- “Westminster’s vaccine safety debate: Heroes and head-in-the-sand hardliners” – The Conservative Woman’s Kathy Gyngell reports on Monday’s parliamentary debate on COVID-19 vaccine safety. She was, she laments, “the only member of anything pertaining to being ‘the Press’ in attendance”
- “CDC Pushed for COVID-19 Boosters Without Clinical Trials: Emails” – Emails obtained by Judicial Watch reveal that the CDC pressured U.S. regulators to authorise Covid boosters without clinical trial data, the Epoch Times reports
- “The Covid tyranny, and why some of us stood up to it” – It was due, among other things, “to courage, natural scepticism of mass movements, a love of truth,” and “moral values deeper than mere physical safety,” writes philosopher Dr. Frank Palmer in the Conservative Woman
- “Veteran denied service at VA clinic over mask rules despite medical condition” – The Post Millennial flags a video showing a veteran being denied access to a health clinic because he was not wearing a mask on account of his PTSD
- “No surge expected in global Covid cases this winter” – A University of Washington analysis estimates that global COVID-19 infections will rise to an average of 18.7 million daily cases by February next year, the Cyprus Mail reports, up from the current 16.7 million
- “The SARS-CoV-2 transmission riddle – Part 10” – Tom Jefferson and Carl Heneghan look to human challenge studies for further insight into SARS-CoV-2 transmission
- “Biden’s Bivalent Booster Blunder” – “The only way for Biden to save himself from his terrible Covid policy is to fire all his advisors and rehire good ones,” says Vinay Prasad
- “How China Abuses U.S. Diplomats” – State Department communications shared with the Wall Street Journal describe how the U.S. Government let China impose its coercive zero-Covid protocols on American diplomats
- “BBC Should Step Aside and Allow the Biopharmaceutical Industry to Do its Own Public Relations” – Paul D. Thacker of the Disinformation Chronicle wonders why the BBC and other fact check sites are “constantly sprinting to the podium as spokespeople for an industry with such a long and tattered history of documented lies?”
- “Parochial and Pathological Altruism” – “Altruism has a dark, hidden pathology,” writes Lucio Saverio-Eastman at the Brownstone Institute, “that has driven some of the worst and most horrific acts humanity has ever experienced”
- “Cancer Rates are Increasing – and May Get Much Worse” – “Cancer deaths began to increase, off the charts, in late 2021,” reports Igor Chudov and he warns that “we are seeing only the first small ripple of a storm coming in the future”
- “How Big Pharma monetised depression” – Writing in UnHerd, Robert Whitaker explains how America was sold a “lucrative myth” about depression
- “Sunak’s ‘ban’ on domestic shale gas is an economic blunder that will worsen Britain’s energy crisis” – Net Zero Watch laments Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s decision to reinstate the ban on shale gas exploration in England
- “Climate alarmism is bad for your health” – “There is an iron-clad relationship between economic development and people’s health,” argues Laurie Wastell, an intern at spiked. “And no country in history has ever become wealthy without making use of fossil fuels”
- “Where are electric cars going?” – “Countries are keen to out-virtue-signal each other with electric cars,” says Graham Pinn in Spectator Australia, but “what is plainly missing in the game is any concept as to how these goals can realistically be achieved”
- “Why solar is not the solution to the energy crisis” – “Next gen nuclear power is clean, efficient, and environmentally friendly,” says Steve Kirsch. “Why was it killed?”
- “University of York drops students’ initials from email addresses in trans-friendly move” – University of York student email addresses will now be made up of randomly generated letters rather than initials, according to the Telegraph, in order to accommodate students who have changed their gender, or got married or divorced, and therefore changed their name”
- “Cambridge college apologises for ‘distressing’ gender critical lecture” – The head of sociology at Cambridge University has apologised to students for ‘distressing’ them with an advert promoting a ‘harmful’ talk about gender ideology with the author Helen Joyce, MailOnline reports.
