Last updated2020-10-06T09:14:52



169351 Bartleby, replying to Bartleby, 89, #1 of 2087 🔗

Good update! Always feel like the tide is turning when I see freshly pressed scepticism.

Doesn’t always last, but still… thank you those of you working on and contributing to the site, and thank you to the fellow commentators, you’re all first in my eyes!

169357 ▶▶ Sir Patrick Vaccine, replying to Bartleby, 23, #2 of 2087 🔗

Dissenting scientists issue Covid-19 herd immunity declaration


Freddie Sayers talks to eminent epidemiologists Dr Sunetra Gupta, Dr Jay Bhattacharya and Dr. Martin Kulldorff, who met in Massachusetts to sign a declaration calling for a different global response to the pandemic.

youtube com watch?v=rz_Z7Gf1aRE

Read the full declaration here : https://unherd.com/2020/10/covid-expe ..

169613 ▶▶▶ Suzyv, replying to Sir Patrick Vaccine, 11, #3 of 2087 🔗

The more that sign this worldwide the better. It attempts to put forward a model that may be acceptable to Governments to stop all the lockdowns and measures. It does mention vaccines (which I am opposed to) but in a much more moderate way.

170195 ▶▶▶▶ crimsonpirate, replying to Suzyv, 6, #4 of 2087 🔗

it may have borne fruit already with the Irish govt rejection of a full lockdown

170205 ▶▶▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to crimsonpirate, 1, #5 of 2087 🔗

Fingers crossed – or were they just sabre-rattling in the first place?

170436 ▶▶▶▶ Monty Bodkin, replying to Suzyv, 2, #6 of 2087 🔗

Signed it yesterday.

169707 ▶▶ crimsonpirate, replying to Bartleby, 4, #7 of 2087 🔗

hopefully the two mooted parliamentary votes re rule of six and the 10PM curfew will be a measure of the tide finally turning.
I am hopeful about the 10pm curfew but I suspect it will be a trade off against keeping masks indoors and table service.

170591 ▶▶▶ Neil Hartley, replying to crimsonpirate, 6, #8 of 2087 🔗

the curfew vote was pulled – so much for parliamentary scrutiny.

169801 ▶▶ HelenaHancart, replying to Bartleby, 30, #9 of 2087 🔗

Yes, you’ve just voiced my feelings! Been feeling very up and down the last few days but today feels different. I really appreciate all the work that has gone into Lockdown Sceptics, from Toby Young, all the contributors, and the commentators. Reading this site every morning gives me hope and keeps me sane. Thanks to all.

170194 ▶▶ Sir Patrick Vaccine, replying to Bartleby, 11, #10 of 2087 🔗

This is the Country Boris Johnson has created. <
Comforting a grieving widow by her two sons is banned at a funeral.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wchPE4ujaZI youtube com/watch?v=wchPE4ujaZI

STOP!” National Disgrace – Unedited 🎤 📺 It’s Come To This…

170633 ▶▶ AidanR, replying to Bartleby, 3, #11 of 2087 🔗

If you see the tide going out, expect a mega-tsunami.

170677 ▶▶ Sir Patrick Vaccine, replying to Bartleby, 7, #12 of 2087 🔗

Forward this to you MP – it might seem pointless, I understand, but it’s better than doing nothing.

When killing people is Government policy
Peter Lloyd Conservative Woman

October 6, 2020

NO Conservative Prime Minister can survive if he or she is taking decisions that are contrary to the interests of most people in the country. The Covid-19 measures which Boris Johnson is forcing on the public are clearly against those interests, and worse is being planned.

The health, education, employment, finances and social and mental wellbeing of the population is being destroyed for the illusory goal of stopping the spread of a coronavirus that is essentially harmless to 99 per cent of the population, and lethal almost exclusively to the elderly with serious underlying medical conditions, as are many strains of seasonal flu.

Much of the damage being wreaked is disguised by the Chancellor’s furlough scheme and other taxpayer-funded handouts, but revealed through an explosion of government debt which will have severe negative consequences for all of us, particularly future generations.

The ramping-up of virus tests with the dubious PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) methodology is inevitably showing more ‘cases’ which in reality may be just harmless fragments of the Covid-19 (or other) coronavirus RNA that can’t be transmitted to others. These are not infections and certainly not illnesses. The bar on proof of infection is too low.

The government refuses to acknowledge that this increase in cases is largely due to the increased testing, and allows the message to embed in the surrounding narrative that a positive test – which may also be a false positive – is equivalent to being ill when the overwhelming majority of those who are Covid-19 positive don’t become ill, let alone die. It is in the business of exaggeration and fearmongering along with most of the mainstream media.

The most important measure of what is happening medically is surely the number of deaths that can be attributed, to a greater or lesser extent, to Covid-19. The graph below from the Office for National Statistics (taken from the ‘Lockdown Sceptics’ latest newsletter) gives the up-to-date figures, showing that Covid-19 attributed deaths since June are running well below those of flu/pneumonia, and that the total weekly UK death numbers from these lung-related infections are running in line with the five-year average.

As fast as the numbers of those seriously ill, and the daily death toll from the virus, are declining, the risk of other undiagnosed and untreated serious illnesses and deaths is rising because of the lockdown mentality still affecting the NHS and other public services, encouraged by government.

On Saturday 66 GPs wrote to the Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, urging him to treat non-Covid deaths as equal to those from Covid. The doctors know that this is not happening at present. For reasons of projecting an image of action and having illusory control over the path of the virus, only Covid deaths matter to the government.

The doctors’ letter reports that there have been more than 30,000 excess deaths in private homes since March, but fewer than one in ten are caused by Covid-19. They are also concerned that ‘the pandemic has resulted in an inflation of acute cardiovascular deaths, most of which did not relate to Covid-19’. They also point to a report suggesting that child suicide rates increased during lockdown and, for these doctors, harm should be measured as more than Covid deaths.

There is so little pressure from the Conservative Party, MPs and the media for the government to act rationally and in the interest of the country as a whole that the government doesn’t feel it has to explain why non-Covid-19 deaths and serious untreated illnesses don’t matter. It has a monomaniacal obsession with Covid-19 which demonstrates how unaccountable the government is to the overall public interest. There is no rigour left in our system of parliamentary and public accountability, which needs a major overhaul.

Far more people are dying because of the government’s measures than are being saved by them. The wholesale destruction of society is taking place for no significant gain in health or mortality and it is government policy.

