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.
Criminal! I hope to god children and parents have the sense to refuse. I fear they won’t.
having lived in British Columbia, Alberta, and Quebec, I know that all Canadians have much sense.You do not last long in Canada without sense. Thye will not be scared by a piddly vaccine shot. I juat wished they’d get a move on and catch up, get back to normal so I can draw my pension that they owe me!
You want to be like the UK?
Step 1 – V day. Massive death spike
Step 2 – blame the V deaths on The Vid
Step 3 – more lockdowns
Step 4 – repeat.
There is nothing “piddly “ about experimenting on immature immune systems by invoking an unknown antibody response for a disease that will not harm them. I do not recognise your generalisation of Canada as having ubiquitous common sense. If you can demonstrate any other medicine or vaccine which has ever been licensed for children in a similar manner you would have some credence. This is a gross moral and ethically incorrect experiment on the young to make their elders feel better .
Some of my Partner’s family live in Canada and married Canadians. One or two have common sense but by no means all of them. Certainly not the druggies and alcohol abusers.
All true, except it’s driver is pharma profitability. Nowt else.
A very dark day indeed
Heaven help them
My eldest is 7, but as and when they get down to that age they can stab me where the sun don’t shine before putting it in her. And yes, she’s had every other regular vaccine going.
Germany has just provided funding of 3.8 billion € for the purchase of booster and variant Covid gene therapies for 2022 and 2023.
There is no plan or chance that the plandemic ends, without us forcing them out.
Extrapolation of jab deaths sofar x doses purchased now suggests 11.000 ‘vaccine’ deaths in Germany alone.
Before the medium and long term side effects related ones, or the vascular ones due to the spike protein factories in the jabbed.
DEUTSCHES ÄRZTEBLATT: Gesundheitsministerium bekommt weitere 3,8 Milliarden für Beschaffung von Coronaimpfstoff – Auszug: „Es geht dabei um Impfstoff für die Jahre 2022 und 2023, also vor allem für Auffrischungsimpfungen und Impfungen gegen mutierte Coronaviren. Das geht aus einem Schreiben des Finanzministeriums an den Haushaltsausschuss des Bundestags hervor. (…) Demnach zeichnen sich Vertragsabschlüsse der Europäischen Kommission ab, ‘um eine ausreichende Versorgung mit adäquaten Impfstoffen gegen COVID-19 auch für die kommenden Jahre sicherzustellen‘. (…) Außerdem stehe ein Vertrag kurz vor dem Abschluss, bei dem es auch um angepasste Impfstoffe für Kinder gehe. Deutschland müsse jetzt Zahlungsverpflichtungen eingehen, damit entsprechend viel Impfstoff bestellt werde.“ (Anmerkung Paul Schreyer: Damit ist die Katze ist aus dem Sack: Die Impfungen sollen fortan regelmäßig erfolgen. „Neue Normalität“ für immer – sämtliche bekannten und unbekannten Risiken und Nebenwirkungen inbegriffen. Kinder zu impfen ist dabei die letzte denkbare Eskalationsstufe und angesichts der vollkommen unerforschten Langzeitwirkungen eine Verantwortungslosigkeit unfassbarer Tragweite. Eines Tages werden sich viele von denen, die diese Beschlüsse und deren Umsetzung jetzt „durchwinken“, vor Gericht verantworten müssen.)
CORONA TRANSITION: Wie gefährlich sind die neuen Covid-19-Impfungen wirklich? – Auszug: „Hat sich Deutschland mit 410 Mio. Impfdosen auch 11’000 Todesfälle ‚eingekauft‘? (…) Im Vergleich zu allen anderen Impfungen zeigen sich bei den neuen Covid-19-Impfstoffen stark erhöhte Werte (jeweils pro 100’000 Impfungen): Nebenwirkungen steigen von 7 auf 217 (Faktor 31); Schwerwiegende Nebenwirkungen steigen von 3,2 auf 23,9 (Faktor 7,5); Todesfälle steigen von 0,06 auf 2,83 (Faktor 47) (…) Deutschland hat sich 410 Millionen Impfdosen ‚gesichert‘ (Stand Anfang Januar 2021). Aufgrund der aktuellen Zahlen des Paul-Ehrlich-Instituts (und nach Adam Riese: 2,83/100’000 x 410 Mio.) müssen wir also in Deutschland mit über 11’000 Todesmeldungen im Zusammenhang mit den Impfungen rechnen! Wohlgemerkt: Es handelt sich um gemeldete Verdachtsfälle! Die Zahl der ursächlich an den Impfungen Verstorbenen liegt natürlich darunter. Andererseits gibt es eine Dunkelziffer – nicht alle Todesfälle werden gemeldet.“
Andy chance of a translation?
