain fog, difficulty swallowing, sore eyes and eye problems and stomach pains.
In the patient information leaflet, AZ, who have renamed their jab Vaxzervia, list many of the reactions the group have suffered but Serkin says: ‘Health professionals more often than not deny the connection.’
The leaflet says: ‘In clinical trials there were very rare reports of events associated with inflammation of the nervous system, which may cause numbness, pins and needles, and/or loss of feeling. However, it is not confirmed whether these events were due to the vaccine.
‘Following widespread use of the vaccine there have been extremely rare reports of blood clots in combination with low level of blood platelets. When these blood clots do occur, they may be in unusual locations, e.g. brain, liver, bowel, spleen.’
Both Matthews and Hibbs developed a clot in the portal vein which leads to the liver, while Serkin, Howard Griffiths, 52, and Dave McGuire are suffering numbness and pins and needles.
Despite their symptoms, some of those who reacted to their first dose are under pressure from GPs to have the second. This is inexplicable but one consultant suggested it could be because GP practices receive £25.16 for each double-jabbed person. With an average of 9,000 patients for each practice (although under-16s are not yet eligible for the jab) that could be a maximum £230,000 incentive. Patient health be damned!
Despite the MHRA’s denials – they say most adverse events are coincidental – logic suggests that if someone receives a vaccine that is designed to provoke an immune response and then develops autoimmune disease or other problems with their immune system, the jab should be first in the frame. However alleged vaccine damage seems to be rarely investigated or taken seriously.
Adverse reactions can be caused by a ‘hot lot’, a faulty batch of vaccine with too much of one ingredient. Big Pharma has known this for decades, and this problem was legally accepted in 1992 during an Irish court case involving Kenneth Best, 23. As a four-and-a-half-month-old baby, Kenneth suffered brain damage and seizures after he was given Wellcome’s diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (DTP) vaccine in 1969. The Irish Supreme Court ruled: ‘The documentary evidence surrounding the particular batch out of which the vaccine given to the Plaintiff was taken indicates that it was excessively high in both potency and toxicity.’
It is hard to know if this happened in this case because the MHRA and AstraZeneca have not responded to repeated requests for information. Contacted on July 29, AZ has not responded (even after Oxford University press office contacted them on TCW’s behalf) while in an unsympathetic email the MHRA confirmed that they had not investigated the group’s concerns.
An MHRA spokesperson said: ‘We are sorry to hear of the health problems these people are experiencing. We are not aware of any batch-specific safety issues for the AstraZeneca vaccine. We are also not aware of any issues with individuals involved in Covid-19 vaccine AstraZeneca trials who subsequently received this vaccine outside of the trial but will follow this up with the investigator.’
Meanwhile those in the group who have been advised by medics not to have a second vaccine fear they will become victims of medical apartheid. Adele B, 57, worries that she will be labelled an antivaxxer because she linked her health problems to the jab. She said: ‘I’ve always believed in vaccines so nothing could be further from the truth.’
Serkin, Freitas and Hibbs would like to travel when they feel well enough, but worry they will not be allowed without vaccine passports. Hibbs says: ‘I so want to visit my son in Cyprus, I’m wondering if I should have the second jab just to go.’
Here are the stories of the seven in detail.
CLAIRE HIBBS, 48, works for easyJet, lives in Luton, and is married with two children.
‘I’ve been signed off work now since the end of March. I’m now concerned about returning to work if I’m vulnerable. Devastated with the travel rules that you have to be double vaccinated, and I cannot have the second dose. My son, 18, is in the Army and is moving to Cyprus. I planned to visit regularly, but not with blood clots in my lungs.’
1st jab date: March 31
2nd jab date: Advised not to have second jab
Health issues before the jab: None
Reactions: ‘I began feeling unwell on April 5 and developed blood clots in the vein leading to the liver (portal vein), also in my lungs. I’m suffering constant headaches, muscle, joint and neck pains, constant eye twitching. I’m off balance and have brain fog. Can’t get through the day without falling asleep.’
Tests done: Blood tests but liver scan cancelled due to staff shortages. D-dimer (checks for tiny clots), CT, ultrasound and MRV scans which detect VITT. Positive HIT test. Positive test for portal vein thrombosis. Appointment with gastro team. Official diagnosis: ‘Thrombocytopenia (low blood platelets) and portal vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism (clot in the lung) induced by the AZ vaccine.’
Doctor’s response: ‘No luck with doctors, just keep getting fobbed off, mostly saying it’s stress. I’m feeling very let down.’
Time off work: Unable to work since March
Response from MHRA and AstraZeneca: ‘Filled in a Yellow Card. Acknowledgement but no other response. AZ have emailed me to ask for consent to contact my GP three times. I said yes but they have not contacted the GP.’
RACHAEL MATTHEWS, 31, an accountant from Norfolk, is married with one daughter.
‘I had my vaccine on my daughter’s first birthday at my GP surgery. I was apprehensive because I wanted to try for another baby in the spring. I’d had a complicated pregnancy, had a blood clot in my leg, but I was told I needed to have the jab to keep my daughter safe. Ironically, it nearly killed me which would have left my daughter without a mum. I’m now not well enough to consider having another baby. I’ve been told I was one of the first VITT cases in the UK.’
1st Jab: March 6
2nd Jab: ‘No second jab although I’ve been under pressure to take it.’
Health issues before jab: None, apart from pregnancy-related blood clot.
Reactions: ‘Started a week after the jab with stomach cramps, nausea and diarrhoea, very heavy legs. Struggled with everyday things I felt so weak. Couldn’t sleep, was struggling to walk, stopped being able to lift my daughter. Unable to get on to the doctor’s couch for a routine smear, a nurse insisted I went to A&E. I might have died otherwise. GPs had dismissed my symptoms. Blood clot found in the portal vein to my liver. VITT and HIT.’
Tests done: Two A&E visits, admitted to hospital for six days. Ultrasound, daily blood tests while in hospital. Endoscopy. Tests for HP4 heparin antibodies show HIT still present.
Time off work: ‘I work for my dad’s firm, so I fit in work when I’m well enough.’
GP’s response: ‘I asked about blood clots and was told it was fake news. Went to A&E and was told to take Gaviscon although routine blood tests showed very low blood platelets, around 50. When I was finally diagnosed with a blood clot I kept asking if it was the vaccine and no one would answer me.’
MHRA and AstraZeneca response: None.
HOWARD GRIFFITHS, 52, an events broadcaster for BBC, ITV and Channel 5, unmarried, lives in South Wales
‘I’m not Howard at the moment and I just want Howard back. I feel like my body has been hijacked, I’m desperate to get rid of the hijackers. I have always been highly motivated and full of energy. Before the jab I ran up Pen y Fan (highest peak in south Wales). After the jab I struggled to walk up hill to the shops.’
1st jab date: April 4
2nd jab date: ‘NHS say I cannot have second AZ but want to give me Pfizer.’
Health issues before the jab: None
Reactions: ‘Anaphylaxis. Within three minutes of the jab my lips and mouth became swollen, and I thought I was having a heart attack. My face went red. I have inflammation of the nervous system. I’m left with tingling and numbness in the hands, face, mouth and beneath the nose. Throbbing headache for ten days, changed to mild headaches but have now gone. Insomnia, which I never had before, dizziness, disorientation and fatigue. Tinnitus in left ear, throbbing in back of the neck and brain fog. Slight improvement but not back to normal.’
Tests done: Blood tests which showed low vitamin D. Three visits to GP and one to the hospital.
Time off work: Scaled down work at the beginning of pandemic anyway but would not have been able to carry on as normal
GP’s response: ‘Made no connection with the AZ.’
MHRA and AstraZeneca response: Filled in Yellow Card via phone call directly with MHRA but no contact since. Did not contact AZ.
JULES SERKIN, 63, freelance radio presenter for BBC specialising in food, married with three grown-up children and lives in Canterbury.
‘Too much stress at the moment. All I am doing is bouncing from pillar to post. Different GPs saying different things. Apparently, I’m a complex case.’
1st jab: March 5
2nd jab: Advised not to have second jab
Health issues before the jab: ‘Underactive thyroid. Initially, I was told it was safe to have the jab, but the advice has changed now for people with thyroid issues.’
Reactions: ‘Shivers were the first symptom, I felt like I had full blown flu. I was in bed for two days. Then blood clots came out of my nose for three weeks, I developed sinusitis. I began sleeping a lot, couldn’t look at a screen because my eyes were so sensitive. Developed a pain in my calf and headaches, which I’ve never had, with pains in my temples. Numbness in cheek and pins and needles in feet. Now my left eyelid has started to droop. I’m feeling tearful too.’
Tests done: Positive D-dimer test for blood clots. Blood tests show elevated liver enzymes which suggests liver damage. Ultrasound scan. MRI scan.
Time off work: ‘It’s affected my work for five months. I’ve been working but resting as often as possible.’
GP’s response: ‘You’re having a reaction to the vaccine.’
MHRA and AstraZeneca response: ‘AZ have sent five emails asking if they can contact my GP, but they haven’t yet. Filled in a Yellow Card in May, I’ve had an acknowledgment but that’s it.’