169352 Allen, replying to Allen, 56, #13 of 2087 🔗

A little factoid from the US as of Sept 6th:

In 2020 the total death number in the US versus 2017’s total death number was 952,398 shy of hitting 2017 death toll. That amounts to 33.9% left of the total to equal the 2017 numbers. With 118 days left in the year which is 32.3% of the year left it looks like a similar outcome to 2017.

At that point the US would’ve needed 18 weeks at current death rates to equal the overall death toll from 2017 whilst there were only 16 weeks remaining.

However, the stat is even more interesting in that here in 2020 the overall population is higher than it was in 2017 so as an overall percentage of population this year’s death total is even lower than stated above.

Another untidy factoid the disproves the sacred screed of the Covid True Believers is that in the US this year’s increase in mortality is 1.12%, similar to last years. However that rate is lower than the previous 5 years before last year.

Let’s also keep in mind the US had 20 straight year’s of mortality rate decreases until 2008- economic recession. Since then we have had 12 straight years of increases with, again, this year’s decidedly not any different than the previous 11 years.

No pandemic.

The majority of the elderly people who died didn’t even die of the virus but it’s being chalked off as a “Covid” death to keep the Covid death count high, the fearmongering going and the $$$ coming in. These are old people with a wide variety of multiple serious medical conditions. They’re are on multiple toxic medical drugs that cause serious adverse reactions. Many were in and out of the ER & urgent care departments well before the arrival of this new virus. They’re dying from pneumonia, COPD, cancers, cardiovascular diseases, adverse reactions to toxic medical drugs, etc . Some of them died from complications of being put on a ventilator when they didn’t need to.

There’s BIG money at stake here. More dough on sliding scale is given to the hospitals for a Covid admission, a Covid ICU hospitalization and a Covid death. That’s why everything these days is chalked off to Covid. And hospitals are starving for $$$ – this a great scheme to improve your revenue and not be in the red all the time.

169439 ▶▶ Sally, replying to Allen, 3, #14 of 2087 🔗

Have you got a source for that mortality data? I would like to share it.

169992 ▶▶▶ Allen, replying to Sally, 2, #15 of 2087 🔗
169500 ▶▶ djaustin, replying to Allen, -1, #16 of 2087 🔗

I have no idea where your data has come from, but it bares little resemblance to the official mortality data. You are welcome to explore it here – a viewer from mortality.org short-term fluctuations data.


169991 ▶▶▶ Allen, replying to djaustin, 3, #17 of 2087 🔗

One of the most ridiculous charts I’ve seen on all of this and that’s saying something.

You need to look at context and trends. That idiotic site does neither.

Go here and look at overall growth rates:


171391 ▶▶▶▶ djaustin, replying to Allen, -1, #18 of 2087 🔗

You do know that the source of that data is the US govt? Its just a simple way of viewing the data from the https://www.mortality.org/ database. Along with 40 other countries. Broken down by age with historic reference data. Which does not look like the above plot. As for a historic view, by all means look back. But for modern perspective 10 years is reasonable. The database is the official data from each government provided by their respective agency. The ONS are collaborators.

171045 ▶▶▶ Rowan, replying to djaustin, 1, #19 of 2087 🔗

How are things at 77th Brigade?

169353 Simon MacPhisto, replying to Simon MacPhisto, 17, #20 of 2087 🔗

Let’s hope the tide is turning – ffs – what other hope is there ?

169567 ▶▶ karenovirus, replying to Simon MacPhisto, 28, #21 of 2087 🔗

A small step featured in todays Local Live, a full article about an independent food retailer announcing that they ‘would allow’ customers to remove masks and that the staff were not wearing them either.
There followed a succinct summary of why wearing masks is useless. The proprietor reported that 95% of customers gratefully removed their masks.
The only kickback being a standard rehash of the law at the end of the piece.

169602 ▶▶▶ BeBopRockSteady, replying to karenovirus, 10, #22 of 2087 🔗

This eoushing for masks are in the very small minority. As soon as mandates or perceived laws around them are clearly removed and people can decide for themselves what to wear on their face, off they come. And it’s the key reason why they will never work, you need 100% compliance and harsh enforcement to even stand a chance.

169782 ▶▶▶▶ Rowan, replying to BeBopRockSteady, 21, #23 of 2087 🔗

Even with 100% compliance, masks have no proven effectiveness in preventing the spread of airborne respiratory diseases. Then of course, there is the downside of mask wearing and more bad news is building up here. Masks are being worn either by fools and collaborators.

169869 ▶▶▶▶▶ RichT, replying to Rowan, 17, #24 of 2087 🔗

Rowan, Saying only fools or collaborators wear masks is a false dichotomy.
I think gaslighted/brainwashed is one reason, if their only news source is The Guardian or the BBC their probably still hiding under the bed. There are the virtue signallers (closer to collaborators) and then their are the folk who just follow rules, even if they disagree with them.

Most of us on this site would probably be diagnosed with oppositional defiant disorder (one of the many fabricated mental illness’s) or something similar, if the pseduo psychologists and big pharma had their way, and be put on some kind of medication. We are the ones that are different (scepticism is quite rare) and it is down to us to try and educate the poor deluded souls.

171060 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Rowan, replying to RichT, 3, #25 of 2087 🔗

Those that rely on the BBC and/or Guardian as their main news sources are patently fools. Nothing too controversial about that.

170066 ▶▶▶▶ Luckyluke1976, replying to BeBopRockSteady, 14, #26 of 2087 🔗

I am afraid I have to disagree with you. For the first time this week in The Netherlands I saw more muzzled people than muzzle-free in the shops. Wearing of masks in shops is “strongly recommended” by the government but they stopped short of making it mandatory (for now). I thought that Holland (btw I’m not Dutch) was an oasis of sanity in this global BS but boy was I proven wrong. The once rebellious, rule-breaking Dutch have turned into sheeple like the rest of Europe. All it took was a misleading “cases” graph from Rutte on prime time TV. It pains me to see young people, men and women in their prime looking pathetic with the diapers on their faces and the irrational fear in their eyes. I have never worn a mask and I am beyond furious at what awaits us in one of the cradles of democracy slowly turning into a communist dystopia. How long are these villains disguised as governments going to destroy everything we hold dear, anything that makes life worth living before we all fight back and hang them from lampposts?? Is it true that that the darkest hour is just before dawn?

