By Rob Slane
The Blogmire Blog, March 22, 2021: It is a year since we embarked on an untried, untested, unscientific, draconian and frankly mad medical, social, economic and psychological experiment on millions of people. On the day we were thrust into this folly I wrote, “So that seems to be that. The end of Britain as we knew it.” All that has taken place since has, I believe, confirmed that, and my only surprise is that millions of people still cling to the bizarre idea that Lockdowns were based on science, that they were necessary, that they have been effective, and that we have a benevolent Government whose aim has been to keep us all safe. None of these things are true.
A Brief Recap of What Has Taken Place
You will search in vain for pre-2020 medical and scientific literature advocating the mass quarantining of healthy people as an appropriate response to a pandemic. In fact, after a panicked Mexican Government flirted with the idea for five whole days during the 2009 Swine Flu outbreak (ending it once it was realised how devastating it would be), the Director General of the World Health Organization (WHO) at the time, Dr Margaret Chan, explicitly warned against such destructive measures being used:
“In this regard, let me make a strong plea to countries to refrain from introducing measures that are economically and socially disruptive, yet have no scientific justification and bring no clear public health benefit.”
So this disruptive, unscientific measure, with no clear public health benefit was quietly buried and forgotten about. Until, that it is, it was implemented in January 2020, in the Chinese province of Hubei, on the orders of Xi Jinping, leader of one of the most totalitarian regimes on the planet, as the lawyer Michael Sanger details in great depth here.
One might have expected the WHO to take the same line as Dr. Chan in 2009, yet by February it had inexplicably changed its pandemic response guidance, on the flimsiest and most unreliable evidence, bringing it into line with the Wuhan decree.
One might then have expected Western countries to reject this tyrannical approach, but shockingly they did not. In Britain, the perfectly sensible Pandemic Preparedness Strategy the Government had had in place since 2011, which stressed the absolute importance of ensuring minimal disruption to society, even during a virus outbreak that might take 315,000 lives in a 15 week period, was binned. Why? That is the single most important question to which we need answers, but I think that Professor Neil Ferguson gave us a big clue in his interview with The Times in December:
“They [the Chinese] claimed to have flattened the curve. I was skeptical at first. I thought it was a massive cover-up by the Chinese. But as the data accrued it became clear it was an effective policy. But it’s a communist one-party state, we said. We couldn’t get away with it in Europe, we thought. And then Italy did it. And we realized we could.”
His claim of flattening the curve is a red-herring. His comment that they realised they could get away with implementing the tactics of a despotic regime is not.
Having been failed by the WHO and the Government, surely the British people would not fall for something so self-evidently absurd as prohibiting millions of perfectly healthy people from coming into contact with other healthy people? Surely the spirit that had made this country one of the freest nations on earth would kick in?
Sadly, and bafflingly, no. The British people, through a combination of being bombarded with fear, hysteria and outright lies on an unprecedented scale, meekly submitted to these despotic decrees, believing them to be something to do with being kept safe.
The Lie of Asymptomatic Transmission and the Myth of Half a Million Deaths
The biggest lie by far is that of asymptomatic transmission. Indeed, it may one day become known as the biggest lie, told to the largest number of people, in the shortest space of time. The claim was based chiefly on an incident in Germany, where a Chinese lady, who was thought to have been asymptomatic, was said to have spread the illness. However, it subsequently turned out that she did in fact have symptoms, but had suppressed them with medication. Yet that was scarcely reported on, and by that time the myth that this was some kind of new, mystical disease that could be spread by people with no symptoms had been born, and with it the basis for the Lockdowns, masks, and the myriad of other bizarre, dystopian restrictions placed upon us. Later in the year, a huge study of 10 million people in Wuhan showed zero cases of asymptomatic spread, but as you can probably guess this was entirely ignored by Governments and media around the world.
What of Professor Ferguson’s claim of 510,000 deaths? This remains the basis for the claim of Lockdown supporters that there would have been hundreds of thousands more deaths had we not locked down. Apart from the fact that the UK is currently fifth on the worldwide deaths per million table having had the third most stringent Lockdown on planet earth, according to the University of Oxford, and that countries who did not lock down have fared no worse, is there anything else that we can point to, to show the fallacy of Professor Ferguson’s doomsday prophecy?
