I bumped into an old acquaintance in the local shopping centre recently. He knows that I’ve been sceptical about lockdowns and is aware that I’ve declined the offer of any Covid vaccination.
“Mark, I’ve just found out that the pharmaceutical companies producing the Covid vaccines have immunity from prosecution,” he said.
He’s a fairly bright, elderly chap who has criticised the way the Welsh Government has handled the Covid situation and every now again he likes to get things off his chest by letting me know how he feels. I was saddened to learn of his ignorance but not surprised.
He is not alone and, after responding that I had known about the indemnity for some time, he continued angrily, “Anyway, I’ve had my third booster and I’m not having any more!”
I’ve been distracted recently from the issues of the last two and a half years by the World Athletics Championships but found it difficult to switch off from my friend’s comments.
I believe a critical contract was entered into between the public and three main bodies: the Government, healthcare professionals and the MSM. This contract is live and running. The contract is critical because it involves our public health.
In a previous article I explained the importance of informed consent and why I have no doubt that the principles of good clinical practice were abandoned in the name of Covid. Here I want to explore whether the public has been deceived into consenting to Covid policy through a serious breech of contract.
The BBC’s coverage of the World Athletics Championships was excellent. Credit where it is due. The experts commentating and reporting on events really are experts. Most of them have had first hand experience of training and competing at the highest level and have even won World, Olympic and Commonwealth medals and world records. They all seem pretty down-to-earth and I trust them to report accurately. It seems in complete contrast to the so-called ‘experts’ who managed the pandemic. They had never experienced living in any sort of lockdown, had never previously been brow-beaten into accepting a novel emergency vaccine and had never been made to wear masks in social settings. The BBC’s commentators didn’t need to provide models of expected outcomes because the viewers were going to see how things would pan out come rain or shine. The reality and purity of the sports events in a rigorously drug-tested competition was a case of what you see is what you get. Yet, in the case of the Covid experts, what you saw were delusions of grandeur. How can experts have no experience of what they are supposed to be experts about, especially when, unlike the sports commentators, they have the power to radically change people’s lives? Shouldn’t that responsibility and lack of practical knowledge make them (principally SAGE and the JCVI) extremely humble and cautious and willing to explore all options and seek second opinions? Did they warn the Government that their proposed solutions to deal with Covid were experimental in nature, weren’t based on a proper cost/benefit analysis and could potentially be disastrous? Did the Government, the healthcare professionals and the MSM break a critical contract with the public in implementing the resulting policy?
For any contract to be valid certain elements are necessary. For example, there must be an offer or exchange of promises; the mental capacity to understand the terms; and acceptance of the offer and an agreement to abide by the terms and conditions. Some examples of contract relating to these three bodies are as follows:
1. The Government’s pledge as stated here: “We pledge to ensure that:
•every person has a fair opportunity in life no matter who or where they are
•people who are furthest behind, who have the least opportunity and who are the most excluded will be prioritised
•every person counts and will be counted.”
2. The healthcare professionals’ pledge as stated here: “In relation to consent the GMC guidance reminds doctors that any decisions regarding treatment should be made in partnership with the patient and that such a partnership should be based on openness, trust and good communication.”
3. The BBC Royal Charter: “To act in the public interest, serving all audiences through the promise of impartial, high quality and distinctive output and services which inform, educate and entertain.”