170088 ▶▶▶▶▶ BeBopRockSteady, replying to Luckyluke1976, 9, #27 of 2087 🔗

Interesting. So it’s fear and social stigma. So maybe I have over estimated the thinking capabilities of the general population.

In that case I would say that as soon as people are told the truth, off they come. Scary graphs and casedemic fear mongering is criminal behaviour

170230 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to BeBopRockSteady, 4, #28 of 2087 🔗

It’s terrorism.

170761 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Proudtobeapeasant, replying to BeBopRockSteady, 3, #29 of 2087 🔗

I think many people won’t believe the truth even when it’s clear as daylight. Having been mongered with fear it will take a long time for them to realize the truth.

171139 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ David McCluskey, replying to BeBopRockSteady, 4, #30 of 2087 🔗

Lord Haw Haw was hanged in 1946 for “broadcasting propaganda”, and he wasn’t even a full British citizen.

170212 ▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to karenovirus, 3, #31 of 2087 🔗

The law only says that face nappies must be worn by shop staff if they can’t maintain “a reasonable distance” from the customers.

169354 Allen, replying to Allen, 77, #32 of 2087 🔗

Direct quotes from fourth graders today:

“They ruined recess, there’s nothing to do. They took away our basketball, wall ball and our soccer ball. We’re just suppose to sit around.”

“I would rather do anything but go to recess.”

“They’re trying to ruin our self-esteem.”

We are bearing witness to massive institutionalized child abuse.

I approached a grade school as masked up kids were letting out and stopped my car the middle of a crosswalk, rolled down my window and yelled at the masked up crossing guard, “Putting a mask on these young children is a form of child abuse, it’s disgusting.” He did not agree- shook his head.

Turned the corner and there was a young couple walking their young child of no more than 6 or 7 and all of them wearing masks. I yelled at them also telling them they were “abusing their child, what is wrong with them.” The father said, “Calm down” and I replied, “No one should be calm when they see kids being abused.”

Some days you can really see how f**ing hideous all of this is.

169370 ▶▶ annie, replying to Allen, 3, #33 of 2087 🔗

What part of Lalalooneyland are you in, Alien?

169847 ▶▶▶ Rowan, replying to annie, 21, #34 of 2087 🔗

It’s probably a place near you. I see this sort of stupidity nearly everyday and like Allen I sometimes vent my wrath on those brain dead people who are imposing this nonsense on young children. Proper blame though, should be directed at the treasonous Johnson and Hancock, who have already murdered tens of thousands of our fellow citizens, in their morbid desire to comply with Bill Gates’s genocidal vaccine agenda. Of course, there are many others who share the guilt, but we need to start at the top, as Johnson and Hancock are looking to repeat their crimes this winter. This pair of serial killers have massively outdone, even the evil Dr Shipman and they both should be clapped in irons forthwith.

169415 ▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to Allen, 29, #35 of 2087 🔗

As a counterbalance, I was on a double-decker bus yesterday and could see, over a high wall, primary school kids playing outside. Maybe 50 of them in groups in organised team games. They were obviously mixing and the groups were close together. Looked completely normal and the kids were shouting and screaming and having a great time. Nice to see somebody has a sense of proportion. Of course, it wasn’t a state school and you’d have to torture me to find out where it was.

169564 ▶▶ hat man, replying to Allen, 4, #36 of 2087 🔗

What’s ‘recess’? Is this in America?

169568 ▶▶▶ karenovirus, replying to hat man, 4, #37 of 2087 🔗


169575 ▶▶▶▶ Two-Six, replying to karenovirus, 3, #38 of 2087 🔗

“Crosswalk”=Zebra crossing
A free translation, “Fanny”=Bum
Not your

169712 ▶▶▶▶▶ crimsonpirate, replying to Two-Six, 1, #39 of 2087 🔗

I’ll add naughty step=time out chair

171259 ▶▶▶▶▶ NappyFace, replying to Two-Six, 1, #40 of 2087 🔗

Cue large bite of Scotch Egg.

169731 ▶▶ AidanR, replying to Allen, 3, #41 of 2087 🔗

Silver lining perhaps…

Maybe it’ll save this cohort from becoming weapons-grade snowflakes and bestow them with independent thought and scepticism of authority and consensus.

God knows, we need more of that.

169355 Cecil B, replying to Cecil B, 30, #42 of 2087 🔗

Oliver Cromwell cancelled Christmas

When the monarchy was restored they dug his body up

The Lord Protector was dragged through the streets of London to his place of ‘execution’ at Tyburn

At Tyburn he was subjected to the traitors execution of being hung drawn and quartered. How they did that with a corpse is not entirely clear but I’m sure they did their best in the circumstances

He was then beheaded

His head was then displayed on a pike in Whitehall as a warning to others

169372 ▶▶ annie, replying to Cecil B, 26, #43 of 2087 🔗

And his remaining regicide henchmen were hunted down and similarly dealt with, but while still alive. See Charles Spencer’s excellent book Killers of the King. There was no place they could hide.
And yet most of them were men of conscience, unlike our own snivelling tyrants. The latter will find nowhere to hide, either, when Nemesis comes after them.

169381 ▶▶▶ Andrew Fish, replying to annie, 27, #44 of 2087 🔗

The Christmas thing is always trundled out to blacken Cromwell, but it’s a misconception because Christmas was not the same as it is now. It was primarily a Catholic religious festival, and since the Civil Wars and the Protectorate came at the end of a century of religious division, and Catholic dissent was still at serious risk of flaring up Cromwell acted not to oppress joy, but to attempt to preserve order. Think of it less as if he’d cancelled a party and more as if he’d banned the marching season in Northern Ireland.

I often compare Cromwell to Margaret Thatcher in that, whilst I’m not sure I’d have got on with either of them personally and I don’t think either of them were perfect, I think they were necessary for the moment in history when they arose, genuinely tried to deal with a perceived problem and have been subjected to propaganda both during and after their tenure. In Cromwell’s case, a key part of the myth that has risen around him is the idea that he was in charge before Charles I’s execution. In actual fact he was a mere backbencher and, despite his military genius, wasn’t even head of the Parliamentary army during the wars (that was Thomas Fairfax who quit when the King’s death sentence was sealed). He only rose to power when, after Parliament had the King executed, it turned out to be just as corrupt and self-serving as Charles himself had been. Cromwell brought in the army to purge the House of Commons and attempted more than once to create a Parliament which actually worked before he reluctantly accepted the mantle of Lord Protector (he was offered the role of king, but refused it).