Why yes there is, and it is in fact contained within Professor Ferguson’s report itself. He arrived at his figure of 510,000 dead for a “no-restrictions” scenario by estimating that 81% of the population would become infected, and by assuming an Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) of Covid-19 at 0.9%. However, in October, arguably the world’s foremost epidemiologist, John Ioannidis, of Stanford University, California, published a definitive study into the IFR of Covid-19. He calculated that the median rate was 0.23%, not 0.9%, as Ferguson had assumed, and his work was accepted and approved by the WHO.
This is very important: If Ferguson had used the IFR number of 0.23%, rather than 0.9%, guess what number of deaths he would have arrived at? The answer is around 127,000. Which is mighty interesting, since the total number of “official” deaths from Covid-19, at the time of writing, is 126,172. In other words, if Ferguson had used the correct IFR, the number of deaths he would have predicted in a scenario with no Lockdown would have been the same number of official deaths that we’ve actually had with the 3rd most stringent Lockdown on earth. Of course, I’m well aware that those 126,000 or so deaths were not all from Covid-19, but Lockdown supporters claim they were and so it’s for them to explain how this number is currently the same as Ferguson’s study would have predicted for a non-Lockdown situation, had he used the correct IFR.
That Lockdowns have not saved lives ought to be obvious. The virus was known since early March 2020 to overwhelmingly kill the elderly with comorbidities, and so resources could and should have been targeted to protect such people. Yet the scattergun approach that was taken of quarantining everyone is not — by definition — a targeted approach. And so the irony is that with all the absurd calls for healthy people to change their whole way of life to protect the vulnerable, what actually happened is the healthy had their lives utterly overturned, and the vulnerable were left to die.
The Destructive Power of Lockdowns
So much for the futility of Lockdowns to do good, what about their destructive power? This cannot be overstated. They are destroying lives. They are destroying livelihoods. They are destroying jobs. They are destroying businesses. They are destroying education. They are destroying churches. They are destroying trust. They are destroying mental health. They are destroying marriages. They are destroying relationships. They are destroying communities. They are destroying the idea that the police serve the people. They are destroying the rule of law. They are destroying free Britain.
Time and space will not suffice to tell of the destruction to the delicate balances of life in the medical sphere (especially weakened immune systems), the social sphere, the psychological sphere and the economic sphere, or the slide to a Transhumanist future brought about by the incessant calls for humans to stay away from other humans, and the bizarre ritual of covering the human face — the most immediate and important physical manifestation of the Imago Dei — with useless bits of cloth.
To those who have acquiesced in this, I would just ask this: Do you still not see what you have done? Do you still not see what it is you have supported?
The Britain that existed prior to March 2020, or which many of us thought existed, is gone. The Britain, in which we took freedom for granted, is gone. We have entered a very different future, and what is more, the vast majority of people seem to have welcomed it. Worse than this, we are being ushered into a Transhumanist Technocracy, where we are not seen as human, made in the image of God, but merely as potential virus carriers, digital ID numbers, drones fit to be tracked and traced, fit to be watched and ordered about by the dystopian technocrats who are building their Medical Despotism around us, but not considered worthy to live quiet and peaceful lives, going about our lawful business, living life without interfering overlords meddling in every aspect of it.
Why has this happened?
For the first few months I hedged my bets between the idea that the continuance of these measures was down to politicians trying to cover up for a monumental blunder, or that it was part of something far more nefarious. And whilst I am still unclear on the origins, for me the “covering up for a big mistake” possibility became untenable in October, with the release of The Great Barrington Declaration. This was a scientifically sound, medically robust, intellectually credible way out of the crisis that had been created. It was an open door for the British Government, along with others around the world, to walk through and save face. But what actually happened is they either ignored it or, in the case of Comrade Hancock, actively ridiculed it.