- “Cancelled preacher gets £100,000 payout” – Franklin Graham will receive almost £100,000 in damages, according to the Times, after a judge ruled that the Scottish Event Campus breached the equality act when it cancelled his event due to the “adverse publicity” generated by his tour
- “The black sheep of the EU head for crisis as Brussels cuts off lifelines” – Hungary is at loggerheads with Brussels over £23.4 billion in EU funding which has been withheld from the country due to concerns over corruption, democratic standards and gay and trans rights, the Telegraph reports. Victor Orban’s allies say the EU is trying to enforce its woke ideology
- “‘Sturgeon’s Tavistock’ clinic offers trans children surgery not backed by ‘robust evidence’” – A leaked recording has revealed that the Sandyford Clinic in Glasgow has been offering patients irreversible sex-change treatments despite senior clinicians admitting that its methods are not backed by “robust evidence”, the Telegraph reports
- “Sacheen Littlefeather and the rise of the race fakers” – “We live in a world that is obsessed with ‘identity’,” writes Frank Furedi in spiked, “And an identity that conveys victim status is prized above all others”
- “Thai transgender activist buys Miss Universe org for $20M” – Thai business tycoon and transgender activist Chakrapong “Anne” Chakrajutathib has purchased the Miss Universe Organization for $20 million, reports the Associated Press
- “Pfizer has now admitted they did not test whether the COVID vaccines prevented transmission before releasing them” – “It is now perfectly clear that we were lied to,” says Ben Shapiro, “by both the vaccine companies in terms of the ability of the vaccines to prevent transmission, and by the politicians who apparently knew better”
If you have any tips for inclusion in the round-up, email us here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Why some stood up to the Covid tyranny was due “to courage, natural scepticism of mass movements, a love of truth,” and “moral values deeper than mere physical safety,”
In my case it was sheer cussedness.
It would be interesting to see who would have stood up to the tyranny if political polarities were reversed. So many on the left only joined in with the tyranny because it was rubber stamped by their own kind, it seems.
Both sides of politics were involved in the tyranny (lock-downs, mandates), but the rank-and-file of the left were disappointingly absent from the resistance. The old-time left would have been marching along with us, but the vast majority of the Modern Left have instead aligned themselves with The Man whether The Man was of the left or the right.
It’s true that there was a lack of real opposition in the Westminster bubble. The absence of that may well have caused the rather large loss of Labour Party members (as shown in their published accounts, and no doubt followed by some redundancies).
Not being a lefty any more I can’t really say for sure what was in people’s minds. The covid reaction could be seen as an extreme example of collectivism, which lefties see as generally good and righties see as generally bad. I guess a sceptic lefty would argue that collectivism has its place but in this case it was abused, a sceptic righty would argue that if not severely kept in check collectivism will always lead to trouble of this kind.
I’d be interested in people’s views on this. I’m not looking to divide us because that’s counterproductive, but it seems to me a legitimate subject for debate.
This question has bothered me since the start of all this as one who has oscillated between left and right in the past. The only explanation I can come up with is that the pro-collectivist and pro-science mind set has completely blinded the left to the obvious damage inflicted on working people by the kind of organisations and companies that they would normally loath. The left may also suffer more from the kind of free-floating anxiety that Desmet refers to as a trigger for Mass Formation given that they tend to lack any kind of spiritual beliefs and hold to a very materialistic view of the world. Having said that, I have a couple of good friends who are very much of the left and they saw through all this crap from the start, so go figure!
Of course I am generalising and many on the “right” were happy to go along with it too.
I think there is an absence of historical perspective amongst lefties and a belief that science is pure and true and progressive. Also see Ivan Illych on doctors being the new priests and hospitals being the new cathedrals.
Left or right doesn’t matter. What matters is pro-freedom or anti-freedom (or even pro-human/anti-human). In the country of my birth I had taken my freedom for granted. I don’t anymore.
Well I suppose you could argue that certain policies when pursued are more likely to lead to freedom than others. Collectivising healthcare for example could be argued to lead to public health fascism – not inevitably in theory but in practice.
But of course freedom is the fundamental that I think everyone who posts here believes.
But the fact remains that most of the political opposition to covid madness and evil has come from the political right, not just in this country but globally – at least that’s my view based on the (admittedly incomplete) information I have.