I’d recommend Antonia May Fraser’s Cromwell, Our Chief of Men .

169386 ▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to Andrew Fish, 14, #45 of 2087 🔗

I was making a point above, maybe not well. Actually I greatly admire Cromwell, and despise Charles I as a self-righteous tyrant – although the legality of his trial and executuion are, to put it mildly, contentious.

169413 ▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to annie, 5, #46 of 2087 🔗

But Cromwell and Ireland isn’t good??

169457 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Ewan Duffy, replying to TJN, 4, #47 of 2087 🔗

Hear hear. In Drogheda, a town about 30 miles north of Dublin, they still talk about like he was on remand awaiting trial!

169550 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to Ewan Duffy, 7, #48 of 2087 🔗

“He blows up policemen, or so I have heard,
And blames it on Cromwell and William the Third.”

Michael Flanders on the Irishman.

171077 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Rowan, replying to Ewan Duffy, 2, #49 of 2087 🔗

Too late for Cromwell, but not for Johnson and Hancock who should be on remand, but no trial seems necessary. These two serial mass murderers make Harold Shipman seem like St Francis of Assisi.

171069 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Rowan, replying to TJN, 1, #50 of 2087 🔗

Blair and Iraq isn’t good. Cameron and Libya also not good.

169459 ▶▶▶▶▶ Andrew Fish, replying to annie, 2, #51 of 2087 🔗

Difficult to find a legal footing to kill the head of state, but in fairness it was the first time that was tried – previous monarchs had just been quietly murdered, deposed or beaten in the field and replaced by another branch of the family.

169552 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to Andrew Fish, 1, #52 of 2087 🔗

True. But constituting the Commons as a court was dodgy.

171085 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Rowan, replying to Andrew Fish, #53 of 2087 🔗

It’s not the head of state this time around. It is the Prime Minister and the Health Secretary who should have their heads lopped off.

169392 ▶▶▶▶ wendyk, replying to Andrew Fish, 12, #54 of 2087 🔗

I’ve read it and, dare I say it, Cromwell is one of the historical figures whom I most admire.

Iron determination and incorruptible; a man for his time.

I think the Lord Protector role was an uncomfortable compromise but all that was realistically on offer in the 17th century.

169398 ▶▶▶▶▶ Cecil B, replying to wendyk, 3, #55 of 2087 🔗

Shall we gloss over the genocide in Ireland

169404 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to Cecil B, 6, #56 of 2087 🔗

By no means. The good and the evil should be weighed in the balance.

169419 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to annie, 1, #57 of 2087 🔗

The best interpretation I can put on it is this.

Cromwell calculated that by undertaking the massacre at Drogheda he was preventing further insurrection in Ireland, and thus saving net life. If by killing one ‘rebel’ in cold blood he prevented tens of deaths inherent in further insurrection then the killing was justified.

Not a calculation I would wish to make, but was he really so terribly wrong??

169944 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Seansaighdeoir, replying to TJN, -1, #58 of 2087 🔗

That’s a justification for genocide. Using that logic it would have been justified to nuke Afghanistan, Iraq or even Argentina – ‘after all if it saves one life…’

170187 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Seansaighdeoir, #59 of 2087 🔗

I’m not saying I agree, I’m just trying to guess the thought process he was going through. Probably the religious certainties of those days made it easier.

169420 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ wendyk, replying to Cecil B, 6, #60 of 2087 🔗

Not at all; my forebears joined the expedition, as bridle makers, so the story goes, but, for his attempts to bring another course to 17th century England, I think he deserves some credit.

Cromwell was flawed, as are we all, but the unfortunate Charles 1st was his own worst enemy.

169451 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Andrew Fish, replying to Cecil B, 15, #61 of 2087 🔗

What happened in Ireland was within the rules of war at the time (you didn’t give quarter to besieged cities if they forced you to breach them) and we tend to gloss over the fact that Wellington did much the same in the Peninsular War. There was also a lot of bitterness amongst the Protestant troops due to (somewhat exaggerated) stories of what had happened during the Irish uprising a few years earlier. We might not like what he did – and it’s certainly been used politically since – but that’s rather like the whole statue-toppling thing at the moment, judging history by our own standards.

169470 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Recusant, replying to Andrew Fish, 7, #62 of 2087 🔗

The idea that Cromwell needed to wage war on Ireland is a nonsense in itself. It was an act of pure bigotry, the man and his demented puritanism are a stain on our history.

I would have been a Royalist through and through.

169490 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Andrew Fish, replying to Recusant, 1, #63 of 2087 🔗

It wasn’t Cromwell’s decision to invade. The rump parliament instructed him to do so, although I agree not for good reason (they basically thought that a standing army was a threat to order if they didn’t give them something to do).

170188 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Recusant, replying to Andrew Fish, 1, #64 of 2087 🔗

So he was only following orders? To be honest I think he had too much fun killing people to use that defence.

169554 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to Recusant, 2, #65 of 2087 🔗

And I a Cromwellian. Muskets at dawn?

169591 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ karenovirus, replying to Recusant, 2, #66 of 2087 🔗

Gets a bit complicated in that the Old English (descendants of the Anglo Norman aristocracy) were still Catholic and generally sided with the locals.

169694 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Caroline Watson, replying to karenovirus, 3, #67 of 2087 🔗

One of my ancestors, Sir Hugh Cartwright of Ossington, was walled up for a month in someone else’s house because Cromwell’s men were after him and considered him a ‘dangerous malignant’ – something to do with a siege at Pontefract I think. He then fled to Belgium. I thought of him at the beginning of the lockdown!
The Cartwrights were descended from the Norman aristocracy and the Cranmers; my many times great grandmother was the Archbishop’s sister. Much of their land came from the dissolution of the monasteries but Cromwell confiscated it, which was why my grandfather ended up taking milk round on a horse and cart!

169950 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Caroline Watson, 2, #68 of 2087 🔗

Great story!

When you think what people in those days went through in adherence to their beliefs in puts what we’e going through into persepective.

169400 ▶▶▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to Andrew Fish, 3, #69 of 2087 🔗

Cromwell didn’t abolish Christmas, it was Parliament.
Cromwell famously danced at his daughter’s wedding.

169417 ▶▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to Fingerache Philip., 1, #70 of 2087 🔗

Even John Calvin allowed dancing at weddings. I think it was the only occasion. I always thought it must have led to serial monogamy in Geneva.