I think it obvious by now that there is something far more nefarious going on. But how to explain it? Some imagine that this must require some Dr Evil character, pulling the strings and making his puppets all dance to the same tune. I don’t believe this to be so. Anyone who has even the most cursory knowledge of politics over the past two decades must have noticed that almost all the people who rise to the top have broadly the same ideology. They think the same things. They mouth the same platitudes. They walk the same walk. And if you don’t think, speak or walk like them, why you’ll never be invited to the party. It is fairly obvious that many of these people have seen Covid-19 as an opportunity to increase their power, to control people, and to remake society in their own hideous image.
But that’s not all. I have seen endless disquieting comments – echoing my own thoughts – from both Christians and non-Christians, that the inexplicably bizarre reaction to what happened was as if millions of people have been put under some kind of spell. On this, it would be well to remember that there are things that go on which are well beyond our ability to explain by purely human reason and human actions:
“For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places” (Ephesians 6:1).
Looking to the Future
Having been lulled and propagandised into the acceptance of measures that are not only futile in and of themselves, but which have destroyed the idea of what we might call normal life, millions have now been lulled into the idea that rushed, untried, untested “vaccines”, which are not due to finish their clinical trials until 2023 (see links to Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Moderna trials), are some sort of salvation and way back to normal. But as the news in recent days has shown, they are in for a big disappointment. Your overlords do not want to let you return to normal. They have the bit between their teeth, and I don’t think they are about to let this opportunity go.
What we are seeing is far bigger, far more comprehensive, far more awful than most of us can comprehend. As Naomi Wolf summed up in a fantastic commentary on the situation recently:
“But this time we do not just face a war on freedom. This time we face a war on human beings, and on all that makes us human.”
Indeed. From Lockdowns to social distancing to masks, humanity and what it means to be human is under attack. There is but one peaceful way out of this Transhumanist Technocratic future: individuals, churches and nations need to repent before God, and having repented they need to plead with Him for deliverance from this judgement, and that he will re-establish truth, reality, and what it actually means to be human, in a world that has forgotten these things. The hour is late. The need really is urgent.
Related:
Victor Davis Hanson: Follow The ‘Science,’ They Said
"All that has taken place since has, I believe, confirmed that, and my only surprise is that millions of people still cling to the bizarre idea that Lockdowns were based on science, that they were necessary, that they have been effective, and that we have a benevolent Government whose aim has been to keep us all safe. None of these things are true."
ReplyDeleteYeah, it is unbearable. I tend to segregate myself away from the people who are so deluded, but they aren't bad people or stupid and so many times my heart goes out to them. There's not a damned thing I can say to them, however, and I don't even try.
I went to the store to buy a special battery and light bulb. I had two very helpful and friendly clerks assisting me. The one clerk was clearly under the impression she was living through the bubonic plague. She was going back to Alabama to see her parents feeling she might never get the chance to see them again if she did not go right now.
Meanwhile I can see she has medical conditions which I recognize as treatable and are not being treated. One of them was eczyma, which clearly interfered with her sense of well being. That's the real thing she is living through--
Yes, as British Prime Minister Lloyd George remarked during World War 1:
DeleteIf the people knew what was going on, this war would end tomorrow. But they cannot know.
Likewise, with the war on Covid.
One recently reported consequence of this war against the people is a decline in birthrate:
Nine months after the pandemic arrived, births fell sharply
In the Western World, that is, where fertility rates are already below replacement.
Another consequence is that overseas vacation travel from Britain has now been made illegal.
All seems consistent with Prince Charles's Great Reset message, about setting ourselves on "a new and more sustainable course."
Meantime, Charlie boy is off to enjoy some winter sunshine in Athens, flying in a huge Government jet. He went for dinner, apparently, and then to see some pictures.
Thanks, CS.
ReplyDeleteI wondered if you'd seen this yet:
How to Avoid Climate Disaster,(2021), by Mr. Bill Gates, know-it-all expert of the universe:
https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/633968/how-to-avoid-a-climate-disaster-by-bill-gates/
And,
https://www.google.com/search?q=how+to+avoid+climate+disaster+by+bill+gates&rlz=1C1ASUT_enUS826US826&oq=How+to+avoid+climate+disaster+by+bill+gates&aqs=chrome.0.0i355j46j0j0i22i30l4j0i390.13262j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#kpvalbx=_XJtbYJXMIYPo9APk44WACA20
I don't know anything about anything but I've reached the reactionary position anything this creep is for I am against, and vice versa.