“The BBC News report is worth reading in full.”
NO
IT’S
NOT.
None of the stories you quote from the BBC, Guardian or Telegraph are worth reading in full.
We need to shun these organisations and anyone who works for them.
LDS became a media noise repeater several months ago.
Agreed. We do not need to be linked to the propaganda, thank you
Great, I’ve got a little pension, locked up in canada worth £7 a day, which covers my bar tab, but I can’t get at it since Canada is closed. I can’t open a bank account, nobody answers the phones, I can’t get transfer funds. so my money stays locked up, I’m pissed off at Canada. They need to get a grip on this thing there, like we have, I want my 2 pints a day!!!
I could fly to Canada to sort it out in a year or two, meanwhile, I’m pissed off at Canada.
Canada has turned into Gilead.
The whole of North America, Europe and Australasia has turned into Gilead.
Yes, barmy in Gilead.
This is the Devil’s work – and yes, they are closing the churches and jailing the pastors.
The forces of the Antichrist are sadly ascendant.
Keep praying. Keep resisting. Do not throw your children into the tophet.
What, in hell’s name, is wrong with Canada? From the current state of. Vancouver, I wonder if it’s Chinese influence flooding over it from west to east.
Healthy children in Canada probably have a 1-in-2-million probability of dying from COVID … and still parents will line up to make sure their kids are “protected” from this terrifying health risk.
Sod the kids, it’s to protect old people.
That’s a shame, because vaccinating children will contribute NOTHING to safety of seniors.
Kids don’t infect adults with this virus, more the others way around.
Vaccines for kids, booster jabs without any evidence that they achieve anything, cheap treatments such as Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine blocked. Yes Covid is a serious disease for certain groups, but it’s looking more and more like big pharma carries a lot of the blame for blowing the whole thing out of proportion, maybe more blame than authoritarian/incompetent governments or people pushing the great reset.
I think the credulous people who accepted all the extraordinary, unsupported claims with nary a question in response also bear some of the blame.
Jesus, I lived in Calgary for 18 years and hearing this makes me ill … Evil fuckers behind this abhorrent decision.
In the UK in 2020, a little more than 1 in 700,000 children in this age group died of covid-19. These had pre-existing conditions. For those without pre-existing conditions, it was less than 1 in 3,000,000.
The current UK death rate for the jab is about 1 in 42,000. This jab is therefore between 17 and 70 times as risky as that which it protects from! Furthermore, their immune system will be compromised and less able to deal with new pathogens in the future.
Jabbing these kids is criminally insane!
“Criminally insane”
No, not insane, as that implIes they are not aware of their actions.
Leave it at criminal
Died with covid-19!
Yes, to the 1 in 700,000. But the 1 in 3,000,000 had covid-19 as the sole reason on the death certificate, unless it was a misdiagnosis.
Died within 28 days of taking a test that may or may not have produced a false positive result.
Did you know almost 4,000 children have been vaccinated for COVID-19 in the States?
And that:
9 died within 28 days (0.2%)?
7 almost died?
3 were permanently disabled?
71 had to see a doctor or were admitted to hospital or had their stay prolonged?
https://mobile.twitter.com/RealJoelSmalley/status/1390011607175081985
9 out of 4000? Seriously? So more than 2 per 1000 died? So in a big school, expect 2 kids to die and one be permanently disabled, and in a smaller school of a few hundred expect one to die?
Add in the 3 disabled and 7 nearly died, that’s 5 per big school. Do you feel lucky, punk?
Appalling.
Twitter deleted that Tweet. Can you remember the source?
“Bring out your dead….”
6,662 DEAD 299,065 Injuries: European Database of Adverse Drug Reactions for COVID-19 “Vaccines
https://healthimpactnews.com/2021/6662-dead-299065-injuries-european-database-of-adverse-drug-reactions-for-covid-19-vaccines/
Not to be biased, other jabs are available…
Total reactions for the experimental vaccine AZD1222(CHADOX1NCOV19) from OxA…Z: 1,086 deaths and 150,863 injuries to 10/04/2021
4,092 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 44 deaths
5,911 Cardiac disorders incl. 140 deaths
52 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 1 death
3,886 Ear and labyrinth disorders
112 Endocrine disorders incl. 2 deaths
5,994 Eye disorders incl. 4 deaths
47,881 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 40 deaths
117,802General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 363 deaths
162 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 6 deaths
1,499 Immune system disorders incl. 5 deaths
8,809 Infections and infestations incl. 84 deaths
3,095 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 11 deaths
7,336 Investigations incl. 14 deaths
6,078 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 10 deaths
68,519 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 7 deaths
97 Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 3 deaths
92,586 Nervous system disorders incl. 154 deaths
71 Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions
39 Product issues
7,934 Psychiatric disorders incl. 9 deaths
1,446 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 8 deaths
1,328 Reproductive system and breast disorders
12,49 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 109 deaths
19,069 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 6 deaths
256 Social circumstances incl. 3 deaths
322 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 7 deaths
6,136 Vascular disorders incl. 56 deaths
All coincidence. It has a long harm, remember.