169401 ▶▶▶▶ Cecil B, replying to Andrew Fish, 5, #71 of 2087 🔗

‘Cromwell acted not to oppress joy, but to attempt to preserve order’

Bit like the dictator and handy cock then

169411 ▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Andrew Fish, 2, #72 of 2087 🔗

I have an ambivalent attitude towards Cromwell. As you say, he was necessary to the time. We have much to be grateful to him for, and yet there was much that was repellent about him. I thought Cromwell had more influence during 1648 than your post implies?

I often wonder which side I which side I would have supported in the Civil Wars. In my view, they both were in part right and in part wrong. The one individual who was truly wrong was Charles I, with his unbending out-of-date attitude; his best months were his last months, and do him some credit, but it was too late.

I have had a copy of Ms Fraser’s book for ages, but haven’t read it yet.

169447 ▶▶▶▶▶ Andrew Fish, replying to TJN, 2, #73 of 2087 🔗

Cromwell was popular with the army – the New Model was based on the cavalry regiment he raised in Huntingdonshire and his strategic nous had delivered the greatest victories of the wars – and he was vocal amonst the regicides, but he was by no means in charge.

Very hard to say where I’d have stood at the time too. I have a strong sense of justice and morality, but obviously that has been shaped by my own background so it may well have been different based on when, and in what position in society, I had been born.

169477 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Andrew Fish, 1, #74 of 2087 🔗

By 1648 if I’d been an MP I’m pretty sure I would have been one of the ‘Presbyterians’, as they were termed.

170034 ▶▶▶▶▶ wat tyler, replying to TJN, 1, #75 of 2087 🔗

I love the fact lockdown sceptics are fighting the English Civil War . Here’s my take . I would of supported Cromwell and the forces of republicanism and we should be justly proud of being the first modern nation to kill a king .But the truth is in the end Cromwell betrayed the cause ,you only have to look what happened to Winstanley and the diggers .The reason today a tiny minority own all the land in Britain and the majority hardly have a blade of grass is because we never fulfilled our dreams of making the land a common treasury for all .

170192 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to wat tyler, 1, #76 of 2087 🔗

As I remember, Cromwell was very sensitive to the continuation of property rights, being from landed stock himself.

171222 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ wat tyler, replying to TJN, #77 of 2087 🔗

He was and as i said betrayed the cause.

169580 ▶▶▶▶ Basics, replying to Andrew Fish, 2, #78 of 2087 🔗

Fascinating. I’m starting to like history.

Can I propose that we follow a modified Icelandic model. That being burying the corpse in a bog, pickled in urine, then perhaps introduce a little British flavour by a hanging, and a quartering if you must, before finally separating body from head until dead, dead, dead.

169407 ▶▶▶ TJN, replying to annie, 8, #79 of 2087 🔗

I thought a lot of the regicides did hide though? Escaped the country. Although there were executions, I thought Charles II tried to be as lenient as he could, and in doing so set the tone for his reign.

I think there’s a lesson here. Terrible as we all feel about the current circumstances, and bitter as we might feel towards the perpetrators, when this is all done as a society we have to move on. And limited revenge is a part of that.

Don’t get me wrong, I wish to see guilty people punished for this; but in the long run I think we have to sort out our society and institutions so as to put in safeguards to ensure that something like this can never happen again. And achieving that will be much more difficult than pursuing the simple gratification of revenge.

169418 ▶▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to TJN, 12, #80 of 2087 🔗

The important thing to do when this is over is to learn the lessons from this and put up safeguards in order to ensure that something like this should never be allowed to happen again.

The people guilty should be punished and serve as a warning to those who seek to destroy the country and its people.

The rallying cry should be Never Again

169422 ▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Bart Simpson, 8, #81 of 2087 🔗

I agree with all that.

It’s not just about lifting the restrictions: it’s about ensuring that it can never happen again.

Punishment and ridicule of the guilty individuals is a part of this, but a small part (and the easy part).

169513 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to TJN, 1, #82 of 2087 🔗

Exactly. It’s appalling how people quickly forget the lessons of the past.

169609 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Basics, replying to TJN, 5, #83 of 2087 🔗

Part of thr never happening again needs to involve unpicking the education system.

Germany leading as a population standing up to the fraud may in time come to be seen as a success of their educated recovery from WW2. The generations of education to never let such a thing happen again appear in some ways to have worked.

There is standing against this the European project of course, which itself uses the threat of an ununified Europe as reason to unify.

Education must be central to never letting this happen again.

169430 ▶▶▶▶▶ Nsklent, replying to Bart Simpson, 12, #84 of 2087 🔗

The thing is we did have the checks and balances to supposedly prevent such authoritarian rule, but they all failed. Swathes of human rights legislation, lawyers, parliament, journalism (corner stone of democracy), our bill of rights, hypocratic oath, policing by consent … it goes on. Every single one ignored or failed to do their duty.

169435 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Nsklent, 4, #85 of 2087 🔗

I know, and that’s why it is going to be difficult to sort out.

It requires a societal revolution.

169493 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to TJN, 10, #86 of 2087 🔗

Which won’t happen.

When the government finally takes their boot off our throats, the general public will utter a collective sigh of relief and forget the entire thing.

Those who still have jobs will go back to the daily grind and distract themselves with whatever mind-numbing fare Pravda trots out on a Saturday evening. Those who don’t have jobs will put their hand out and be grateful for whatever crumbs the Bank of England’s printed money will buy them.

If I had anywhere to go, I’d be gone.

169498 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Mabel Cow, 3, #87 of 2087 🔗

Maybe, as a nation we will drown in complacency.

But maybe there’s another side to this coin: the pain will be so bad it will force a rearrangement and reset. Bit like 1979.

169502 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to TJN, 8, #88 of 2087 🔗

Maybe. It feels a bit too much like 1933 right now.

171300 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Jules, replying to Mabel Cow, #89 of 2087 🔗

Yes. People will struggle to feed themselves. That will be the new normal, and the bastards that are responsible will walk away unpunished.

169508 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Thinkaboutit, replying to Mabel Cow, 2, #90 of 2087 🔗

And Dido Harding will get another cushy non- job.

169586 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Julian S, replying to Thinkaboutit, 3, #91 of 2087 🔗

Instead of being crushed under the wheels of incompetence it seems that she is one who is propelled yet higher by her mistakes.

169516 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to Nsklent, 1, #92 of 2087 🔗

Well said. It makes you wonder why they failed and why those in authority failed in their duty.