ADELE B, 57, is a retired communications co-ordinator, from Preston, who lives with her partner.
‘I’ve suffered weeks of weird symptoms. I feel it just can’t be coincidence that everything came at once. It also impacts on your family and friends. I feel like my partner is always checking on me. It’s put a cloud over my life. I cannot recall a day since I had the vaccine that I have felt completely well.’
1st jab: March 14
2nd jab: Advised not to have it while taking steroid medication to correct adverse reaction
Health issues before jab: None. Rarely went to the doctor.
Reactions: ‘Immediately after the vaccine I had chills, a sleepless night followed by a day with a headache and five days of feeling fatigued. The following week began with muscle aches and weakness in my shoulders, upper back, thighs and hips. Lack of sleep due to pain and I struggle to stand up after inactivity. These symptoms point to polymyalgia rheumatica (stiffness in neck and shoulders), an inflammatory autoimmune disease. My vision became blurry, and I had floaters in my right eye coupled with feeling disorientated when I sat down. I have heart palpitations, a strange rash behind my knee, dizziness and disorientation. Nerve pain and numbness in face, legs and feet and electric shock type sensations across my body. Health professionals are at a loss for a true diagnosis.’
Tests done: Several doctor’s appointments, seven blood tests, a 111 call, a visit to A&E, referral to rheumatology, referral to neurology, MRI scan of head, neck and spine, chest X-ray, eye examination.
Doctor’s response: ‘My doctor has advised me not to have the second AstraZeneca vaccine. Rheumatologist has indicated that she has seen several people reporting with autoimmune disorders since having their vaccine.’
MHRA and AstraZeneca response: Filled in Yellow Card, had a standard acknowledgement but nothing since. Didn’t contact AZ.
CARLA FREITAS, 31, highly specialist occupational therapist in neurology, neuro-cardiac and neuro-outreach at St George’s University Hospital, south London.
‘I was deemed fit enough to join the phase 1 Oxford Covid vaccine trials last April. I received the placebo and was offered the vaccine in January due to being an NHS worker. In the first few weeks of suffering nasty side effects and not understanding what was happening to my body I was in a very lonely place.’
1st jab: Jan
2nd jab: March 27
Health issues before jab: ‘None, 10-15-mile hikes at the weekend, scuba diving, travelling, you name it . . .’
Reactions: ‘No immediate side effects post second jab but after two weeks everything changed. I began getting headaches in the back of the head and pain in my neck. Stiff neck, pins and needles in my head and neck. Fatigue and short of breath during hikes. I had to stop after every lap when swimming. I tried to carry on as normal but couldn’t.’
Tests done: Four A&E visits and two admissions, one a suspected stroke the other because she couldn’t swallow, suspected VITT and Guillain-Barré syndrome (rapid onset muscle weakness), burning in hands and feet and leg weakness. Fifteen GP appointments, numerous blood tests, MRI of brain and spine, endoscopy, recorded heart rate for 24 hours, neurological physiotherapy, and exercises to help improve balance and reduce dizziness.
Time off work: Five months but hoping to return to work fulltime as feeling much better.
GP’s response: ‘I was told this is all stress and anxiety, in other words, all in my mind. Denial that the vaccine has anything to do with it. Doctors in the clinical trial have been unhelpful.’
MHRA and AstraZeneca response: Not known
DAVE McGUIRE, personal details not given. Dave provided three emails but has not been in contact since.
‘I’ve been talking to my best chum recently who had his first Pfizer jab a few weeks back. He’s now a fully-fledged member of the post vaccine headache world. What on earth is in these vaccines?’
1st jab: details not provided
2nd jab: not known
Health issues before jab: None
Reactions: Constant headaches, dizziness, abnormal heart rate, chest pain, reflux, fatigue, muscle pain and weakness in legs and arms, pins and needles and tingling in my right little finger, nausea, inflammation and stomach pains.
Tests done: Not known
Time off work: ‘Chest pain and muscle aches seem to be waning away and my heart is no longer racing like it used to.’
GP’s response: ‘One was hopeful that from her experience of seeing people with long-lasting effects from other vaccines that these should disappear with time.’
MHRA and AstraZeneca response: Not known
NOTE: By July 28, 24.8million people had received 48.4million doses of the AstraZeneca with one in 110 people reporting adverse reactions to the MHRA’s Yellow Card Scheme. A total of 20.46million have received 34.26million doses of the Pfizer with a reporting rate of one in 208 adverse events. Only 1.3million people have received 1.7million doses of the Moderna and 1 in 110 have reported serious side effects.
August 13, 2021
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Timeless or most popular | COVID-19 Vaccine, UK |
Leave a comment
In April and June of 2020 I wrote about something I referred to as LOKIN 20. In a series of articles I was among those in the so called “alternative media” who tried to highlight that lockdowns and other response measures, created by the Coronavirus Act, increased the risks to the most vulnerable.
This was entirely contrary to the rationale we were given for these new laws and subsequent policies. The response was promoted to the public as a “plan” to protect the most vulnerable. It was certainly a plan but increasing, rather than decreasing, the risks appears to have been the objective.
I reported the removal the safeguards put in place following the Shipman Inquiry and Francis Report (Mid Staffs). I pointed to statistical evidence from the Office of National Statistics and the concerns raised, by people like Professor Carl Heneghan and David Spiegelhalter, that a dangerous withdrawal of healthcare was contributing toward unnecessary increased mortality among the most vulnerable.
I am not claiming any great insight or deductive powers. I was just one, among many others, in the inappropriately named alternative media who were reporting the obvious dangers inherent to government policy.
It is important to stress that the increased mortality risk from the policies, rather than COVID 19, was abundantly clear at the time. Many people tried to warn the public but they were widely dismissed and labelled as “COVID deniers.”
A year later a number of mainstream media (MSM) articles have emerged confirming, what appears to have been, a policy that would inevitably maximise the risks to the most vulnerable. As usual, the possibility of deliberate policy intent is never broached in any of these MSM pieces. Their reports uncritically cite statements by politicians and consistently assume that these policies were mistakes and promote the notion that lessons need to be learned.
Speaking in June 2020 about the high risk discharge of 25,000 vulnerable patients into care setting, where they received neither medical care nor adequate social care, the former Health Secretary and chairman of the Health Select Committee, Jeremy Hunt, was unquestioningly reported as saying:
“It seems extraordinary that no one appeared to consider the clinical risk to care homes despite widespread knowledge that the virus could be carried asymptomatically”
Leaving aside the clear scientific proof that there is no such thing as asymptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the evidence suggests that these were neither mistakes nor failures. Yet all we see from the mainstream media is a free pass for the politicians and a blanket refusal to ever question their deceitful statements.
We face a huge sociopolitical problem. Despite the mountain of historical and contemporaneous evidence that governments can and do intentionally harm us, it seems we are collectively incapable of grasping the reality of democide. We wrongly assume that every policy is intentionally benign.
We must overcome this flawed and naive belief. Until we recognise that there are those within government, and its wider partnership networks, that wish us ill we will remain unable to address the threat they pose to all of us.
The UK government not only created the legislation to enable healthcare providers to increase the risks to the most vulnerable, they fully understood those risks. They had previously identified them in training exercises and had extensively modelled those risks.
Contrary to Hunt’s statement, there were many in the UK government who did “consider the clinical risk to care homes.” When the claimed pandemic arrived, rather than respond to limit and reduce the known dangers, the government, of which Hunt is a leading member, appeared to intentionally exacerbate them.
Section 14 of the Coronavirus Act removed the crucial NHS obligations under the NHS (standards) Framework. The NHS did not have to comply with clause 21(2)(a) and 21(12) of the 2012 Regulations.
The NHS no longer had a duty to assess a patient’s “eligibility for NHS Continuing Healthcare” before discharging them. In addition, no relevant body needed to have any “regard to the National Framework.” It is important to recognise what this meant within the context of a supposed global pandemic.
On 19th March 2020 the HCID group of Public Health England and the Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) unanimously agreed to downgrade COVID 19, from a High Consequence Infectious Disease, due to low mortality. The UK government issued instructions to the NHS that they must discharge as many patients as possible on the same day.
With no duty to assess a patient’s continuing healthcare needs, the government set very unsafe assessment criteria and compelled hospitals to discharge them. Unless they were in intensive care, receiving oxygen, on intravenous fluids or imminently close to death, the government decreed:
“Every patient on every general ward should be reviewed on a twice daily board round to determine the following. If the answer to each question is ‘no’, active consideration for discharge to a less acute setting must be made.”
This is worth reiterating. During an allegedly unprecedented health crisis the UK government removed the NHS duty to assess a patient’s health status (and conditions) before discharging them from hospital. They then issued instructions compelling the NHS to discharge as many patients as possible.
The government and the NHS accepted that this would mean discharging patients with an active COVID 19 infection into the community. COVID patients, and people with a range of potentially life threatening conditions, were shipped into care settings where other vulnerable adults, who may not not have had any infection, were supposedly “shielding.”
There is no doubt that untested and COVID 19 positive patients entered the care system via this route. Both during the first and second “waves.” It is entirely reasonable to suspect that this policy, combined with others we are about to discuss, caused the said “waves.”