Re:
DeleteHow to Avoid a Climate Disaster
THE SOLUTIONS WE HAVE AND THE BREAKTHROUGHS WE NEED
By BILL GATES
I liked this Amazon Review
Gates may have a point when he says that the human caused rise in atmospheric CO2 will persist indefinitely, but I am not sure. Years ago, I asked some experts in the field and they were reluctant to comment.
DeleteThere are, in fact, both geological and biological processes that take carbon out of the atmosphere. Wetlands, for example, make peat bogs that sequester carbon, and atmospheric carbon dioxide interacts with various minerals to form carbonates. But what's not clear is how rapidly these processes occur. So maybe Gates is correct: atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration will remain elevated unless steps are taken to remove it on an industrial scale. However, I need more than Gates's assurance. I want the facts that support that conclusion.
And here's what NOAA has to say about oceanic CO2 absorption:
DeleteWhen carbon dioxide CO2 is released into the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels, approximately 50% remains in the atmosphere, while 25% is absorbed by land plants and trees, and the other 25% is absorbed into certain areas of the ocean.
Colder regions are capable of absorbing more CO2 than warm regions, so the polar regions tend to be sinks of CO2 (see the North Atlantic and Arctic)
By 2100, much of the global ocean is expected to be a sink of CO2 from the atmosphere.
But if we stop emitting CO2, the oceans will presumably continue absorbing the gas. So evidently Gates is BSing.
The important thing is to stop emitting the stuff. Then we should see an asymptotic decline in atmospheric concentration to something close to the pre-industrial concentration.
So, yeah, Gates is trying to create a panic, the better to "set us on a new and more sustainable course," which is to say less for you, more for the billionaire class.
Here's the NOAA page I referred to.
DeleteI couldn't follow your link to the Amazon review you liked, but that turned out to be okay because there are a lot of good reviews there. They appear to be recognized as good, too. They give his sloppy BS the one star it deserves. Look for yourself, CS. Overall, the book as a 4.6 star rating, but I am looking at all the reviews other readers found helpful and I have yet to come to a five star. Money can buy a lot of 5 star rating (70%, which I recognize is shockingly low-- Gates's money has failed to buy heart and soul, which is what he's angling after.)
Delete"Overall, the book as a 4.6 star rating, but I am looking at all the reviews other readers found helpful and I have yet to come to a five star."
DeletePeople who've been around for a bit know that if Gates gets to run the world everything will work like Windows 3.0, i.e., barely, if at all, and requiring you to pay for seven more versions before it does the job, and even then it's crap.
Ah, found it:
ReplyDelete"If you enjoy Stalin or Hitler, then you'll like this book."
A one-star with 46 voting helpful. ( I put in a helpful so make that 47, hopefully. Apparently I had failed to sort according to helpful, and so came upon many reviews rated less helpful before seeing this.
I appreciate equating Hitler and Stalin, subtracting the ways they are no way alike. I want to get this ideological shit out of the way. I really do. And I am a rigorous intellectual and...
"But that’s not all. I have seen endless disquieting comments – echoing my own thoughts – from both Christians and non-Christians, that the inexplicably bizarre reaction to what happened was as if millions of people have been put under some kind of spell. On this, it would be well to remember that there are things that go on which are well beyond our ability to explain by purely human reason and human actions"
ReplyDeleteAwhile back I mentioned a few recent films involving almost precisely the pandemic narrative we're witnessing now played out in reality. Since then, I have discovered a surprising number more. I will post some, if you would like. I suspect at some level all of us absorbed what was going to happen to us and what our expected roles would be in it when the events depicted would arrive. It can't be by accident...I mean, who would believe "pandemic" would provide attractive drama and entertainment? And why did it? The fact of the matter is the mass audience simply passively absorbs anything Hollywood provides, seemingly willing to believe "it's a good time". "This is fun!"
Yes, more on the background to the present criminalization of normal life would be useful.
Delete