Taking each in turn, let me give a few examples of contract breaches:
with regards to the Government promise, the people who were furthest behind, who had the least opportunity and were the most excluded were definitely not prioritised. These were the hospitalised elderly discharged at the beginning of the pandemic and the young whose educational development, future health and wealth has likely been compromised. They also include the less well-off who stand to lose the most from the £400 billion wasted on Covid and the resulting inflationary consequences;
with regards to the healthcare profession pledge, the law surrounding consent only recently shifted after the judgement in the 2015 case of Montgomery and Lanarkshire which redefined and modernised the standard of informed consent by introducing the general duty to attempt the disclosure of risks. It established that the relationship between the doctor and the patient was not one of medical paternalism and professional medical opinion. It is a legal requirement for a patient to give informed consent before any treatment can go ahead – without valid consent the treatment could be considered assault or battery. The key issue with Covid is that the risk varies significantly with the age and general health of each individual. Each case should have been treated on its own merits and each individual risk should have been accurately assessed and assiduously and conscientiously disclosed. So, for example, the latest data from Iceland show a healthy child’s risk of death from Covid is virtually zero and that same child’s risk of suffering severe symptoms is practically non-existent (0.06%);
with regards to the MSM, I wish to focus on the BBC as it is the nation’s public broadcaster. We must pay a fee to watch and listen to it and its Charter proclaims its commitment to “impartial output and services to inform, educate and entertain”. I will concede that it may have fulfilled an obligation to entertain, but it also merits scathing criticism because so much information that ought to have been loudly broadcast to provide the ‘informed’ part of consent with respect to the Covid vaccinations was not aired. In this regard, it could be argued that the BBC has been, at best, negligent or, at worst, complicit in a scandal. To make such an accusation I have to provide clear examples. There are only so many examples I have the space to list but we now have the benefit of many months of data collected as evidence since Covid began and for which the BBC should have even less excuse to hide. So here are a handful:
1. that ONS data suggest Covid vaccines give very little protection against death and this data correlates with similar studies in Canada and the Netherlands;
2. That excess deaths are currently significantly higher than normal and these excess deaths appear to have occurred at the same time as the vaccine roll-outs and that the Government is currently refusing to carry out an investigation into this;
3. That a number of cardiac specialists and scientists worldwide have raised serious concerns about the effect of the vaccine on the heart;
4. That false (very low) figures were given for the percentage of the unvaccinated U.K. population in the BBC’s recent documentary Unvaccinated and the participants claim they were misled into taking part and many of their rational arguments and concerns relating to the vaccination programme were left on the cutting room floor by the producers;
5. That Vicky Spit (the bereaved widow of the first vaccine victim to be officially acknowledged and awarded compensation) had her FOI request to disclose information relating to the Government agreement (providing indemnity from liabilty and prosecution) with AstraZeneca rejected; the question put to the Department of Business was “What would make the indemnity granted to AstraZeneca void?”;
6. That, despite the FDA repeatedly promising “full transparency,” and reaffirming its “commitment to transparency” just prior to the vaccine roll-out, they later attempted to block the release of documents relating to the licensing of the Pfizer vaccine for 75 years; that a U.S. federal court rejected this and ordered the immediate release of this information;
7. That witnesses have revealed that Pfizer falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators and was slow to follow up on adverse events; that the forced trial disclosures have revealed concerns of fraud and worrying discrepancies and deficiencies that severely undermine Pfizer‘s early claims that the vaccine is safe and effective;
8. That the risks of Covid to healthy children are extremely small and less than the risk from flu.
In my opinion none of the above examples have been given anywhere near enough attention by the BBC, if any. This shows that the BBC is not impartial and that it is failing to inform and educate as promised. Where is Ofcom here with regards to integrity and credibility? I would like to see its defence of the BBC in response to these questions, or a BBC ‘Fact Check’ of them…if it dares!
I’ve written this article to demonstrate that agreements with professional bodies have been made with the public since the pandemic began and the public has been deceived. In a fair and just democratic society this shouldn’t happen. Shouldn’t the judicial system step in to protect the public here? In a concerning development, the High Court recently rejected a judicial review of children’s Covid vaccination. This appears to disregard the public protection gained through Montgomery and, as Stephen Jackson, the author of the above article, put it: “By this decision the court has finally and fully stepped aside from protecting U.K. citizens. It has abandoned all restraints on the power of the Government when wielded in the name of Covid or any other pandemic that may be declared.”
In the eyes of the Government, the healthcare profession, the media and – now – the judiciary are we – the public – valued citizens or simply their Muppets?
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.
The BBC Royal Charter: “To act in the public interest…”
Opinions will vary as to what that is. I think it’s simply a terrible idea for any country to have a state broadcaster. Better to have private ones acting unashamedly in their own interests, and caveat emptor. We don’t have, and never have had, a state newspaper – they had them in the Soviet Union though.
Good article. The only thing is, we, the citizens at large, and this includes many journalists, lawyers, judges, doctors and regulators, are, in fact, muppets.
I believe that more and more people will be opting out of the vaxx and further restrictions, simply because they clearly don’t work. But for most people, that seems to be enough. They seem to take this view that it was a jolly good try, didn’t work out, now let’s move on.