An August 2020 study by the Queen’s Nursing Institute found the following practices commonly operating in Care Homes during the spring 2020 outbreak. We should note the element of compulsion:
“Having to accept patients from hospitals with unknown Covid-19 status, being told about plans not to resuscitate residents without consulting families, residents or care home staff… 21% of respondents said that their home accepted people discharged from hospital who had tested positive for Covid-19… a substantial number found it difficult to access District Nursing and GP services… 25% in total reporting it somewhat difficult or very difficult during March-May 2020.”
On January 11th 2021, during the alleged second wave, The Care Quality Commission stated:
“These settings are admitting people who are discharged from hospital with a COVID-positive test who will be moving or going back into a care home setting.”
Even a few isolated voices in the mainstream media pointed out what they referred to as culpable neglect. Some of the UK’s leading charities for vulnerable people including the Alzheimer’s Society, Marie Curie, Age UK, Care England and Independent Age contributed toward an open letter to the UK government. Written on 14th April 2020 they highlighted a litany of policy “failures:”
“Instead of being allowed hospital care, to see their loved ones and to have the reassurance that testing allows; and for the staff who care for them to have even the most basic of PPE, they are told they cannot go to hospital, routinely asked to sign Do Not Resuscitate orders.”
The policies operated both by the NHS and the care homes, as a consequence of Coronavirus Act’s “legislative easement,” did not protect the most vulnerable. Rather they maximised their clinical risk. Not just of COVID 19, but of every condition that rendered them vulnerable in the first place.
From the 17th March 2020 the NHS were discharging vulnerable patients into care homes without assessing their “eligibility for healthcare.” On 2nd April 2020 the NHS combined this with instructions that care home residents should not be conveyed to hospital. On the 6th April they issued guidance to GP’s which stated:
“All patients should be triaged remotely… Remote consultations should be used when possible. Consider the use of video consultations when appropriate.”
So called “first wave” mortality peaked on the 11th of April and the UK government published its COVID 19 Action Plan on the 15th April. This seemingly insane policy agenda was deemed “necessary” by the UK state to create “capacity” in the NHS:
“The UK Government with the NHS set out its plans on the 17th March 2020 to free up NHS capacity via rapid discharge into the community and reducing planned care… We can now confirm we will move to institute a policy of testing all residents prior to admission to care homes.”
There was no commitment to improve the situation from the UK government, just a plan to move toward one. We know from the observations of the CQC that they continued these high risk policies during the subsequent virus “waves.” There is no evidence that any of these policies were designed to reduce the risks of the most vulnerable. They all, consistently tended to increase them.
It is not tenable for politicians to now claim that they didn’t know what was happening. They constructed and enabled all of the policies that made this dangerous negligence possible. Nor is it credible to simply blame the medical profession. The widespread use of Hospital Trust gagging orders (non disclosure agreements) was also in place. Doctors who did speak out were disciplined or sacked. This was systemic policy initiative which physicians were expected to abide by.
Once the vulnerable were trapped in abandoned care homes, which were knowingly understaffed, the remaining, unprotected staff were then left to deal with both their own safety fears and the mounting mortality. The government decided this was an opportune moment to suspend all safety inspections in both hospital and care settings. This was supposed to “limit infections,” although every other decision they made appeared to increase them. Yet again, ending inspections raised the mortality risk for the most vulnerable.
At the same time, Do Not Resuscitate (DNAR) notices were being attached to vulnerable people’s care plans, often without their consent or even their knowledge. This coincided with a massive increase in orders for the potentially life ending medication midazolam.
In March 2020 the NHS purchased the equivalent of two years worth of supply. French suppliers were then given regulatory approval by the MHRA to sell additional stock to the NHS. This was then distributed for out of hospital use in the community.
This benzodiazepine (midazolam) is a sedative/anaesthetic that suppresses respiration and the central nervous system (CNS). The British National Formulary (BNF) recommends its use for sedation of anxious or agitated terminally ill patients using a mechanised syringe pump in doses of 30–200 micrograms/kg/hour. It is not recommended for conscious sedation in higher doses due to the following risks:
“CNS (central nervous system) depression; compromised airway; severe respiratory depression.”
Therefore a frail, eight stone (50 kg) adult could receive an initial dose of up to 2.5mg followed by a total incremental dose of another 2.5mg over a 24hr period. The purpose of this would be to ease their anxiety and agitation if they were experiencing the frightening sensation of intense respiratory difficulty.
Midazolam becomes a conscious anaesthetic for use in intensive and palliative care when given in higher doses. The British Association for Palliative Medicine recommend:
“Start with 2.5-5 milligrams – if necessary, increase progressively to 10 milligrams – maintain with 10-60 milligrams / 24h in a syringe pump”
Ten milligrams is twice the BNF recommended dose to ease anxiety (for an 8 stone vulnerable adult.) Therefore it is extremely concerning that NHS Clinical Guideline for Symptom Control for patients with COVID-19 recommended 10mg of Midazolam for patients with “distressing breathlessness at rest.” This risks a rapid deterioration of the symptoms causing them that distress.
Police are still investigating an estimated 15,000 deaths that occurred at Gosport War Memorial Hospital between 1987 and 2001. An inquiry has already found that at least 456 people’s lives were “shortened” through the unwarranted use of unnecessary medication. Many suspect that the true figure is in the thousands. The independent panel into the malpractice at Gosport War Memorial Hospital found:
“There was a disregard for human life and a culture of shortening the lives of a large number of patients by prescribing and administering “dangerous doses” of a hazardous combination of medication not clinically indicated or justified… they were, in effect, put on a terminal care pathway… The risk of using them in combination has been consistently documented in the BNF. In particular, it has long been known that when given together, opioids and midazolam cause enhanced sedation, respiratory depression and lowered blood pressure.”
This report was published in September 2018. In 2020 the NHS treatment guidelines for COVID 19 patients, who were deemed to be “agitated,” was:
“Start with Morphine 20mg and Midazolam 20mg”
This is precisely the mechanical syringe combination used at Gosport War Memorial to “shorten” thousands of peoples lives. There are numerous reasons to suspect that the huge increase in midazolam ordered by the NHS, with the full knowledge of the government, was intended for this purpose.
In April 2020 the Health and Social Care Committee, chaired by Jeremy Hunt, heard submissions from medical professionals as they considered the government response to the global pandemic. In Q377 Dr Luke Evans (MP fror Hinckley and Bosworth) asked then Health Secretary about NHS provisions for “a good death.” This is medical shorthand for assisted dying or euthanasia. Dr Evans (MP) asked:
“The syringe drivers are used to deliver medications such as midazolam and morphine. Do you have any precautions in place to ensure that we have enough of those medications?”
To which Matt Hancock replied:
“Yes. We have a big project to make sure that the global supply chains for those sorts of medications… are clear. In fact, those medicines are made in a relatively small number of factories around the world, so it is a delicate supply chain and we are in contact with the whole supply chain.”
Hancock was clearly referring to the huge midazolam order and MHRA approval of the French supply chain. The UK government had already passed the Coronavirus Act, removing the NHS Framework duties, and had ordered them to discharge patients en masse. The NHS had instructed care homes not to send sick patients to hospital and GP support from the care homes had effectively been withdrawn.
Jeremy Hunt was chairing this discussion. For him to claim two months later that no one had “appeared to consider the clinical risk to care homes” smacks of vile obfuscation. The best we can say about this statement is that he was wrong. We now have the documentation which shows that the clinical risk in care homes was very carefully considered and the withdrawal of care was planned.
In 2016 the UK government ran Exercise Cygnus. The training scenario was prepared by Professor Neil Ferguson and his team at Imperial College London (ICL). It simulated a flu outbreak and was a Command Post Exercise (CPX) designed to test the UK’s pandemic preparedness. Nearly a thousand key officials took part from central and local government departments, the NHS, public health bodies from across UK, as well as local emergency response planners.
Some of the Cygnus Report recommendations were implemented in response to COVID 19 and others not. For example, it recommended legislative easements. The Coronavirus Act certainly eased the legislation surrounding the death registration process and the NHS duty of care. The legal requirements for inquests, post-mortems and cremations were also relaxed.
Exercise Cygnus also highlighted a number of deficiencies. It identified inadequate numbers of critical, general and acute care beds, which the government then proceeded to reduce further; it warned that whole sections of the NHS may have to be shut, which is exactly what the government did during the “pandemic;” it highlighted that the most vulnerable could be denied care, just as they were, and that the health service would have to be set on a war footing just to be able to cope.
These were warnings not policy suggestions. The UK government’s adoption of some of the Cygnus recommendations and determination not to address Gygnus alarms appears to have been their policy response to COVID 19.
COVID 19 healthcare strategies were seemingly set in 2016. The Cygnus scenario, modelled by Ferguson and ICL differed from their COVID 19 “models” only by virtue of being based upon influenza rather than a coronavirus.
Perhaps this explains why Exercise Cygnus was kept secret, reportedly for reasons of “national security.” When the report was released, after being exposed, it was heavily redacted and all the names of the senior officials involved were hidden.
The official explanation for this is that it was just too terrifying for the public to withstand. We might ask, terrifying for whom? Using the media to terrorise the public during the alleged pandemic was recommended by Spi-B (SAGE.)