And Common sense. The presence of a dangerous respiratory virus – a pandemic no less – a risk to all should have produced in the UK alone around 30 million obvious symptomatic cases, that is with symptoms at least the same as bad Cold and ‘flu, even if not hospitalised, in January, February, March 2020.
Where were they?
There cannot be a pandemic without population-wide disease, with relatively few serious cases confined exclusively to the elderly and moribund.
“No surge expected in global Covid cases this winter” – A University of Washington analysis estimates that global COVID-19 infections will rise to an average of 18.7 million daily cases by February next year, the Cyprus Mail reports, up from the current 16.7 million
Funny how the MSM would never put it like that.
What happened to the ‘twindemic’ facing the UK from Covid and flu?
Somebody needs to inform the UK!
https://www.unison.org.uk/news/press-release/2022/10/winter-plan-for-covid-urgently-needed-says-unison/
Commenting on the rise in Covid cases announced today (Friday), UNISON assistant general secretary Jon Richards said:
“Winter is coming and the virus is staging a comeback. Yet the government doesn’t appear to have a plan.
“Unless urgent action is taken, cases will surge and schools, hospitals, care homes and other key public services will be without the staff they need to function.
“Bringing back free testing is a must so people don’t unwittingly take the virus into work, school or the pub.
“A system of proper sick pay where everyone, no matter where they work, gets full pay when poorly is also long overdue.”
Also..Euronews today…..
https://www.euronews.com/2022/10/26/european-health-experts-warn-of-new-wave-of-covid-19-within-a-week
The European Medicines Agency says a new wave of COVID-19 infections will hit the continent in the coming weeks as we move towards winter.
The EMA held a press conferenc in the Netherlands where officials said the pandemic is not over and that the Omicron variant continues to mutate and therefore to cause concern.
Theres absolutely not a snowballs chance in hell of them giving up this golden goose…..we will just be subjected to the same old crap….
Funny how Rhinoviruses don’t get a special name and they’re responsible for most common colds by far…
It’s just beyond farcical at this point isn’t it?
…actually lots of headlines in America that they are facing a triple-demic apparently…covid, flu and RSV….(respiratory syncytial virus)..
As you say, just variations of a cold….and none of them fatal to the majority!
And the four Coronaviruses which cause 10% of Colds.
I have been stating on here for many, many months that the Unions, or at least their leadership, were in on the scam. Clearly they are now being used again to ramp up fear. They are hopelessly blatant and vacant.
““Unless urgent action is taken, cases will surge and schools, hospitals, care homes and other key public services will be without the staff they need to function.”
All of these institutions long ago ceased “functioning”.
Perhaps if the Unions had stood up for their members when the aggression started these institutions wouldn’t be so F#kd.
“schools, hospitals, care homes and other key public services will be without the staff they need to function.”
Precisely. No interventions on behalf of the members when many felt compelled to leave their jobs because of outrageous pressure to take poisonous injections.
And schools? Even governments are now accepting that untold damage has been done to a generation of children but what did the Unions support: mass testing, mass masking, mass closures, mass antisocial distancing.
The Union leaderships are as guilty of treason as much as our government. The complicity of union leaders has been staggering and all for Judas’ gold. Evil.
Except very few people are away from work with CoVid, their is caused by Testitis which qualifies them for a 10 day paid holiday. Serial Testitis is commonplace, with long, back to back paid holidays.
What is required is to ban PCR and Lateral flow tests and stop sick pay.
Paul D. Thacker of the Disinformation Chronicle wonders why the BBC and other fact check sites are “constantly sprinting to the podium as spokespeople for an industry with such a long and tattered history of documented lies?”
Well, I can think of a few reasons:
1) Vaccines are part of the new religions of scienceism, technoworship, safetyism, NHSworship. It’s an appealing idea to think that horrid diseases can be made to go away so easily. Especially appealing if you’ve been brainwashed into believing covid is a terrible thing for you and society. This applies generally to most people, not specific to the BBC or journalists.