Yes, the MSM is not spelling out all the criminal and negligent acts of authorities, it refuses to highlight the many AEs and excess mortality, question why all the vaxx companies were given indemnity, or simply question why we should keep on doing the same things that have clearly failed several times over. But there has been plenty of information available, even in the MSM, for those willing to just simply take 2 + 2 and arrive at 4. Instead, most people seem to want to put this behind them, trust it was all well intended and not be bothered with uncomfortable truths and where taking some responsibility for what we as citizens allowed to happen will lead. Most people do know there is something dodgy about the vaxxes, they do know the apartheid app was the wrong thing, they do know most of the measures are now entirely meaningless gestures, a sort of “we know it does nothing, you know it does nothing, we know that you know and you know that we know that you know – but we’re going to pretend anyways”. But they do not wish to acknowledge that none of these things are a given and that if we all just say “no more”, it stops. The majority still thinks that our ‘betters’ are necessary to make that decision for us.
This type of lazy thinking and reluctance to take responsibility for one’s own life is nothing knew and in some ways I get it. But I will never, ever understand how so many people were and are willing to let total strangers make decisions about their bodies and that of their children – strangers who, by and large, know absolutely nothing about vaxxes, masks or infections, etc. other than the press releases they regurgitate.
It is time for the muppets of the world to unite and push back.
Yes, I think you’ve captured the attitude of many people to all this. It reminds me of the financial adviser who recommended that my brother invest most of his fortune in Royal Bank of Scotland shares, just before the crash of 2008. His explanation was “It was the right decision at the time”.
In some ways the scamdemic reminds me of the 2008 crash and the years leading up to it. Between 2000 and 2007 I was travelling between the UK, NL and Spain on a very regular basis. I was looking to buy a home and was most interested in Spain. I only thought of buying a place there after I had spent about 3 years there, around 2003. The increase in prices during those 3 years was off the wall – I was in Barcelona, so fair enough, big city, bigger prices, but the prices were crazy – a lot of people on salaries of 1000 euros a month were getting mortgages of 350,000 euros or more, for tiny hovels that needed lots of work. The same thing was happening in the UK and to some extent in NL.
I remember just watching in astonishment as month after month, year after year the prices nevertheless kept rising to ridiculous levels and people saying it couldn’t possibly go wrong. No one would listen, no one would believe if you said it couldn’t last.
I have no great interest in or special knowledge of finance, just used common sense, as I did with the vaxx and general view of the bat flu, that clearly was not as dangerous as advertised.
Then, as now, people simply could not believe that governments and regulators would sit back and let private institutions get so out of control and so abdicated all critical thinking to others who often had no more knowledge than any random person and even if they did, would not speak out.
Suggest a read of this article: They Thought They Were Free ⋆ Brownstone Institute People are naturally trusting and I guess this makes us vulnerable, even to situations we wouldn’t want. It’s a gradual abuse, chipping away at normal ways of doing things; we have to object to it. It’s not intolerance to do that – just standing firm for right and freedom.
Agree absolutely and to the above criminal acts one can certainly add the purposeful denial of early treatments for covid, eg Ivermectin at the behest of the Real Powers that Be and bigpharma. This deliberate and evil act cost thousands of lives in order to ensure nothing could prevent the roll out of the “miracle vaccines”.
As I understand it, no GP in the UK can prescribe it even now lest they be struck off
For other criminal acts just read ” The Real Anthony Fauci” by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and make sure you tell as many as you can to read it. Open their eyes and make them see.
100% in agreement – but I’m never offered a choice in anything so I can push back, apart from refusing the jabs.
That’s been the genius of the whole thing: don’t ever engage with the public unless they’ve been vetted.
I wonder how many people would have consented to be vaccinated if they’d been told up front that the vaccines don’t stop you getting Covid or passing it on, that vaccine efficacy starts to decline from day one, that an indefinite number of boosters would be required, that there was a risk of rare but serious adverse reactions in the short term, and that long term health risks were unknown.
In other words, if they’d been asked to give informed consent.
I tried to tell people, but I was insulted and ignored. Anyway, a lot of people, especially the young, just got vaxxed to be able to travel, go to concerts etc – they didn’t care about covid much. I tried to tell them this was fascism that must be resisted, but I got insulted and ignored. Still waiting for my apology! F*** the lot of them.
Yes, but that was because they’re gullible sheep, and Good Morning Britain told them that the vaccines were 100% safe and effective. If they’d been told that they could kill you (an equally simplistic message perhaps) they’d have believed that too. It works both ways.
The world is full of ignorant, selfish, know-it-alls and always has been – “The war will be over by Christmas!” This one goes all the way back to Pfizer. Normally we can ignore them, but it’s when they have power and propaganda that it becomes a problem and people acquiesce because it’s easier and know nothing else. So those in charge are to blame.
