In April, The House published an article from the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, detailing the dangers of public misinformation around Covid19. “Misinformation in the coronavirus crisis is putting lives at risk…” it blared, stating:
The volume of inaccurate information circulating around the Covid-19 outbreak has prompted a global ‘infodemic’.
Widespread misinformation has included proposed underlying causes of the virus (such as 5G radio waves), conspiracies around the actions of public bodies and unverified treatments and preventative measures.
An Ofcom survey of over 2,000 people found that, within the first week of the ‘stay at home’ measures, 46% encountered false or misleading information. Within this group, 66% reported that they were seeing Covid-19 misinformation at least once a day and 55% said that they did nothing about it. (emphasis added.)
They go on to analyse where the “misinformation” is coming from noting:
The Reuters Institute of Journalism and Oxford University recently analysed 225 items of Covid-19 misinformation and found that 88% appeared on social media. (Emphasis added)
Now, here’s where they pull the old “bait and switch”. What sort of misinformation are they concerned about?
For example, false claims that taking hot baths or using hairdryersprotects people from Covid-19 may have stemmed from NHS recommendations about washing bed linen in temperatures of 60 degrees Celsius.
Misinformation can arise from genuine misconceptions. The term ‘coronavirus’ is not limited to the virus which causes Covid-19, and instead refers to a family of viruses identified in the 1960s. A photo of a disinfectant bottle label, which claims to ‘kill human coronavirus’ has been shared on Facebook over 2500 times, and led some users to speculate that manufacturers knew about Covid-19 ahead of the public.
Well, okay, some people may need to be protected from that sort of misinformation, agreed.
But is that the “misinformation” they are actually “protecting” the public from? Some insight may be gleaned from an illuminating recent twitter thread from investigative journalist, Cory Morningstar (@elleprovocateur).
Center for Countering Digital Hate @CCDHateThanks to @POST_UK for including #DontSpreadTheVirus in this very useful summary of coronavirus misinformation and what's being done about it. https://t.co/F2xr9197Cj https://t.co/FO6SWUutdy
So, a considerable amount of capital has been expended to manage public perceptions around Covid19. Would this be necessary if the world was actually in the grip of a “global pandemic”? Surely, the truth would be self evident. Perhaps that’s the problem. Completely ignored by MSM, the following occurred recently. A Portuguese court has ruled that PCR testing is “unreliable” and “unlawful to quarantine people”, and Belgian health experts have written to authorities demanding and investigation into the WHO for “faking Coronavirus pandemic”. Iain Davis agrees, stating recently:
No matter where you look in the supposed genome of SARS-CoV-2, there is nothing in the WHO’s test protocols that clearly identifies what it is. The whole genome could be false. The tests do not prove the existence of SARS-CoV-2. All they reveal is a soup of unspecified genetic material.
If so, as there are no isolates or purified samples of the virus, without a viable test, there is no evidence that SARS-CoV-2 exists. Therefore, nor is there any evidence that a disease called COVID 19 exists.
This infers that there is no scientific basis for any claims about COVID 19 case numbers, hospital admissions or mortality figures. All measures taken to combat this deadly virus are quite possibly founded upon nothing.
In recent days a video has appeared on social media featuring an audio recording of Cambridge trained pathologist, Dr Rodger Hodkinson, calling it; “The greatest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting public”.
Surely, this should raise very serious questions, or more appropriately, calls for criminal prosecutions for those who have participated in this global pandemic fraud; which has enriched politicians and their cronies.
However, rather than engage in reasonable debate about the issues, the government has instead waged war on anybody disagreeing with their, ever disintegrating narrative, aided and abetted by the “opposition”.
Of course, the usual suspects; Twitter, Facebook, and Youtube are also doing their bit to counter “false” information too. This is indeed disturbing, when the opinions being censored, are of respected, albeit, dissenting scientists and doctors.
Even the British Medical Journal have commented on the “politicization, corruption and suppression of evidence” pertaining to Covid19.
It should be clear where we stand. We have politicians steadfastly ignoring, and attempting to silence any dissenting opinion or evidence that further discredits the Coronavirus fraud narrative. It reeks of desperation.
It is also clear the government are rogue. They are acting outside of reason and law, as ex-Supreme Court Justice, Lord Sumption warned recently:
So, I regret to say, is the propaganda by which the government has to some extent been able to create its own public opinion. Fear was deliberately stoked up by the government: the language of impending doom; the daily press conferences; the alarmist projections of the mathematical modellers; the manipulative use of selected statistics; the presentation of exceptional tragedies as if they were the normal effects of Covid-19; above all the attempt to suggest that that Covid-19 was an indiscriminate killer, when the truth was that it killed identifiable groups, notably those with serious underlying conditions and the old, who could and arguably should have been sheltered without coercing the entire population.
Yet what holds us together as a society is precisely the means by which we do things. It is a common respect for a way of making collective decisions, even if we disagree with the decisions themselves. It is difficult to respect the way in which this government’s decisions have been made. It marks a move to a more authoritarian model of politics which will outlast the present crisis. There is little doubt that for some ministers and their advisers this is a desirable outcome.
Are we really in a position where a few dangerous men can lead us directly into tyranny and dictatorship, with no protection at all from our much vaunted political system? If so, there does, indeed, need to be a “reset”. One that firstly results in the gaoling and criminal prosecutions of all involved in this global fraud, including executives of pharmaceutical companies. Then we rewrite the rules so that this level of criminal malfeasance by corporate interests and politicians can never happen again.
PS: I have had my issues with censorship with Twitter recently banning me from my Twitter account MaggieMay@JOBrian14, so if you like this please share.