2) Related to (1), questioning vaccines is liable to get you labelled as a loon, so it’s easier not to. In general people hate you if you question their dearly held beliefs, so they look for a convenient way to vilify you and shut you down. This also applies generally, but certainly to journalists who depend on reputation in order to work in the mainstream.
3) The media pushed the “vaccines” and they realise they made a mistake but are doubling down like the rest of the establishment. I think this is true for a good many.
4) The covid “vaccines” are part of the overall covid response that was an extreme example of collectivism, which the BBC ideologically sees as “good”. Scepticism about vaccines and about covid as a threat, and interest in alternative treatments, is seen as “right wing”, and anything “right wing” is Bad.
I very much agree with 1,2 and 4, but I am not sure that they actually realise they have made a mistake yet. They are so steeped in the pro-vaccine narrative that anything that questions it is dismissed as it, as you say, may make them look like a loon. I tried to watch some of the parliament debate yesterday but got too angry to continue. However, before I turned it off, I did see some comments from a turnip of an MP, which I thought were telling. He was lumping in anyone who questions ‘safe and effective’ in the same group as people who question the moon landings and flat earthers. I think this belief is widespread, and we are not helped by the overlap of the Venn diagram of covid sceptics and people who do actually hold some beliefs that are pretty ‘out there’.
Every day we see credible scientific papers highlighting harms from these therapies, but the people in the media, I suspect, just won’t see them, let alone read them. If they won’t look, they won’t see.
We need better orators and people who are able to present and hold an argument well based on good solid, sound, irrefutable evidence. The MPs who were asking for an inquiry seemed a bit woolly to me although I thank them for their courage in standing up and speaking – that might have something to do with UK parliamentary etiquette and protocols that do not embrace impassioned speeches in these debates. Yes, you’re quite right though that anyone who questions the narrative are tarred with the same brush – anti-vaxxers/conspiracy theorists – but I must admit there are a lot of really ‘out there’ ideas in our camp, which I don’t personally hold myself but hey, if that’s their thing then let them sing. The trouble is that they are often the ones with the loudest voices! There are plenty of less excitable, grounded, rational voices in our camp who do not always get heard, at least in the media or parliament. Getting through the denseness of the denial that exists at the heart of all the organisations that matter is like cutting one’s way through brambles that immediately spring back to life and grow ever thicker. Not all those in these organisations will be wedded to the WHO/WEF/NWO narrative, I don’t buy that at all, but they will have adopted some elements of those bodies because they are not looking at these bodies as we are. I could see from the speeches made in the Covid Vaccine debate that these MPs exist in a different world that doesn’t see the encroaching darkness at all. If we mention ‘genocide’, they go running for the hills and so all arguments must be kept to the realms of credibility in the first place and then slowly work our way up to the reality – as I see it anyway – of what we are facing: medical tyranny, depopulation, totalitarian control and the destruction of our society and way of life because some psychopaths think they know what’s best for the human race.
“all arguments must be kept to the realms of credibility in the first place”
Depends who is defining credibility. Our enemies and sheeple at large would for instance say it’s not credible that so many doctors, regulators, politicians, scientists and drug peddlers would lie to us so brazenly, but they bloody well have. I do agree you have a point that the more non-mainstream beliefs will likely be counterproductive, so best to stick to the point if possible.
Regarding orators, Ron Paul is superb. Hitchens would have been good with the issue but he has not taken it up – not sure why, but then he has so many things he is exercised about and perhaps focuses on the ones he sees as mot neglected by others.
Perhaps the word ‘acceptability’ would have been a better choice. First we have to be heard, then we gain acceptability from our reasonable arguments then we start adding a few more ingredients to the stew!
I’m not sure about Hitchens. His brother Christopher would have been my choice. He was a superb, convincing orator, such a shame that he died.
Again it depends on who defines “acceptable”.
Christopher Hitchens was a good speaker but ideologically unsound (from where I stand anyway).
Without wishing to split hairs still further, this is about creating a platform where WE are taken seriously. We have to start somewhere! So my point is about getting heard and for that to happen, one’s views – our views – have to be accepted (by those who are still banging on about whatever it is they bang on about) – we have to create arguments that are in part acceptable to them.