To the so-called public health officials (and to some degree, the health profession at a large), we’re nothing but sometimes troublesome livestock which has to be managed by experts in accordance with best lifestock management practices to prevent us from accidentally causing harm to ourselves or others.
So-called chicken flu is managed with chicken lockdowns to prevent infections. When this doesn’t work out, it becomes track, trace and cull: Work out which chickens became infected and kill them and all their close contacts.
So-called human COVID is managed with human lockdowns to pevent infectons. When this doesn’t work out, it becomes track, trace and incarcerate: Work out which humans became infected and put them and their close contacts into forced isolation. Due to them not being chicken, they’re given a chance to recover and might even receive emergency medical care should they become seriously sick. Doubtlessly, management of human COVID could have become much more efficient if the lessons from chicken flu management had really been learnt: Do away with this silly humanity and just f***ing cull them! Ain’t there more than enough of them already?
Vets don’t need informed consent from animals because it’s held to be true that this wouldn’t be possible and because they’re property professionals have to care for. The pandemic was an attempt to extend these sound principles to other kinds of economically useful creatures.
I have the perception that an increasing number of people are becoming aware they have been taken for a ride over the covid measures. I see basically two categories of people now. (1) Those who were sceptical from the start, didn’t wear masks, didn’t get jabbed, and saw through the fear p0rn and media hysteria, and (2) Those who played along with all the nonsense at first and who, because of an assortment of reasons, have woken up, at least partly, to the fact something is seriously wrong. The sceptics, not having let themselves be duped, are more likely to calmly seek exposure of the crime and justice for the perpetrators. The second group are more likely to feel aggrieved when they realise how they have been ripped off and how their health may have been permanently damaged by the toxic jabs. I suspect some of those aggrieved people are the most likely to resort civil unrest and possibly violence.
I know one instance of that rare beast – someone who went along with it to start with and was twice injected who now freely admits he got it wrong and it’s all bollocks. He is pretty angry.
I am in a similar category in that I had 2 vaccines. At the time I was unaware of any potential problems with it because, I suppose, I was rather naive and stupid and just, well, hopeful that it was a solution. At the very least I thought it may just be useless. When I very belatedly looked into things, my anger knew (and knows) no bounds, and I’ll tell you why.
I was considered vulnerable because of a heart condition. Now, if when I had gone for my shot I had been told that side effects could include myocarditis or pericarditis I would never have had it. In fact, nothing was said about side effects other than a sore arm. I am b****y furious with the government and I am terrified that I have (or rather, they have) shortened my life, but of course, if I drop dead it won’t be me that suffers anguish, will it? I have embarked on a weight loss and get fit regime, and I no longer use the NHS for day to day stuff because I am disgusted with them too – not that they care about pensioners like me anyway – they make it quite clear they would rather we disappeared.
I no longer believe anything I am told, and I even look askance at things that have happened in the past and wonder if there is another truth. But my anger with the government, the NHS and the BBC is bottomless and undying.
You have every reason to feel shafted and I wish you every success with your campaign to optimize your health.
Those tasked with looking after us either ran scared or took the money and kept quiet.
The NHS pays my pension but I want nothing more to do with it.
I very much appreciate that you have spoken out about your experience and I admire your positive attitude. I hope others hear what you have to say and that this will help them to be more cautious about the professional advice they are given with regards to their health. I wish you all the best with regards to your health and wellbeing and hope you can eventually find healthcare professionals you can fully trust.
Unfortunately before enough muppets wake up to kick up a fuss and challenge the media, government or big Pharma, we will be on to the next crisis; cost of living, fuel and food shortages.
I’d say the globalist cabal are doing quite well.
Health Officials, MSM employees, the legal professionals, the government and MP’s, they all have families and friends, what were they thinking of, not questioning a jab that was given indemnity from prosecution. They’ve been jabbing away at pregnant women while telling them not to eat certain cheeses!!!
I always loved the cheese-warnings (they seem to have disappeared a while ago). The wording was roughly This cheese has been made from raw milk and may thus contain naturally ocurring bacteria. Don’t consume if your pregnant, elderly or have a low resistance to infection. Presumably, the people who designed this weren’t happy that they couldn’t go full tobacco and directly write THIS CHEESE IS GOING TO KILL YOU AND YOUR UNBORN CHILD! CONTACT … FOR HELP QUITTING CHEESE!
