Well, that poked a hornet’s nest. I logged on this morning to discover a plethora of emails, almost all reacting to yesterday’s article, Time Will Tell. 63% were sceptical (9% extremely so), while the other 37% gave rational reasons, some in impressive detail, why the contents, although shocking, were not beyond possibility. Thank you, all.
So, who is correct?
The published screenshots were purportedly excerpts from a memorandum written, on 14th June, by Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College, London, to the other main players in the UK’s coronavirus fraud. Was the memorandum genuine? Was it satire? Or was it the work of malicious extremists? Imperial College has denied all involvement. (Well, it would, wouldn’t it?) In order to reduce the risk of arriving at wayward conclusions, the following must be considered:
i) Ferguson, in particular, has a disgusting history of scaremongering and being hopelessly unscientific with his epidemiological voodoo modelling. It is as if he is given a predetermined conclusion, to which he then strives to fit his convoluted, GIGO calculations. (GIGO, by the way, is a term used by computer software writers: garbage in → garbage out.) Nonetheless, his reputation has never been brought into question by government. Why not?
ii) Funding sources, of Ferguson, and Imperial College in general, have not been investigated with regard to potential or actual conflict of interest. Why not?
iii) Predictions and projections made by the other players – namely Michie, Whitty, Vallance and Van Tam – have not been properly peer-reviewed prior to public broadcast. Many have been shown to be distortions and outright lies. These ‘experts’ have never taken part in open scientific debate with opponents and sceptics. (I would jump at the chance.) Why not?
Regarding the past eighteen months:
iv) Small businesses have been either crippled or destroyed by perpetual lockdowns and other restrictions. Corporations, on the other hand, have profited like never before. Is this mere coincidence? Surely, from now on, no rational entrepreneur will risk investing capital knowing that politicians could pull the rug without reason or warning. Hence, avaricious corporations – media, pharma and tech – are set to become invincible.
v) An estimated 20,000 to 50,000 British people have died prematurely as a consequence of withdrawn or postponed diagnosis and treatment of, for example, cancer. What is this, if not a crime against humanity?
vi) The fatality rate of COVID has, in spite of a fraudulent PCR test protocol, been accepted by the World Health Organization to be a mere 0.15%, not statistically different from that of seasonal flu. This, alongside the fact that there has been no excess overall mortality worldwide, proves that there has been no viral pandemic.
vii) Science has been distorted to mislead the public, particularly with regard to the never-ending river of viral ‘variants’ and a devious implication that increased viral transmissibility equates to increased lethality. (The opposite is true.)
viii) Draconian, antisocial, antiscientific measures imposed by government on the British population have led to bizarre instances of: hillwalkers surveilled by police drones; householders warned not to sit in their own front gardens; lone sunbathers arrested in public parks; rail passengers manhandled by police despite having legitimate reasons for not wearing face masks; government ministers openly advocating a system of ‘medical apartheid’, where only ‘vaccinated’ individuals would be entitled to basic services; along with an outrageous degree of 24/7 coercion regarding so-called ‘vaccines’.
Therefore, it would be weak to argue, from nothing more than personal incredulity, that surreal restrictions to everyday life could not be extended, compounded or made permanent. Send in Big Brother? Don’t bother; he is already here.
Examining the main points of the memorandum:
ix) Are the summer ‘variants’ simply ‘a re-branding of Hay Fever’? Citing hay fever symptoms might be yet another manipulative way to convince healthy people to take PCR tests on a frequent basis and thereby inflate the number of recorded ‘cases’. As in Thailand and many US states, once the PCR testing stops, so does the ‘pandemic’.
x) Former Pfizer Vice-President Dr Mike Yeadon has reported that medical diagnostics facilities have been recruiting extra laboratory staff in preparation for the next full lockdown, so it is perfectly logical to suggest that social and economic straitjackets are already primed to be tightened further.
xi) Huge anti-lockdown protests and the Euro 2020 football tournament could provide government with convenient ammunition to claim that such mass gatherings of ‘people disobeying rules’ have precipitated the spread of ‘deadly variants’.
xii) Online censorship has already become rampant. There is no reason to believe that it will abate, and, by so doing, allow the light of truth to disinfect people’s minds.
xiii) ‘Stay At Home Bracelets’ might appear to be the most far-fetched aspect of the memorandum. Could these be enforceable by emergency law?
xiv) Prototypes entitled ‘The Capital Variant’, ‘The Dorset Variant’ and ‘The Border Variant’ could realistically be invented and subsequently announced to the public, mass travel being given as the reason for their purported emergence.
The public is, to some extent, waking up to the biggest fraud in history. Will enough awaken quickly enough? I am not so sure. Many individuals lack the critical faculty, not to mention advanced scientific knowledge, to differentiate facts from propaganda. They cannot, therefore, tell when they are being lied to. Moreover, many are either too proud, stubborn or embarrassed to address the suggestion that they have been duped from the very beginning.
Fundamentally, it seems to me that humans in general cannot really disentangle multiple levels of misdirection. This is something of which sophisticated propagandists are acutely aware. The tragic consequence of this phenomenon, coupled with intellectual laziness, is that the majority will believe a simple lie rather than the complex truth. Blind acceptance and acquiescence consume far less mental energy than does digging like a dog.
Since I began writing this article, the stream of emails has become torrential. I admit, the memorandum does seem outrageous – or, rather, it would in normal times, but these are not. As I wrote yesterday evening, time will tell whether (any or all of) the points contained in the memorandum come true. By next month, we shall know whether suspicions are misplaced or Ferguson et al. really are as repulsively conniving as I already believe them to be.
Copyright © 2021 Paul Spradbery