Well yes there is a spectrum of views and one could probably predict which ones would be most likely to get you written off as a nutjob by normies, so those may be best avoided as a matter of tactics. But sadly just stating the obvious fact that covid reaction was folly and evil will get you written off as a nutjob by many. It’s easier for them than facing what a lot of them know to be true. None of these tossers has apologised to me or said “you were right”.
Agree that many don’t know they have made a mistake but I would speculate that some do. But it’s hard to know without knowing these people personally and speaking to them off the record – and even then, they may know it but not even admit it to themselves.
Think you’re being a wee bit charitable there. They know alright. What’s the point in having an adverse event reporting system if the glaringly obvious safety signals are going to be ignored? Which is what they’re doing by refusing to investigate. The whole purpose of such a system is that signals are acted upon. Is the Yellow Card system, as well as the Eudravigilance, Vaers etc, just there for decoration? They have a function and that function is being blatantly ignored. And I don’t for one second believe they aren’t aware of the science as it’s not exactly discreet and nor are people such as Dr Malhotra and his international colleagues, GB News, all the organizations set up for victims of the jabs, papers in journals being cited all over the place etc etc. It’s all in the open, no need to dig around at all now. After best part of 2 years how can anybody NOT know? And it is their job after all.
I think I am just being realistic. BBC staff (I won’t call them journalists because they haven’t earned that title for years) and fact checkers are paid to write stories conforming to the narrative. I suspect they will rationalise the VAERS/Yellow Card data thus: billions of people have had the jab, therefore many of them will get sick coincidentally and it is only nutters who see a causal relationship. Yes, there are a ton of papers pointing to a relationship, but if you don’t read them, they won’t bother you. Nobody is a villian in their own eyes and they will see themselves on the side of science. Some of them may acknowledge that there are ‘vaccine’ injuries, but doubtless they will consider them as reasonable collatoral damage. This is all speculative, of course, who knows what is going through their minds? But for me this is the most plausible explanation. Does it let them off the hook? No, of course not. They should have the gumption to open themselves up to other views and the honesty to take them seriously, but I personally think that they are more likely to be still in the delusion than cynically writing stories that are the opposite to what they believe.
5) Money.
When the likes of Lord Bill of the Gates of Hell are chucking millions at your organisation it pays to be onside. This is actually no.1.
Yes, how could I forget that! I think BG gives to the BBC and the Telegraph, maybe others.
The Groan, The Times, The Financial Times, The Economist, The Sun, Washington Times and Post, New York Times, The Atlantic, all UK TV stations, Fox News, believe it or not.
I would clog the thread if I listed them all.
Fox? That I find hard to believe. Do you have a source for that.
This has quite a long list, headed by NPR and The Guardian, but no mention of Fox
Documents show Bill Gates has given $319 million to media outlets to promote his global agenda – The Grayzone
Also searched for Fox here and came up with nothing:
Committed Grants | Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Another list on CHD doesn’t include Fox; perhaps the confusion is over pharma advertising which Fox relies on quite heavily (except during Tucker Carlson!).
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/bill-melinda-gates-foundation-media-objectively/
https://factualnews.org/politics/fox_news_advertisers.htm
Advertising is a huge problem because most big corporations seem to have political agendas now, and a subscription model is a big barrier to maximising viewership.
I will see if I can find a link tof. It shocked me too. I think Billy’s “donations” to Fox are third partyish shall we say.
And the BBC.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaaction/about/funding
Back in the weird realm of alleged self-assembling nanotech now. A doctor put a few drops of Pfizer gunk under an electron microscope and saw this. It’s got to be the oddest microscopy finding I’ve seen yet. From around the 6min mark you can see what looks like little robot arms pushing at the square-type shape in the middle from all sides. I’d be interested to see what the opinions of experts are on this as there may be a rational and boring explanation but I’m blow if I know. Any thoughts?
https://zeeemedia.com/interview/world-first-robotic-arms-assembling-via-nanotech-inside-covid-19-vaccines-filmed-in-real-time-dr-nixon/
This is a really good Twitter thread. Lest people forget what the UK government have done to the populace these last 2.5+ years. I particularly like no.12;
“Being a bunch of incompetent, ignorant, corrupt, weak, gullible cowards who will forever be remembered as the worst Parliament in British history that oversaw the return of fascism to the governmental, juridical and cultural forms of the neoliberal democracies of the West.”
https://twitter.com/SimonElmer2022/status/1584629343816658946
What he said…..