It is reasonable to assume that many of those redacted names would have been people working for Ferguson’s ICL team and current members of SAGE. If so, this indicates that those involved in planning the response to COVID 19 not only understood what the risks were, they then provided the claimed “scientific” justification for policies which they knew would increase them.
One of the senior officials involved in Cygnus reportedly said:
“These exercises are supposed to prepare government for something like this – but it appears they were aware of the problem but didn’t do much about it.”
Again, we see the assumption that everything must be explained away as error or unfortunate oversight. This stretches credibility beyond breaking point when we understand that Gygnus ultimately produced a plan to deny healthcare during a pandemic. This policy of increasing the risks of the most vulnerable was evidently operating during the first alleged pandemic wave. It also seems likely that it continued beyond that point.
Based upon the Cygnus conclusions, in September 2017, the NHS Surge and Triage briefing paper was made available to senior health and government officials. It discussed something called population triage:
“The purpose of this paper is to provide an update to Chief Medical Officer (CMO) and the Chief Scientific Advisor (CSA) on continuing refinement of the knowledge and understanding behind the potential decision that may be required in a future extreme pandemic influenza scenario to move to a state of population triage across the country..”
Population triage means the potential denial of healthcare:
“The majority of the detail in this paper will not be replicated in any publically available documentation… Difficult decisions will be needed about maintaining patient access to care.. There is significant discussion in the paper about ceasing or changing care to patients in the HRG (Healthcare Resource Croups)… Patients would be assessed on probability of survival rather than clinical need and higher level services would no longer be provided… Total excess death rate would be in excess of 7,806 per week of the peak of the pandemic if all these services were stopped… So in the peak six weeks of a pandemic… 46,836 excess deaths could be expected”
Between 7th March and 8th May 2020, there were 47,243 excess deaths in England and Wales. According to the Cygnus predictions this was slightly higher than the numbers envisaged to result directly from the withdrawal of healthcare. However, nearly all of these deaths were attributed to COVID 19. We should ask where, in the claimed COVID 19 mortality figures, the anticipated deaths from the denial of healthcare are.
In November 2017 a number of English stakeholders also met to discuss the a pandemic briefing paper for Adult Social and Community Care. This too was a product of Exercise Gygnus. Once again the intention was to keep the report secret.
“The majority of the detail in this paper will not be replicated in any publically available documentation… Whilst demand will increase, capacity, which is already under pressure because of recruitment challenges, will also reduce because of staff absences… Adult social care will have an increased role in supporting rapid discharge from hospital.. In a severe pandemic, only those services that are life-critical will be maintained… More patients could be supported by a greater focus on telecare/tele-monitoring.”
It is known, from the reports of the CQC and national charities and other NHS documents cited in this article, that primary healthcare was withdrawn from care settings and the community. The staff shortages identified in 2016 became chronic and then severe during the pandemic. This was entirely predictable and was a known outcome of the track and trace and self isolation polices of the UK government.
The briefing paper spoke about which services could be “reduced or deferred.” Crucially these included assessment of care needs, mobility support, personal care support, maintaining family connections and access to medical treatment.
During the “first wave” approximately 25,000 vulnerable people were discharged into care homes to face the extremely high risk environment created for them by the UK government. At the same time potentially life ending drugs were being liberally prescribed.
This was the COVID 19 policy response and we were told the intention was to “protect the most vulnerable”. All of it was predicted on the assumption that hospital were struggling to cope with the “surge” in COVID 19 patients. According to the UK government, patients needed to be discharged to free up capacity in the NHS.
At the height of the so called first wave, on the 13th of April 2020, the Health Service Journal reported that hospital bed occupancy was at a record low, with 4 times more beds available that usual for the time of year. There were 37,500 available beds.
The HSJ stated that the reason for this spare capacity was the discharge policy operated by NHS at the behest of the government. What they didn’t mention is that these figures show the high risk discharge of the most vulnerable people in our society was entirely unnecessary.
You may not like it but is not “unthinkable” that this was deliberate, coordinated policy designed to increase the mortality statistics. Many have questioned the claimed severity of the alleged pandemic. If you wish to give the impression of a high mortality disease then you need the deaths to back up your claim.
It is feasible that all of these risk heightening factors happened to perfectly coalesce to increase mortality, but is it plausible? A refusal to contemplate the possibility of a intentional act does not rule it out. Only a thorough, truly independent investigation can.
While this system was in operation, the UK government encouraged widespread adoption of the Clap for Carers, often referred to as “clap for the NHS.” During lockdowns, as the whole nation was told to self isolate indoors and avoid all unnecessary congregation, between the 26th March and the 28th May, we were “allowed” to simultaneously congregate on the streets and show our appreciation by clapping, banging pots and pans and ringing bells.
Meanwhile vulnerable people were being discharged into unsafe care homes where access to medical care was withdrawn and essential social care removed. Clapping for this was obscene. The government clearly used this ploy both as a distraction and as propaganda. This does not suggest that doctors, nurses and carers do not deserve our support. Any medical professional or carer who blows the whistle is almost certainly making a career ending decision.
Given the evidence we have discussed, if we consider ourselves to be responsible citizens who live in a democracy, it is unconscionable for us to simply ignore what appears to have been a deliberate and illegal government policy of large scale euthanasia in the UK. We must seek answers from policy makers and malfeasance in office must be prosecuted wherever it is identified.
August 12, 2021
Posted by aletho |
Supremacism, Social Darwinism, Timeless or most popular | Covid-19, Exercise Cygnus, UK |
Leave a comment
To paraphrase a famous quip from then Presidential candidate Bill Clinton in a debate with his Republican opponent in 1992, “It’s the vaccine, stupid!” The daily mainstream media and government narrative we are being inundated all over the world with is confusing to most, to put it mildly. So-called Delta or “Indian” variant is spreading like chicken pox we are told, but not what that “spreading” means. Unvaccinated are accused of spreading COVID-19 to those supposedly vaccinated. The USA, UK and EU are leading this confusing and deadly narrative.
Children are told by political appointees to get the jab despite official recommendation from WHO and national medical authorities such as STIKO in Germany to wait. PCR tests that define policy, but which do not tell anything about a person’s having a specific virus, are treated as a “Gold Standard” of infection. Yet as of this writing not one lab has successfully isolated purified samples of the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus said to cause the COVID-19 disease. How can PCR tests be calibrated if the claimed pathogen is not clear? If we take a step back it becomes clear that we are being subjected to a deliberate worldwide operation in cognitive dissonance whose intended consequences for the future of our civilization are not being told to us.
Resolving dissonance
Cognitive dissonance is a term in psychology for a person’s experience of two contradictory or inconsistent experiences whose inconsistency causes them great stress. The stress is resolved in the brain by the person playing unconscious tricks to resolve the contradiction. The Stockholm Syndrome comes to mind. In this case it is the traditional trust in Authority—governments, WHO, CDC, RKI, Bill Gates and other self-appointed epidemiological experts, in many cases with no medical degree. These authorities are imposing draconian lockdowns, masking and travel restraints and what is rapidly becoming de facto forced vaccination with untested jabs whose adverse effects now number in the millions in the EU and USA.
The ordinary brain says, “Why would the authorities want to harm us? Don’t they want the best for us and the country or the world?” The real experiences of the past 18 months since the World Health Organization declared a pandemic over an alleged virus first proclaimed in Wuhan China suggest that either politicians and health officials across the world have lost their minds, are deliberately evil, or willfully destructive or simply corrupt. To resolve that frightening contradiction, millions of us take an experimental concoction known as mRNA genetically-edited substance assuming then they are protected against infection or severe illness from an alleged deadly pathogen called COVID-19. Some even attack those around them who view the dissonance differently and who refuse a vaccine out of distrust and caution. Yet even the ever-present Dr. Fauci in Washington admits the novel mRNA vaccines do not prevent getting the alleged disease or being infectious, only maybe helps lessen its impact. That is not a vaccine, but rather something else.
Delta Variant?
At this point it is useful to look at several demonstrated facts around this coronavirus and its apparently unlimited “variants.” The current scare in the UK and EU as well as the USA is a so-called Delta variant of the coronavirus. The only problem is that we are not being told by the relevant authorities anything useful about that variant.
Since the alleged Delta variant of an alleged but nowhere scientifically proven Wuhan novel coronavirus is being used to justify a new round of draconian lockdowns and pressure to vaccinate, it is worth looking into the test to determine if a Delta variant is present in a tested person tested with the standard WHO-recommended PCR test.
The Delta Variant back in May was originally called the Indian variant. It was soon blamed for up to 90% of new COVID-19 positive tests in the UK, which also has a significant Indian population. What is not being told is that in just two months the alleged Delta positives in India dropped dramatically from 400,000 daily in May to 40,000 in July. Symptoms were said to be suspiciously like that for ordinary hay fever, so the WHO quickly renamed it the Delta variant according to the Greek alphabet just to muddy the waters more. Similar Delta declines came in the UK. “Experts” claimed it was because terrified Indians stayed at home as only a tiny 1-3% of the population had been vaccinated. In UK experts there claimed it was because so many had been vaccinated that Delta cases plunged. If you get the impression they are just inventing explanations to feed the vaccine narrative, you are not alone.