The one scant consolation here is hopefully many of these people will be living with a guilty conscience for the rest of their lives.

170273 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to Bart Simpson, 2, #93 of 2087 🔗

Psychopaths don’t have a conscience.

170799 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ PastImperfect, replying to Nsklent, #94 of 2087 🔗

Or found the felicitous attention of billionaires too much to resist. They did not just fail to do their duty, thy joined the ranks of the enemy.

169583 ▶▶▶▶▶ Julian S, replying to Bart Simpson, 3, #95 of 2087 🔗

Great sentiments, but for all the “never agains” history has a strange way of repeating. En masse people do exhibit the most extraordinary lack of basic recall.

169601 ▶▶▶▶▶ karenovirus, replying to Bart Simpson, 2, #96 of 2087 🔗

Lesson #1 no more Enabling Acts, I thought we had learned that from Hitler.

169461 ▶▶▶▶ Andrew Fish, replying to TJN, 8, #97 of 2087 🔗

Totally agree – I don’t think we should be telling Boris to buy an extra shirt and setting up the scaffold in Whitehall, but we should have a (proper) inquiry and, depending on the findings, leave those who acted from improper motives to the criminal justice system whilst we do what we need to do to prevent it happening again.

169600 ▶▶▶▶ karenovirus, replying to TJN, 3, #98 of 2087 🔗

As part of the settlement Charles ll declined to emancipate the thousands of Royalists condemned to indentured servitude in the West Indies.
The property rights of their new masters trumped the reduction of Englishmen to slavery.

169650 ▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to karenovirus, 1, #99 of 2087 🔗

Notably, the property rights of of the disposed Royalists in Britain were not reinstated after the Restoration. I didn’t know about the West Indies business and will have to look into it.

169574 ▶▶▶ karenovirus, replying to annie, 1, #100 of 2087 🔗

some of them sought to avoid retribution by fleeing abroad but the forces of law and order tracked them down (Eichmann/Mossad).

169566 ▶▶ Basics, replying to Cecil B, 2, #101 of 2087 🔗

We should do our best in our circumstances. Thanks for the history lesson. Sometimes history is a beautiful thing full of justice.

169897 ▶▶ Rowan, replying to Cecil B, 3, #102 of 2087 🔗

There are two prime candidates for similar treatment and not just for cancelling Christmas, but for murder on the grand scale. Of course, it’s Johnson and Hancock, who killed tens of thousands of old people in the Spring. These two serial killers are now looking to repeat their evil crimes this winter, under the guise of the totally flawed PCR tests. Like the rest of us, they know the test is worse than useless, but it serves the Bill Gates’s genocidal vaccine agenda and that is all that will matter for them.

169356 Sir Patrick Vaccine, 8, #103 of 2087 🔗

Dissenting scientists issue Covid-19 herd immunity declaration


Freddie Sayers talks to eminent epidemiologists Dr Sunetra Gupta, Dr Jay Bhattacharya and Dr. Martin Kulldorff, who met in Massachusetts to sign a declaration calling for a different global response to the pandemic.

youtube com watch?v=rz_Z7Gf1aRE

Read the full declaration here : https://unherd.com/2020/10/covid-expe ..

169358 Ceriain, replying to Ceriain, 27, #104 of 2087 🔗

Like all here I was fascinated by the Crimes against Humanity video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kr04gHbP5MQ

I was also fascinated by reading Corona, False Alarm?: Facts and Figures book by Karina Reiss Ph.D . and Sucharit Bhakdi MD : https://www.amazon.co.uk/Corona-False-Alarm-Facts-Figures/dp/1645020576

Chapters 3 and 4 are quite astonishing; not only because of the reported actions of the ‘scientists’ named in the video above, but also because by replacing the names of the main German protaginists, e.g. Chancellor, CMO, Health Minister, etc., for our equivalents, i.e. Johnson, Whitty, Handjob, etc., you would think you were reading about what the UK done. The timings, actions, etc. have a remarkable similarity.

I was gobsmacked!

Almost as if it were all planned.

169369 ▶▶ Spinko, replying to Ceriain, 7, #105 of 2087 🔗

Safety in numbers. They’ll be covering each other when the time comes.

169414 ▶▶▶ annie, replying to Spinko, 8, #106 of 2087 🔗

Try ’em in batches then,

169374 ▶▶ Mark H, replying to Ceriain, 11, #107 of 2087 🔗

But…surely it’s all just global bumbling incompetence…? You’re not one of those pesky conspiracy theorists, are you?

169408 ▶▶ Tim Bidie, replying to Ceriain, 4, #108 of 2087 🔗

We know the eu pressurised this country and we caved…….

“We had prepared the closure of our border and told Prime Minister Johnson we would implement it that day if there was no evolution [of British measures],” a senior French official…’


169428 ▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to Ceriain, 7, #109 of 2087 🔗

+1 for Corona, False Alarm . It’s a great book.

169484 ▶▶ Jonathan Palmer, replying to Ceriain, 17, #110 of 2087 🔗

It’s this what swings it for me.Looking at our useless government I can believe in the incompetence theory,but the similarities between our response and governments is too alike
.All these governments cannot be this incompetent in exactly the same way.

169617 ▶▶ Kevin 2, replying to Ceriain, 13, #111 of 2087 🔗

They don’t call it a plandemic for nothing!
Forum users seem a degree reticent to use that term.
I don’t know why….

Robert Koch in Germany, Inserm in France, SAGE and Imperial College in the UK; all infiltrated years ago.

As you say, lockstep uniformity everywhere.
We have one or two outliers of course; Sweden the obvious one, plus Belarus, where we know that Lukashenko was offered a huge bribe to shut down his country, and Serbia where the citizens simply said NO!
And the figures from those three countries serve to expose how none of the lockdowns and other attacks on civil liberty were justified in the slightest.

170008 ▶▶▶ helen, replying to Kevin 2, 2, #112 of 2087 🔗

Great post..exactly

170598 ▶▶▶ James Bertram, replying to Kevin 2, 1, #113 of 2087 🔗

From the top of my head, I think Brazil, Mexico, Tanzania and Pakistan also had somewhat limited lockdowns?

169359 NY, replying to NY, 52, #114 of 2087 🔗

THANK GOD Trump isn’t in the ICU right now. That would be a nightmare for the ages. I’m hoping he continues on an upwards trajectory, and I’m very pleased with the way he’s handled this. “Don’t let it control your life” is exactly what the world needs to hear right now. I’m hoping this will begin to change people’s perspectives and make them less tolerant to excessive measures.