Lee Hurst – Vote Anyone But LibLabConGreen
@LeeHurstComic
I can sit here commenting on our political woes all day long & it’s just a variation on a theme.
There is only one answer & that is to pledge to only vote for anyone else but LibLabConGreen in order to change things.
Anything else is word salad.
So that is now my only comment…
“Media and government officials were regularly conflating the difference between being infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus and being infected with COVID-19. Here’s one headline.”
I must admit I got lost here… what is the difference or is my lack of knowledge about it the entire point? Someone explain please!
I think what they mean is that you can ONLY be infected with SarsCoV2 because that is the virus. Covid-19 covers the symptoms you get from being infected with SarsCoV2…..
You are infected with SarsCoV2 to get the disease Covid-19…..
LOL! Even sounds like gobbledygook when I’m writing it!!!
Not really – herpes zoster causes chickenpox and shingles, various paramyxoviruses cause measles and mumps, critical thinking causes Fauci-itis, Whittyitis and McPhersonitis – same sort of thing.
Oops – Fergusonitis.
I’m understanding that now. This from the WHO:
“Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus.”
However I still don’t see how that matters, it seems more of a technicality but I don’t feel like this is some kind of deception???
Oh wait! I think I got it….
Preventing COVID-19 is not the same as preventing SARSCOV2. In that the “vaccine” will prevent and mitigate the symptoms of the disease COVID-19 but not stop you from actually being infected (and transmitting) the SARSCOV2 virus.
https://www.supplychainbrain.com/articles/35959-pfizer-probed-in-italy-for-allegedly-hiding-12-billion-profit
Pfizer Inc. is the target of an Italian probe alleging the company hid at least 1.2 billion euros ($1.2 billion) in profit by transferring money to units in other countries, according to people familiar with the investigation.
Italy’s Guardia di Finanza is alleging that Pfizer’s unit based just outside Rome, Pfizer Italia Srl, transferred excess capital to affiliates in the U.S. and the Netherlands to avoid taxes on profits that can be as high as 26%, according to the people, who asked not to be named as the information isn’t public.
….but surely it’s not about money, they just did it for the good of humanity!!
…presumably this is what happens when you go ‘at the speed of science’…and don’t actually get the facts first….
https://www.news.com.au
26/10/22
ATAGI didn’t know about heightened risk of myocarditis in young men until five months after Pfizer, Moderna approvalThe Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation has revealed it did not know of heart risks until five months after approving vaccines for use.
A functioning link to the electric car article in the Australian Spectator: https://spectator.com.au/2022/10/where-are-electric-cars-going/
https://www.aier.org/article/when-the-family-is-abolished-people-starve/
No wonder ‘family’ is under such grotesque attack.
The above article provides the WEF template.
A disturbing read.
Can anybody answer this for me: Why did the Pfizer exec, on being asked the question about transmission (with respect to whether it was trialled for prior to its release), apparently change the subject and talk about immunization instead (specifically “stopping immunization”, whatever that means)? Had she mis-spoken and meant to say “transmission”, or was this a Freudian slip admitting that the truth is worse still: that Pfizer do not even know whether their product causes immunization either?
“The speed of science”
“Stopping immunization”
“We had to understand what was happening in the market”!
Why have Pfizer chosen someone to represent them in a hearing, who is seemingly full of such meaningless drivel? And what did she mean by it all? Would be very interested to hear anyone’s opinions on this.
The share price of Facebook owner META has dropped by 60% since the start of this year. Ever the optimist, I hope part of the reason was censorship. Particularly, those groups injured or bereaved by the injections.
From ‘Reclaim the Net,’ – Japan is pushing Digital ID and threatening citizens with loss of Health Insurance if they fail to sign up.
This is the start of The Big Push.