Nice to see the comments are considerably more “sceptical” than the considerably “unsceptical” author on the “so-called sceptical” website.
If there’s one crime out of all of this nonsense that’s worth getting angry about, it’s medical experimentation on children who bear no risk and do not have the capacity to consent for themselves.
True, but the list of anger-raising crimes is so long it is hard to pick a worst one!
Vaccines for everything and all ages if this is the baseline.
Parents get ready for the fight of your life.
Keep your murderous hands off our children! Off our grandchildren! You evil genocidal scumbags.
Sadly scientists have failed to recognise that in their rush to publish regardless of the quality of their data they are harming society. When innocent children are having their future lives potentially harmed by a vaccine for a disease which will not harm them ethics and morality has been dismissed. Shame on all those who feel that children should be used as a comfort blanket for their elders.
Scientists might have rushed to publish but the blame lies squarely with governments the world over who are coercing their populations to have the current jabs on offer and future “top-ups” to deal with scariants or whatever public health emergency is drummed up. The blame lies with the governments. They are the pushers.
Disgusting unethical child abusers
Sorry, Curzon is incorrigible. My only explanation is that TY wants a contrarian voice on the page to show that there is “balance” in the reporting. Note: contrarian here is used to mean contrary to the principles of the site. The byline of Lockdown Sceptics is: Stay Sceptical. Control the Hysteria. Save Lives. Curzon is not sceptical (of vaccines). The articles he promotes elevate hysteria and could cost lives–it is unconscionable to inject children with an experimental substance for a disease that does not affect them. This is so outrageous that even MSM should be asking this question of why children?. So I guess Curzon is just going to keep doing Curzon when it comes to vaccines…..
If there is one that is likely to cause the sheeple to finally wake up is when these bastards start taking their children.
“In March, Pfizer said initial results from trials of its vaccine in this age group showed 100% efficacy and a strong immune response.”
Strong immune response – meaning the poor children experienced adverse effects from a totally unnecessary assault on their medical freedom by use of questionable injections?
What is the world coming to, abusing children like this? To abuse those children in order to ‘protect the old and / or vulnerable’ and in doing so, may irreparably affect their own health and life. Unforgivable.
This must be about the vaccine passport. There’s no other reason for it. They need everyone to be vaccinated so that everyone has a ‘passport’. Children and young people are key to this ambition since they will be the ones who will be mostly affected by future passport control.
Did I really write that? How things have changed in the last 12 months.
There’s a lot of money in the child vaccine market.
I think it’s high time we stopped calling this injection a vaccine. If you’ve not watched the video of five doctors discussing this thing, you can see it here:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/i2fMnrMH3Zm3/
Set aside an hour and twenty minutes (though jump past the first 5 minutes of the annoying woman at the start who keeps letting her phone ring while talking).
And the UK column transcript of the interview with the NHS whistle blower who was working on the jab rollout – that person kept calling it a jab for the very precise reason that the injection did not meet the criteria to be called a vaccine. That same person said it was genocide.
Essential watch on the ‘vaccines’ – Interview with Sucharit Bhakdi :
https://off-guardian.org/2021/04/30/watch-perspectives-on-the-pandemic-15/
… and the answers to all the Mayo crap about absolute v. relative RR (above) is also answered – with the important point that the risk increase from the vaccine can also be calculated – with a very sobering set of figures for vaccine worshippers – whichever way you look at it. The relative risk of blood clotting symptoms of no-vaccine versus vaccine are pretty shocking in relative terms – if that’s your chosen measure.
Sauce for the goose …..
“Canada has recorded more than 1.2 million coronavirus cases and roughly 20% of those have been in people under the age of 19”
The underlying message is that kids are at threat – get them vaccinated! But they could have tested in any winter season and got the same (or better or worse) results.
The only reason for vaccinating kids (or anyone) is if there’s a threat of serious illness or death. There is not.The policy continues to be abhorrent and parents should be defending their kids by NOT getting the vaccine.