169361 ▶▶ Anonymous, replying to NY, 41, #115 of 2087 🔗

Fully agreed. So far, the way Trump has used his illness to encourage people and alleviate fears has been a much-needed counter to the fear-mongering from the likes of Neil Ferguson, Anthony Fauci, and the mainstream media. I’m not the political type, but I have to say I’m proud of Trump. Hopefully this causes more people to come to their senses and put an end to these ridiculous, dangerous lockdowns in what has become the craziest year of the 21st century.

169421 ▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to NY, 22, #116 of 2087 🔗

I’ve said before that I’m no Trump supporter. I voted against him in the last election. I disagree vehemently with a lot of what he’s done. But even a broken clock is right twice a day – and he is right about covid. In fact, I remember hearing one of his early statements about it and thinking at the time that he might very well be right. But I held my judgement until I got a lot more evidence and did a lot more reading from sites like this one. And here I am.

I am eligible to vote in the upcoming US election but will be sitting it out. There’s is nothing that could get me to vote for him, but I will not vote against him. The Dems keep sending me emails, asking for campaign contributions. I keep replying with sceptic arguments against the hysteria, but I doubt anyone reads them.

“Don’t let it control your life” should be spread far and wide here in the UK. Although it might be better as “Don’t let the government control your life”.

169611 ▶▶▶ BeBopRockSteady, replying to ConstantBees, 7, #117 of 2087 🔗

Same. I would have wanted him to win the election anyway as the Democrats are sickeningly captured. However he’s won my respect in a couple of ways :

1. No more wars
2. Kicking back in China
3. His Corona approach has been excellent given the pressure he is under. He was on tbe money with HCQ, masks (though he caved for votes), the lack of evidence that this is anymore than the flu, getting Richard Atlas in

170286 ▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to ConstantBees, 6, #118 of 2087 🔗

Anyone who loudly defunds the WHO gets a vote from me.

170781 ▶▶▶ NY, replying to ConstantBees, 3, #119 of 2087 🔗

I’m also eligible to vote in the US election and I’m absolutely voting Trump for this reason alone.

169360 Anonymous, 12, #120 of 2087 🔗

Three epidemiologists from Stanford, Harvard, and Oxford recently wrote a declaration that I think just about all lockdown skeptics would want to sign. They are calling for an end to all lockdowns, and for governments to pursue an approach similar to what Sweden, Japan, South Dakota, etc., have used in this pandemic. There are some high-profile lockdown skeptic scientists who have signed this declaration or cosigned it, including Sunetra Gupta and Michael Levitt. I encourage everyone to sign it and spread the word!


The October 5 Freddie Sayers interview (on UnHerd) with those three epidemiologists is also fantastic, by the way.

169362 Chris, replying to Chris, 7, #121 of 2087 🔗

With the news that the vaccine will only be for older and more vulnerable people (Monday’s FT) does that mean there will need to be another U-turn in govt policy accepting that high numbers of “positive” cases in the under 50s are OK without continually resorting to restrictions and lockdowns. For example all the students and school children currently with it pushing numbers ever higher. The alternative will be endless restrictions with a disease that has relatively little impact to the under 60s.

169512 ▶▶ SweetBabyCheeses, replying to Chris, 8, #122 of 2087 🔗

I’m so confused about this supposed vaccine. I thought the whole point of vaccines was that they conferred herd immunity and not just individual immunity. For example, this is why it’s so important for children to get the measles vaccine as babies can’t have the vaccine so the immunised people around the vulnerable protect them.

The fact that they’re only going to give it to the vulnerable and that it might only lessen symptoms makes me wonder if it is even a proper vaccine at all?

169582 ▶▶▶ Chris, replying to SweetBabyCheeses, 5, #123 of 2087 🔗

In the FT interview it went on to say the vaccine (at least the Oxford one) isn’t intended to stop someone getting COVID but only to reduce the impact of catching it and reducing the chance of severe illness. Presumably that is part of the answer – no point in giving it to the young as they are rarely badly affected by it. Also said that don’t want to give to young as vaccine side effects likely to outweigh the benefits. Ie little or no benefit for young people.

169632 ▶▶▶▶ Kevin 2, replying to Chris, 6, #124 of 2087 🔗

I saw on Twitter; ‘Less than half of UK population’ will get a COVID-19 vaccine’ and thought that the majority of the population were finally seeing sense….
Of course it wasn’t meant to mean that.

They really don’t know what they are doing. Even their best-laid plans are unravelling.
They can attempt to vaccinate the ‘vulnerable’ but that is precisely the section of society for which the vaccine hasn’t been trialled. So safety is a complete unknown, as is efficacy. And they dilute their statements about efficacy all the time.
And then Peston comes out and says the young should be prioritised.
Why pick on them? They have already served to bring us towards the HIT, and will derive nothing but risk from a vaccine.

The US polls are showing that no more than half of the population will accept a vaccine.

170294 ▶▶▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to Kevin 2, 1, #125 of 2087 🔗

Peston wrote a load of appalling bollox.

169970 ▶▶ Suburbian, replying to Chris, 2, #126 of 2087 🔗

You’re making a rational, logical deduction. Don’t assume our politicians can do the same.

169363 Steeve, replying to Steeve, 18, #127 of 2087 🔗

Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent PCR testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.

How about explain the risks and let people decide how to live? The bit about retired people is patronising bullshit! and this is meant to be a step forward?

169364 ▶▶ Steeve, replying to Steeve, 1, #128 of 2087 🔗

The Great Barrington Declaration

169365 ▶▶▶ Steeve, replying to Steeve, 1, #129 of 2087 🔗

Hi Steeve and what are the comprehensive and detailed list of measures that are within the scope of public health professionals? I mean how many measures do we need? Sorry will not be signing this one!

169366 ▶▶▶▶ Steeve, replying to Steeve, 3, #130 of 2087 🔗

I mean who wants to hang in a wardrobe with mothballs?

169367 ▶▶ Anonymous, replying to Steeve, 16, #131 of 2087 🔗

They address that issue in the final paragraph, in talking about how life should be resumed as normal by the non-vulnerable members of the population. They clearly state that high-risk individuals should be free to resume life as normal if they want:

People who are more at risk may participate if they wish , while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.

They also explain themselves more fully in the UnHerd Freddie Sayers interview, which is definitely a good one.