It gets worse. Virtually no one in the UK, India the EU or the USA who is claimed to have been tested positive for Delta has had a specific Delta variant test as such a direct variant test does not exist. Complex and very costly tests are claimed to exist, but no proof is offered that they are being used to claim such things as “90% of UK cases are Delta…” Labs around the world simply do the standard, highly inaccurate PCR tests and health authorities declare it is “Delta.” There is no simple test for Delta or any other variant. If that were not true, the CDC or WHO or other health institutes should explain in detail those tests. They haven’t. Ask relevant health “experts” how they prove presence of a Delta variant virus. They cannot. Testing labs in the USA admit that they do not test for any variants.
Worthless PCR Tests
Even the PCR test itself is not a test for any virus or disease. The scientist who won a Nobel Prize for inventing the PCR test, Dr. Kary Mullis, went on TV to attack by name NIAID head Tony Fauci as incompetent for claiming the PCR tests could detect any pathogen or disease. It was not designed for that, but rather as a laboratory analytical tool for research. PCR tests cannot determine an acute infection, ongoing infectiousness, nor actual disease. The PCR test is not actually designed to identify active infectious disease, instead, it identifies genetic material, be it partial, alive, or even dead.
A January 21, 2020 published paper by two Germans, Corman and Drosten, was used to create the PCR test immediately adopted by the WHO to be the world standard to detect cases of the novel coronavirus from Wuhan. At that point a mere six persons had been identified having the novel coronavirus. In November 2020 a group of scientific external peers reviewed the Drosten paper and found an incredible number of major scientific flaws as well as brazen conflict of interest by Drosten and colleagues. The scientists noted the Drosten PCR design and paper suffered from, “numerous technical and scientific errors, including insufficient primer design, a problematic and insufficient RT-qPCR protocol, and the absence of an accurate test validation. Neither the presented test nor the manuscript itself fulfils the requirements for an acceptable scientific publication. Further, serious conflicts of interest of the authors are not mentioned. Finally… a systematic peer review process was either not performed here, or of problematic poor quality.” Yet the Drosten PCR design was immediately recommended by the WHO as the world corona test.
The PCR amplifies genetic material by using cycles of amplification until it reaches what is called Cycle threshold (Ct), the number of amplifications to detect genetic material before the sample becomes worthless. Mullis once said if you amplify by enough cycles you can pretty much find anything in anybody as our bodies carry huge numbers of different viruses and bacteria, most harmless. Even Dr. Fauci in a 2020 interviews stated that a CT at 35 or above is worthless. Yet the CDC is believed to recommend testing labs to use a CT of 37 to 40! At that level perhaps 97% of COVID positives are likely false.
Neither the CDC nor the WHO makes public their Ct recommendations, but reports are that the CDC now recommends a lower Ct threshold for testing vaccinated so as to minimize COVID positives in the vaccinated, while recommending a Ct above 35 for the unvaccinated, a criminal manipulation if it is true.
For those interested in the evolution of perverting the PCR tests to supposedly diagnose specific presence of a disease, look into the sordid history beginning in the 1980s of Fauci and his underling then, Dr Robert Gallo, at NIAID, using Mullis’ PCR technology to wrongly claim a person is HIV-positive, a criminal enterprise that resulted in unnecessary deaths of tens or hundreds of thousands of people.
Notably nearly every prominent COVID vaccine advocate from Fauci to WHO head Tedros have come out of the HIV/AIDS swamp and its fake PCR testing. The entire panic measures imposed since 2020 around the world are based on the false premise that “Positive” RT-PCR test means being sick or infected with COVID. The COVID-19 scare that emanated from Wuhan, China in December of 2019 is a pandemic of testing as many doctors have pointed out. There is no proof that a pathogenic virus is being detected by the test. Nor is there a proven reference value, or “gold standard” to determine positive. It is purely arbitrary. Do the research and you will find it.
Pushing Experimental Vaccines
If it is the case that we have destroyed trillions of dollars in the world economy since early 2020 and ruined countless lives based on worthless PCR tests and now the same fraud extends the insanity for an alleged Delta variant, the clear conclusion is that some very influential actors are using that fear to drive experimental genetic vaccines never before tested on humans nor extensively on animals.
Yet the vaccine-related official death toll in the EU and USA continue to break records. As of this writing, according to the official EU database for recording vaccine injuries, EduraVigilance, by August 2 a total of 20,595 deaths had been reported of people who previously received the experimental genetic mRNA jabs! Such numbers have never before been seen. In addition there have been reported 1,960,607 injuries and 50% of them serious including blood clots, heart attacks, menstrual irregularities, paralysis, all following COVID-19 mRNA injections. The USA data at the CDC VAERS database is being manipulated openly, but even they show more than 11,000 post-mRNA vaccine deaths. The major news media never mention this.
Authorities and politicians reply that there is no evidence the deaths or injuries were vaccine related. But they cannot prove that they were not because they prohibit doctors from doing any autopsy. If we are told to follow science, why are doctors being told by health officials to not do autopsies on patients who died AFTER receiving two mRNA vaccines? After thousands of vaccine-related deaths only one autopsy has been reported, that in Germany, and the findings were horrific. The mRNA spike protein had spread through the entire body. The CDC stopped monitoring non-severe COVID-19 cases among vaccinated people in May. That hides the alarming number of vaccinated who get seriously ill.
Something is terribly wrong when respected experienced medical experts are being banned for suggesting alternative hypotheses to the entire COVID drama. When other scientists adhering to the official line call for any criticism of Tony Fauci or other mainstream COVID doctors, they are to be labelled as doing a “Hate Crime.” Or when cheap and proven remedials are prohibited in favor of the costly deadly mRNA vaccines in which Fauci’s NIAID holds a financial interest.
Already vaccine advocates such as Fauci are speaking of the need for booster mRNA shots and warning of yet a new “Lambda variant” looming. How will they test for that? Or are we to take it on faith because he or she is said by CNN or BBC to be a “respected authority”? How far will sane citizens allow this cognitive dissonance to destroy our lives?
F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University.
August 12, 2021
Posted by aletho |
Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | COVID-19 Vaccine, European Union, UK, United States |
Leave a comment
Brits being ‘coerced and controlled by fear’
The organisation claims its numbers are growing as current and retired journalists join. Their ethos is that only one side of the Covid-19 story is reported and the government isn’t being questioned enough by the mainstream media.
A counterinsurgency is underway in the British media. Holding The Line is a group who bill themselves as ‘Journalists Against Covid Censorship’. They are not anti-vaxxers or Covid-deniers but do feel the mainstream media is only allowing certain themes and tropes to be reported. Most importantly, they are adamant that UK citizens have been manipulated and gaslighted by the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE).
One of HTL’s spokespeople, Sonia Elijah, said to RT.com: “Unfortunately, I feel the UK public have been part of a mass behavioural science experiment because these behavioural scientists know full well the power of fear. You can really control someone’s behaviour through fear.”
I feel fearmongering has really gone on in the media like the government’s Project Fear advertising campaign about if you leave your house people can die, and they did a Look Me In The Eyes campaign. If you look at the early meetings that SAGE did last year in the minutes, they did look to use the media to increase the sense of personal threat, so the media were used as a tool for fearmongering, that’s a fact.”
This fear and control is what Holding The Line wants to rally against.
Elijah said: “We feel there’s only been one official Covid narrative that has been pushed onto the public through the mainstream media. As journalists, our role is to present all the facts, not just select a few.”
Some members of the group are anonymous, for fear of losing their jobs but they are from a cross-section of the industry. The plan is to expand and begin to release their own content online to beat the censors. Elijah, an independent investigative reporter, witnessed the censorship first hand when YouTube removed a video of her interviewing Dr Robert Malone.
She explained: “I think I’m the only UK journalist to have done so as yet, he is a vaccine expert and the inventor of mRNA technology. He’s undergone systematic attacks; his whole profile is being erased online. I posted the interview on YouTube and within three hours it got taken down for violating their policy, there was nothing on it that was to do with any kind of conspiracy theory.
It was very fact driven, he was measured in his responses but because he mentioned people having adverse events from taking the vaccines, that was probably one of the reasons it got taken down. People working in the mainstream media have found a lot of their stories being blocked or censored, or just not getting published, it’s a problem.”
Holding The Line is particularly concerned with mixed messaging. Some attribute this to the changing demands of a global pandemic, but they feel there is also a more sinister reason.
Taking aim at England’s Deputy Chief Medical Officer Professor Jonathan Van-Tam, Elijah added: “When the pandemic first broke, he was saying over his 15 years, there has been no evidence of masks presenting any transmission of a virus and then they did a U-turn weeks later and mandated masks, so you’re getting this sort of flip-flopping happening. Journalists need to ask, why is this happening?
I covered the anti-lockdown protests that were hardly covered in the mainstream media in the early days and if they were covered by the BBC, they were covered as anti-vaxxers, conspiracy theorists and they were a small group of a few thousand. When, in fact, I attended one of these protests and there were hundreds of thousands of people there from all different backgrounds.”
Virtually everyone concedes Britain has reacted ineptly to the pandemic, with over 130,000 dead but, according to Elijah, issues around testing go beyond naivety.