🙂
Animal is a super cool Muppet. He’d have been wise to the shenanigans from the start.
Who would have jumped the queue to get the jabs first?
Indeed he is.
I reckon Kermit would have been a covidian.
I like to think Statler and Waldorf would be sceptics.
Unfortunately, your friend has now likely compromised his immune system and unless he takes three boosters per year, is likely to be at significantly higher risk than normal. This might be reversible given time but that’s not clear cut at the moment.
And in the short term, some of their mates are making a profit out of it, more than likely. This article is a valid analysis of them all, but many of us could mention that big organisations, like the BBC, or the NHS overall, are not really monolithic. Some parts of it are better than others; some do a good job, others make serious mistakes from time to time, with some of us being lucky to be around at all.
“the BBC, or the NHS overall, are not really monolithic”
The NHS for sure, the BBC I disagree simply because editors and senior management have much more control over and visibility over what goes out, so any good eggs will be crushed or will simply be too afraid to do much, so while there may be some good eggs the effect is pretty monolithic. Deborah Cohen, before she quit, and Nick Triggle, both on the health side, were the best of a bad bunch but said nothing “controversial”.
BBC Is Upset
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v93uoaRkj90
The BBC is upset that “Tony on YouTube” called out their fake news about last week’s hot weather.
Tony Heller
Worth watching for the weather forecast at the end.
Yellow Boards By The Road BUILD BACK FREEDOM
Thursday 4th August 11am to 12pm
Yellow Boards
Junction A321 Wargrave Road &
A4 New Bath Road
Twyford RG10 9PN
Stand in the Park Sundays 10.30am to 11.30am – make friends & keep sane
Wokingham
Howard Palmer Gardens Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Bracknell
South Hill Park, Rear Lawn, RG12 7PA
Telegram http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
Very good little clip, and loved the Marty Feldman bit…hahaha,
of course ‘Tony’ comes across as much more sensible and realistic than anything the beeb say..
I reckon we’ve been nudged for years. From telling us we were the sick man of Europe so needed to join the Common Market, to F&M, the Iraq war, covid, still on going, friends had to prove they had been jabbed to go to a wedding in France, daily distraction and nudged hysteria, weather, football
People are generally far too trusting; it’s why so many get scammed.
I’m not; I firmly believe in the mantra “believe nothing you hear and only half of what you see.” So I was naturally cautious when the Covid propaganda started; after a few days of watching the Daily Briefing from Downing Street I told my son that they weren’t putting any of their stats in context so it was telling us nothing of any value. I switched it off and started doing my own “research.” By the time “the jabs” were rolled out, I was firmly in the “I’m not going along with the lunacy” camp.
Unfortunately, far too many people in the UK believe that “I’m from the Government and I’m here to help” is good news. It isn’t. They should grow up and take responsibility for themselves.
This demonstrates the advantage of being a subscriber to the daily sceptic and its former version. We who are know about all these issues, and more. You highlight that the BBC and the MSM in general deliberately fail to publish this information to follow the government line and herd the majority of the public that believe it to follow the government dictats without question. This continues with the governments net zero agenda. We need an honest and honourable government which is what Boris Johnson failed to deliver and the reason he was rightly removed. Those who are trying to put him back in power should realise that our country needs honesty from its government and every one of them that is promoting this is denying that from us, so should be ashamed of themselves.
I just hope whoever is chosen to lead our government next can improve the contract between the government and its people and repair at least some of the damage done by the current outfit. I was a Johnson supporter until, after he promised to ensure Northern Ireland was retained as an equal part of the union, he renaged on that promise. The first sign of further lack of honour and honesty to come. He blamed his predecessor for this, but it was him that signed the document. Pathetic attempts at trying to correct that error have been expectedly unsccessful and what is required fom our new leader is the guts to sort this out and take on the EU with the same aggression they show to us.
Western countries have become too wealthy. The annual cash flow is enormous and it just keeps coming. It seems everyone wants a small piece. Every man made crisis is out to get a piece from the 2008 banking crisis that were bailed out, too big to fail, to pharmaceuticals seeking direct liability free funding from country treasuries (what a dream) to NGOs & government agencies creating a climate crisis to ensure their slice of the pie. Our elected politicians forming our governments are losing control and many are actively participating in this abuse. Meanwhile ordinary hardworking tax paying middle class people keep putting up with this abuse by elites. The time for revolution is fast approaching.