She took a look herself at the lateral flow tests that are being used by millions of Britons and made a startling discovery.
“These tests are produced in China by Xiamen Biotime Biotechnology, their original manufacturer,” she explained, “but they have been rebranded by Innova which is a US start-up company that has no background in any medical field and they were started up just around the time the pandemic started. They are wholly owned by Pasaca Capital which is a venture capital group funded by a US/Chinese billionaire.
The UK government has spent£3.2 billion in procurement and buying these tests. The Innova lateral test was then rebranded by the NHS, school children were given these kits and they were branded as NHS but this is the history behind it. They were proven to be highly inaccurate and very unreliable, they actually have false positive and false negative results.”
Due to issues around the tests, in June the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) urged Americans to stop using them. They advised the population to place “them in the trash” or return them to Innova. Elijah added: “Our equivalent in the UK, the MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency) ignored what had happened in the US and have continued to extend their emergency authorisation use for these tests. They are saying they have done their assessment and are satisfied, but they’re not publishing their findings, so they’re not being forthcoming. There are so many scandals and the people who have benefitted from these contracts have made billions.”
Pertinently that’s what Elijah thinks is behind a lot of the perceived Covid censorship: money. With many media companies struggling financially, they are clinging even harder to the backers. For example, Rupert Murdoch’s successful tabloid The Sun (once the biggest selling British newspaper) was recently given a value of zero, after Covid-19 contributed to a £200 million loss.
Elijah explained: “You have to look at who funds the mainstream media, the amount of advertising revenue they make, their sponsors, and a lot of them don’t want to bite the hand that feeds them. The independent platforms have the freedom to tell the whole story, they are not being restrained whereas in the mainstream media, you have to follow the money.
There is sort of a war on information going on right now, it’s a shame for journalists to be gagged in a way. We need to level the playing field. We are promoting best journalistic practice as a group and we feel there needs to be more room for a balanced debate, that’s what has been sorely missing in this whole Covid world.”
Other themes that Holding The Line say have been omitted from mainstream platforms are the Great Barrington Declaration and the drug Ivermectin as a way to fight Covid-19, which the FDA strongly advises against. It is true many issues haven’t received widespread coverage, but some journalists attribute this to research or facts that don’t merit the spotlight. Different platforms will choose what to run, it’s not feasible to report every possible story but professional balance is essential.
Elijah added: “It’s the way people are being coerced that I think is a bit troubling and there hasn’t been enough questioning behind that. Even the lab leak theory which has been discussed in the mainstream media, six months ago that would never have been discussed. The public are hungry to know what’s really going on.”
Chris Sweeney is an author and columnist who has written for newspapers such as The Times, Daily Express, The Sun and Daily Record, along with several international-selling magazines.
August 11, 2021
Posted by aletho |
Full Spectrum Dominance | Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine, UK |
Leave a comment
DOCTORS, lawyers and other patient advocates around the world are challenging the legality, ethics and scientific basis of the global drive to vaccinate the entire population, including children, against Covid-19. But even as they raise their voices, the intensity of censorship is increasing.
The latest victim is cardiologist, internal disease specialist, epidemiologist and academic researcher Dr Peter McCullough, editor-in-chief of two medical journals and author of over 600 peer-reviewed publications in the US National Library of Medicine, more than 45 of them dedicated to Covid-19. He has managed the care of more than 100 Covid patients as well as advising on hundreds more worldwide.
When this top American doctor spoke out on the effectiveness of early treatment, and raised questions over the safety and effectiveness of the vaccines, he began to find himself a pariah among colleagues.
He now faces what he calls ‘a dark cloud of censorship and reprisal’, including a legal action against which his attorneys were filing a defence last week.
Google his name, and you find at the top of the list an outrageously biased stand-alone item about the lawsuit, in which the online journal Medpage Today accuses him of ‘Dishing Out Vax Falsehoods’.
An information war is under way, and though most of the weapons are in the hands of governmental and drug company-funded sources, the resistance movement is growing.
McCullough has prepared what he calls ‘five key messages of scientific truth that I want everybody to understand about the virus and the pandemic.’ He has all the necessary scientific back-up to support his claims.
If his messages were to be emblazoned across every media outlet in this land and abroad, there would be a chance of ending the socially and economically destructive policies that have so far cost UK taxpayers an incredible £400billion in additional public spending directly attributable to Covid-19.
The five messages are:
1. The virus is not spread asymptomatically. That is, only sick people give it to other people.
2. We should stop testing symptomless people. That just generates false positives – creating extra ‘cases’ and extra concerns. ‘There shouldn’t be a single person on Earth that should undergo an asymptomatic test or a test done on a routine basis. For any reason. People ought to just walk past these testing stations. They have absolutely no standing whatsoever.’
3. Natural immunity is robust, complete, and durable. It cannot be improved by vaccination, or any other method. A person who has developed immunity after exposure to the virus is at minimal risk of becoming seriously ill again from Covid. Where apparent cases of that kind have been reported, a misinterpretation in the test procedure has been responsible.
Even with loosely defined cases, 11 studies involving 650,000 individuals showed a long-term recurrence rate of only 0.2 per cent. ‘Someone who is naturally immune can walk up to someone who has Covid-19, get a big cough in the face, and they are not going to get the illness.’
4. Covid-19, no matter what the variant, is easily treatable at home with simple, available drugs. About 88 per cent of hospitalisation and death is avoidable with early treatment. ‘The only way people end up in hospital and have a miserable time is when they receive no treatment.’
It’s easy to treat the illness early on, when the symptoms are mild. It has three major components: Viral replication, inflammation, and thrombosis – blood clots. Once these develop, they lower oxygen levels in the lungs and are hard to reverse.
5. The current Covid vaccines – AstraZeneca, Johnson and Johnson, Pfizer, and Moderna – are obsolete. ‘They do not cover the new variants. Patients are being hospitalised and getting sick, despite having the vaccines.’ And because of the record levels of deaths and injuries reported after the jabs, they should be considered ‘unsafe and unfit for human use.’
McCullough delivers this message in a four-minute video posted on LifeSite News.
It could save many lives, and perhaps even avoid any further fall into lockdown lunacy, if the link were to be sent to every doctor and every home in the UK.
To all who come across this article, please take a look at the video and judge for yourself: Is this some anti-vax maniac pushing a self-serving agenda? Or a highly-experienced, concerned doctor offering valuable insights into Covid realities, and fighting for a more rational, science-based treatment approach?
This treatment guide, co-authored by McCullough and Dr Elizabeth Lee Vliet, president and CEO of the Truth for Health Foundation (THF), a Christian-based US charity founded by doctors, could also be widely distributed. Vliet is a past director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.
Last week McCullough was among a team of physicians, scientists, clergy and patient advocates presenting ‘factual scientific and medical data previously kept from people around the world’ at the LifeSite-sponsored THF conference called Stop The Shot.
The foundation said the aim was ‘to help all of us be able to save lives and expose the threats to human health with these “shots” being forced on people without proper informed consent.’
Americans have not seen a single press briefing on vaccine safety, despite more than 100,000 people having died or been hospitalised in the wake of the jab, McCullough said.
‘My patients ask me: Doctor, am I going to be someone who dies after being hospitalised? I tell them: I don’t know, because our government is not telling us anything.
‘I had patients ask me today: Doctor, I hear the vaccine is failing. My friends have gotten the vaccine, but they’re getting sick with Covid, the Delta variant. Which vaccine is the best? Which one protects best against Delta? I say: I don’t know, because our government hasn’t told us anything.
‘So part of this conference is to have everyone start to really get on edge and demand of their government officials, their representatives, their hospital representatives, information – fair information.
‘If somebody gets on TV and says the vaccines are safe and effective, that’s misinformation. There’s nothing to suggest that these vaccines are safe and there’s nothing to suggest right now, based on the reports that we’re seeing, that they’re effective. We’re almost seeing a wholesale failure of the vaccine programme. So we have to take action now with early treatment.’
The situation is similar in the UK, where nearly 340,000 adverse reactions of varying severity, including 1,500 deaths, have been reported. With 84million shots administered, regulators insist that apart from local reactions to the jab, most of the deaths and injuries are coincidental.
That stand is highly questionable. In Germany, the Federation of Pathologists is urging that more autopsies should be conducted when people die in the wake of vaccination, to either exclude or prove a cause-and-effect link.
The call follows a study by Dr Peter Schirmacher, acting chairman of the German Society of Pathology, in which he performed autopsies on 40 people who had died within two weeks of the jab.
He found that 30-40 per cent of the deaths could be directly attributed to rare but serious adverse effects from the vaccine such as a blood clot in the brain, or autoimmune disease. He believes there may be many such cases in which the deaths go unnoticed, because doctors don’t make the link with the vaccine and certify the death as from natural causes.
August 11, 2021
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine, UK |
Leave a comment
WE HAVE a limited time to act. The essence of the situation now is clear: what is still perceived by many as a medical emergency is in reality a highly organised global corporate and political agenda. This agenda is directed towards imposing unimaginable control over the global human population though mandatory vaccination, connected to a digital passport, which will be linked to digital currency and a social credit score.
These technologies enable power to be centralised to a level of intensity never seen before in history.
At the controls of the machine will be the network which has orchestrated everything that has unfolded over the past eighteen months.
Here is what has happened in Great Britain since March last year. The Ministry of Health under the direction of Matt Hancock has presided over the deaths of tens of thousands of the elderly in care homes. These deaths were not caused by deciding to lock down too slowly, but were the outcome of a series of political decisions.
These included turning care homes into prisons, and banning relatives from visiting, and placing an enormous order for Midazolam, a sedative which has been used for euthanasia.
At this time the government also reduced hospital capacity, emptied untested and sick patients into care homes, suppressed the early treatment use of safe generic drugs and initiated a behavioural control campaign directed towards increasing fear.
If there had been a premeditated plan to maximise deaths while retaining plausible deniability that this plan existed, how would it have unfolded differently?
The government has now converted hotels into prisons and incarcerates everyone who enters Britain from an arbitrary list of countries, drawn up without clear logic, and subject to sudden rapid changes. Leaving and returning to the country now involves submission to a regimen of humiliating, pointless and expensive testing based on Drosten’s defective PCR tests and a disinformation myth of asymptomatic spread.
Why are they doing this? To confuse and to humiliate, to deter travel, and to desensitise the population to a new normality of arbitrary imprisonment without trial.
Now the government has mandated the compulsory vaccination of care home workers even as evidence accumulates that the global universal vaccination programme, an unprecedented policy in the history of public health, following the unprecedented global lockdown, is a medical catastrophe with numbers of major side effects including death reported in the aftermath of vaccination climbing into tens of thousands, and still not ending the pandemic.
Mandating any medical treatment as a condition of employment writes medical apartheid into law; the fact that this treatment might be useless (since the ‘vaccines’ do not prevent contracting, transmitting or even dying from the virus) as well as dangerous indicates a darker logic.
The extension of the vaccine programme to children, who are at less risk from the virus than they are from vaccines, suggests the vaccines have a function independent of their role in serving as a vaccine passport Trojan horse. Children will be harmed and die due to this policy, having already been tortured for a year with pointless mandatory testing and propaganda baselessly accusing them of potentially becoming accidental murderers if they did not comply with government decrees. Meanwhile Carrie Antoinette Ceaușescu is pregnant once again, with Johnson having done to her what he has been doing to the country.
For the vaccines to receive regulatory approval (if not for further reasons) effective, safe and cheap treatments have been ruthlessly suppressed. In March 2020 the Lancet, once the most reputable medical journal in the world, now a propaganda organ for the global network, published a fake paper claiming hydroxychloroquine had a negative effect; the paper was eventually retracted. One of the largest hydroxychloroquine factories in the world burned down after an explosion. The highly effective drug ivermectin remains suppressed in the UK and criminalised in other countries. If these drugs had been made available tens of thousands of people would be still alive today. Instead official policy has increased the death toll on the road to mandating vaccines.
Global government intends to make recurring vaccinations mandatory, indefinitely, to access social life. For this purpose they have stockpiled 450million doses of vaccines, enough to vaccinate each member of the British population seven times; other countries have similar figures. They will later order more. What is being implemented is compulsory repeated vaccination for perpetuity.
Towards this goal the facts about the danger of the virus and now the dangers of the vaccines have been ruthlessly suppressed, and bogus information, lies, neurolinguistic programming, and pseudo-scientific models promoted in their place.
A long and growing list of authoritative and conscientious scientists and doctors (including John Ioannidis, Mike Yeadon, Martin Kulldorff, Jay Bhattacharya, Sunetra Gupta, Didier Raoult, Scott Atlas, Peter McCullough, Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi, Sucharit Bhakdi, Robert Malone) have been censored and defamed. In their place we’ve been presented with charlatans, propaganda actors and fanatics.
Sweden, Florida and Texas, which have all defied the global line on lockdowns, are no longer mentioned, while Haiti’s Moise, Burundi’s Nkurunziza, and Tanzania’s John Magufuli are all dead, in Magufuli’s case weeks after the Guardian published a Gates Foundation-sponsored article demanding action.
This is a shameful period in human history and with every day that passes the shame of what we have already allowed to happen deepens. We have failed to stop a systematic policy which has killed millions around the world and will kill millions more. We have failed to stop the imposition of policy of child abuse on a national scale. We have failed to stop the imposition of lockdown policy which has achieved nothing but the immiseration of hard-working men and women. We are facing government by mercenaries, tyrants, propagandists and fanatics.
Men and women who have already shown courage must continue to do so, and others must now find their courage.
Doctors who have sacrificed their ethics to collaborate in this grotesque charade must redress the balance and remember their duty is to patients, not the government, and not to science.
Apathetic journalists who for eighteen months have functioned as the mindless relays of a criminal regime must recognise their duty is to truth and to the people.
The judiciary, who for eighteen months have deferred to rule by diktat and extended their goodwill to tyranny must recognise, like some of their colleagues in Spain, Alberta, Lisbon, Weimar and elsewhere, that their duty is to justice and human rights, and that these cannot be suspended under any circumstances whatsoever without being destroyed completely.
The vaccination programme must be stopped, or it will never end. Instead, it will become the basis of a new post-social contract modelled on the periodically updated terms of social media in which shared political and corporate interests will make humanity a resource to be farmed.
The Government, who answer to these interests, will seek to reimpose a lockdown with additional restrictions in the autumn. They must be stopped by every moral means.
August 8, 2021
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine, UK |
Leave a comment
Downing Street will enlist TikTok stars to push teens to get vaccinated, even as critics note that the committee behind the decision to expand the inoculation drive has admitted it had sparse evidence for doing so.
The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) announced on Thursday that the first dose of the Pfizer Covid vaccine will be offered to all 16- and 17-year-olds without needing the consent of their parents, reversing its own recommendation from just two weeks ago.
The independent panel of experts, which advises the UK government on immunisation, had earlier said that the jab should not be given to minors unless they were over 12 and suffered from medical conditions that would make them vulnerable to Covid-19, or lived with someone deemed high-risk. JCVI said it will issue a recommendation about when the second dose should be administered at a later date.
The NHS is now gearing up to give the shot to about 1.4 million children. To help with the effort, the government plans to assemble an army of Instagram and TikTok stars, as well as a fleet of ‘vaccine buses’ to drum up enthusiasm for the jab and make it easy for teens to get, iNews reported.
The kid-friendly approach to promoting the Pfizer jab comes after social media observers highlighted the fact that JCVI chair Wei Shen Lim sent mixed signals about how the decision to offer the jab to teens was made.
During a press briefing on Thursday announcing the policy, Lim said his committee decided to reverse its recommendation after “carefully considering the latest data.”
But he appeared to back-pedal after a journalist asked if the committee would be publishing “the evidence” used in making its decision to allow 16- and 17-year olds to get the shot, in order to help reassure parents. Lim responded by stating that there was currently no evidence available to share with the public.
The intention is for all the evidence to be published. The evidence isn’t necessarily in the hands of JCVI. We have spoken to academic partners and to other people in other countries as well. So wherever possible we encourage that the evidence is published, but the timing is not in our hands.
The committee’s attempt to explain its decision led to head-scratching from the media. Sarah Knapton, the Science Editor at The Daily Telegraph, said that after sitting through two press briefings, “I’m none the wiser about why JCVI has changed their advice. Not convinced they know either.”
Others pointed to what appears to be a rather straightforward conflict of interest. While the JCVI claims to be an independent body, Professor Wei Shen Lim is part of a department at the British Thoracic Society that received more than £25,000 ($34,760) in funding from Pfizer. Lim declared the “departmental interests” in a 2021 audit, which stated that he had “direct responsibility” over the Pfizer-gifted funds. The British Thoracic Society is a charity that aims to improve treatments for respiratory and associated disorders.
Governments around the world have urged people of all ages to get vaccinated, claiming that the more transmissible Delta variant may pose a greater risk. However, the disease has had a negligible effect on mortality among children. In the first 12 months of the pandemic, NHS data shows only 25 under-18s died from the illness.
August 6, 2021
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | COVID-19 Vaccine, UK |
Leave a comment
LAST week I had a house call by a Covid officer to check compliance with post-holiday quarantine following my return from the Balearics. After a lovely holiday in a destination on the green list which later turned amber, my punishment consisted of ten days’ forced isolation in three rooms (including lavatory) covering 500 square feet and no outside space.
As an unvaccinated Untouchable, I looked on in envy at my double-poked friends who returned to London being able to move about freely and my travel companion who’d be showing off her tan. I wistfully imagined the glamorous parties they’d be attending whilst I’d be limited to surfing murder mystery reruns on ITV with a slightly acidic bottle of rose.
But be careful what you envy, ladies . . .
Two such double-jabbed friends, both travelling back to the UK from amber list countries, Spain and Denmark, on different budget airlines, were pinged and ordered to self-isolate on their return. It turned out someone on both of their flights had tested positive for the virus.
Now, neither of them is dumb enough to have the NHS track and trace app but their details were taken from the forms they were required to complete to board the planes bound for home.
So it turns out that getting the poke is no guarantee of regaining your freedom at all, and definitely not any kind of insurance policy for risk-free travel abroad. This was in spite of the fact that both of them, having taken tests within 48 hours of boarding and on day 2 after landing in UK arrivals, tested negative for the virus. The one returning from Denmark was fortuitously pinged after day 2, which she interpreted to mean that her isolation could be shortened to 7 days. Both friends were also required to take a test on day 8 of isolation (so in her case after it was over), and unlike myself, their Untouchable counterpart, could not do a day 5 test to get out early for good behaviour.
Everyone keeps telling me that as of August 16 the double-vaccinated will be able to move around freely regardless of whether they have been pinged. But as in this context ‘pinged’ refers to the app presumably the new freedom pass will not apply to the situation both of my friends found themselves in. Such is the absurdity that will prevail in the approaching mid-month holiday peak that there will be no way to ascertain whether it is worth travelling to a green-list rock in the Atlantic or going the whole hog and risking a turn from amber to red, with consequent pay-to-play prison sentence on return.
I wonder whether the government (which I no longer spell with a capital ‘G’ as I do not recognise its legitimacy) justifies all of this on the premise that people who dare to go on holiday must be treated as putrid receptacles of contagion and thereby do penance for their hubris.
Just like me, my vaccinated friends are sitting at home this week, watching the tan fade and bingeing on Thai food delivered in a box whilst staring at some dystopian feminist melodrama on Channel 4 for human company. My Danish friend lives in a 350 square foot studio flat in Notting Hill but at least she has a balcony on which to smoke and sunbathe; otherwise I don’t know what she would do as in such a small space confinement is unbearable.
Not for her dressing up to visit Tesco Express or setting a playlist to walk in the park; no stolen glances at the hot barista on the morning coffee run. The Covid gods have spoken, and her sentence is to wake up every day in the fiery furnace of quarantine to be purified until such time as she may be released by her gracious overlords.
Lots of articles have been written recently about the pingdemic and I daresay most employees who can’t work from home are delighted to get a ping. These serfs will doubtless not be looking forward to August 16 (another ‘freedom day’), and were I one of them I would consider coming up with a strategy to deal with the impending fall-out. An efficient tactic could be the collection of bulk quantities of LF tests to multiply potentially positive results and, via photographic replication, establish a vault of templates for passing around when needed.
I digress. Back to being stalked by the Covid marshal. He knocked at the door twice, politely, and when I opened it he met me with sheepish eyes over a medical mask to request proof of ID. You can never be too careful in verifying the identity of someone who answers their own door during a spell of quarantine.
Neither of my vaccinated friends who were told to self-isolate received a visit from the NHS. I have now started quite feeling special that someone actually cared enough to check up on me.
Come to think of it, I should have invited the Covid marshal in for a drink . . .
August 4, 2021
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | COVID-19 Vaccine, UK |
Leave a comment
In recent weeks, ministers and officials have announced that UK households and businesses will have to fund many of the government’s Net-Zero plans via their energy bills and cost of living.
Currently, UK consumers are funding renewable energy investors to the tune of £12 billion per year, taken from consumer bills as stealth taxes.
These subsidies are projected to grow over the coming years, reaching a total of about £13 billion a year in the mid-2020s.
But on top of this huge and rising cost, the government now plans to add a whole catalog of additional Net-Zero subsidies, as the recent news reports below reveal.
- The government plans to force consumers to subsidize the installation of charging stations for electric vehicles (EV) by raising electricity bills.
- Ministers are in the process of drawing up legislation that will force households to fund the construction of new nuclear power plants through the use of a surcharge on energy bills.
- Households face paying an extra £200 per year to fund greenhouse gas removal technology.
- The wind energy lobby has warned that consumers will have to subsidize offshore wind farms indefinitely, refuting the oft-repeated claim that renewables are close to becoming “subsidy-free”, and confirming analysis showing that wind power costs have not fallen.
- Energy bills face an additional rise in cost as the power grid operator is increasingly forced to pay wind farms to switch off turbines. ‘System balancing’ costs alone were £2 billion last year and could hit £2.5 billion per year over the next decade as renewable capacity continues to grow.
Industrial and commercial consumers with the option of relocating to countries with cheaper energy will obviously do so.
Households, on the other hand, will simply have to cut down on food and other expenditures in order to pay their energy bills and cut their standard of living.
The GWPF’s director Benny Peiser said:
“It is fairly certain that most households would be unable to keep their heads above water as this torrent of additional Net-Zero costs overwhelms their domestic budgets.”
“Neither Boris Johnson nor his government would survive this unwise and unjust imposition on the British people.”
August 4, 2021
Posted by aletho |
Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | Human rights, UK |
Leave a comment
A senior Russian foreign ministry official strictly rejects existence of any indications pointing to Iran’s likely involvement in a recent attack on an Israeli oil tanker off the Omani coast.
“We have not the slightest reason to believe [that Iran was involved in the attack],” the Russian Foreign Ministry’s Second Asian Department Director, Zamir Kabulov told Russia’s Sputnik news agency on Monday.
In a statement on Friday, Zodiac Maritime, the Israeli-owned firm managing the tanker, said that two crewmen, a Briton and a Romanian, had been killed in the assault.
The Israeli regime and its sworn allies, the United States and the UK, rushed to accuse Iran of having a role in the incident, without providing any evidence. The Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has also alleged that the attack was deliberate and coordinated by Tehran.
Kabulov, however, reiterated Russia’s stance, saying Moscow’s refusal to corroborate such accusations was because “we have no facts.”
“When there are facts, then we will work out our position,” he added.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry has summoned Britain’s chargé d’affaires and Romania’s ambassador to convey Tehran’s strong protest, reminding the envoys that the source of instability in the Persian Gulf was not the Islamic Republic, but actually extra-regional presence.
Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh has also refuted such accusations as “absolutely groundless,” saying they feature “contradictory,” “hollow,” and “provocative” claims.
The official also sounded a strong warning against any act of adventurism targeting the Islamic Republic’s interests based on the unfounded claims.
August 3, 2021
Posted by aletho |
Wars for Israel | Iran, Israel, Russia, UK, United States |
Leave a comment
Guido Fawkes reminds us today that over 1,200 so-called experts signed ‘the Declaration’ – cooked up by the same people behind the John Snow Memorandum – warning of the terrible effect easing coronavirus restrictions on July 19th would have. The Declaration originally took the form of a letter in the Lancet, published on July 7th, in which 120 self-described ‘scientists’, many of them members of Independent SAGE, described ‘Freedom Day’ as “dangerous and premature”. They cited the SAGE modelling showing there would be 100,000 new Covid cases a day if the Government went ahead its plans and set out the dire consequences for Britain and the rest of the world. “We believe the Government is embarking on a dangerous and unethical experiment, and we call on it to pause plans to abandon mitigations on July 19th, 2021,” they wrote.
Two weeks on from ‘Freedom Day’, their predictions aren’t holding up terribly well.
According to Public Health England, the number of new daily cases fell to 21,691 today, another five-week low. So the 1,200 signatories of the Declaration exaggerated the number of daily cases that would follow ‘Freedom Day’ by 500%.
The Lancet letter also predicted that hospital admissions would soar as a result of Boris’s recklessness:
The link between cases and hospital admissions has not been broken, and rising case numbers will inevitably lead to increased hospital admissions, applying further pressure at a time when millions of people are waiting for medical procedures and routine care.
Perhaps they should have thought twice before inserting that word “inevitably” because the latest data shows hospital admissions falling. “Another 731 admissions were recorded by officials on July 30th, the latest date available – down 15% on the week before,” reports MailOnline.
And it wasn’t just these 1,200 ‘experts’ who were sounding the alarm. Let’s not forget that Keir Starmer also described Boris’s plan to ease restrictions as “reckless”.
And, of course, our old friend Neil Ferguson said on July 18th that it was “almost inevitable” that daily cases would climb to 100,000 a day if Boris went ahead with the unlocking the following day and added that “the real question” was whether they would reach 200,000 a day or more and warned of a “significant burden on the healthcare system”. Out by 1000% – which is actually pretty modest by Ferguson’s standards.
As Guido Fawkes says: “Guido can’t remember a time 1,200 so-called experts were proven so wrong in one fell swoop…”
Boris’s decision to go ahead with ‘Freedom Day’ is the first time I can think of in the past 16 months when he’s stuck to his guns in the face of wildly apocalyptic claims from various ‘experts’ about the consequences of “letting it rip” (their phrase for giving us our freedoms back). On every previous occasion, because he’s done exactly as these gloomsters have asked, they haven’t been proved wrong. Admittedly, locking down three times hasn’t stopped the U.K. from having one of the worst Covid death tolls in Europe, and Sweden’s excess deaths in 2020 were lower than ours in spite of not locking down. But the crystal ball gazers have always been able to argue that things would have been so much worse if we hadn’t locked down. Yet this time – finally – Boris ignored their doom-mongering and, as a result, they have been proved spectacularly – and humiliatingly – wrong.
Will this experience stiffen Boris’s backbone the next time he’s prevailed upon by the Government’s scientific advisers, sundry public health experts and the chin-wobblers in the Cabinet to lock down again, which really is inevitable? We can but hope.
August 3, 2021
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science | Covid-19, SAGE, UK |
Leave a comment