169368 ▶▶▶ Steeve, replying to Anonymous, 9, #132 of 2087 🔗

People who are more at risk may participate if they wish – shows how far we have fallen?

169371 ▶▶▶▶ Anonymous, replying to Steeve, 13, #133 of 2087 🔗

Yep, the world has definitely gone nuts. That’s why I’m glad scientists like these are speaking up about it. We need our freedom back, and lockdown victims desperately need the lockdowns to end as soon as possible.

169378 ▶▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to Anonymous, 17, #134 of 2087 🔗

Never mind possible, It’s impossible to define that ‘possible’. We need our freedom NOW, unconditionally.

169384 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Anonymous, replying to annie, 13, #135 of 2087 🔗

Agreed. That is what I meant. The lockdowns should have ended months ago, but the irrationality and overconfidence of public health officials interfered.

169458 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Saved To Death, replying to Anonymous, 18, #136 of 2087 🔗

There should never have been lockdown.

169432 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to annie, 16, #137 of 2087 🔗

Thanks for saying that. I keep hitting that note in Daily Mail comments. We need restrictions removed NOW full stop.

169373 ▶▶ annie, replying to Steeve, 67, #138 of 2087 🔗

I’m retired, I live at home( like millions of others who have not been attacked by instant senility on reaching pensionable age) and I will meet family members wherever I damn well like, when I’m not out riding, gardening, walking the dog, working, or generally living.

169375 ▶▶▶ Steeve, replying to annie, 1, #139 of 2087 🔗

And what health care measures helped you to continue living life to the full?

169377 ▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to Steeve, 31, #140 of 2087 🔗

Fresh air and good food.

169379 ▶▶▶▶▶ Steeve, replying to annie, 1, #141 of 2087 🔗

You should do a recipe for the day!

169390 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to Steeve, 58, #142 of 2087 🔗

Fresh air ad lib.
One breakfast, one lunch, one supper. Adapt quantities to suit your taste and appetite.
Tea and/or coffee ad lib.
Your favourite drink, in or out of moderation.
Chocolate ad lib.

Season with a large quantity of Coronascepticism.

To be consumed in optimistic mood and in good company, whether of human, dog, horse or any other living creature whose companionship cheers and consoles.

169399 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to annie, 12, #143 of 2087 🔗

Great post!

Although I’d specify ‘favourite drink’ as single malt whisky, cask strength but then watered to taste, drunk at any time of the day.

169402 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ CGL, replying to annie, 3, #144 of 2087 🔗

Annie you are amazing

169425 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to annie, 2, #145 of 2087 🔗

Wonderful!!! A great recipe for a life worth living!

169440 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to annie, 5, #146 of 2087 🔗

Dark chocolate, in my case. Lots of fresh air. Go mad being confined indoors 24-hours a day. Always been that way.

169455 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ wendyk, replying to annie, 3, #147 of 2087 🔗

Ann, you should march on the Senedd, demand to be heard and lay some sound Ann advice on them.

And then please come up here and take on the Holyrood Heidbangers!

169559 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to wendyk, 2, #148 of 2087 🔗

Alas, they have no ears to hear, and Cardiff is a jail, nobody allowed in or out.
For freedom they lost their blood, as our national anthem says.

169994 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ charleyfarley, replying to annie, 1, #149 of 2087 🔗

Dark chocolate!!!

169394 ▶▶▶▶▶ wendyk, replying to annie, 1, #150 of 2087 🔗

Same here!

169456 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ wendyk, replying to wendyk, 1, #151 of 2087 🔗

Regular bird watching helps

169405 ▶▶▶▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to annie, 1, #152 of 2087 🔗

As: previous comment plus hard manual work.

169438 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to Fingerache Philip., 20, #153 of 2087 🔗

Exactly. I work on my allotment for 2 or 3 hours a day seven days a week. Getting stronger as a result (got the plot in February). And I intend to do a lot of path building over the winter, digging paths and moving wood chips, so heavy labour. I’ve lost over 8 kilos since lockdown started and improved my diet with tons of fresh veg.

And the government wants to make over-60s (over-50s?) think we’re made of cotton wool and have to hide in our houses? Hell, they’re trying to make 20 year olds think human beings are frail little creatures.

169522 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to ConstantBees, 13, #154 of 2087 🔗

I don’t know about you but aged 15 I was working 50 hours a week for a small building firm ( It would be rightly classed as child labour today.)
I certainly don’t want to fall into a “Monty Python” sketch (” When I was young, there were 15 of us and we lived in a hole in the middle of the road and had 1 shoe between us and we were lucky,etc) but don’t class us 60/70/80 somethings as poor old people who should be locked away “for their own good”

169685 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ karenovirus, replying to Fingerache Philip., 6, #155 of 2087 🔗

Aged 13-15 I worked Saturdays for W.H.Smith & Sons. There would be 3 or 4 of us from a pool 6 so taking time off was never a problem.
One day the Manager (great guy) told us that the law had changed and that if we worked more than half a day he was ‘exploiting’ us.
Stuff that, how was I going to get fags And records with half day pay ? It was all cash in hand then so we worked around their stupid ‘protections’.

I’m in my sixties now and still work at the job I enjoy up to 7 days a week, by choice.

169604 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ fiery, replying to ConstantBees, 17, #156 of 2087 🔗

I’m 61 and anyone who try’s to define me as vulnerable can f**k off. I’m not overweight, don’t have any health problems and am not on any medication. I work in a front line service in social care and would like to be able to keep my job which won’t happen if the bed wetting government castigate me as fragile. In my free time I walk, cycle, climb boulders and wild swim. Lockdown didn’t stop me doing any of these things and neither have I worn a mask or used the dreaded hand sanitiser when I go shopping. I don’t believe in staying safe and would make the most if my remaining healthy years.

169403 ▶▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to annie, 3, #157 of 2087 🔗


169409 ▶▶▶ CarrieAH, replying to annie, 31, #158 of 2087 🔗

Same here Ann. I’m retired, own a smallholding a few miles away from my own home, and spend most days there with my horses, sheep and goats. I grow fruit and veg, I have a handyman who comes three times a week to help me with heavy lifting and things I simply can’t do now due to arthritis, but I’m active and well in all other ways. Nobody gets to tell me to stay at home! I’m there in all weathers, living life as I wish. I avoid shops and restaurants as I don’t wish to get involved with the nonsense Covid “measures”. I will not comply, ever.

169424 ▶▶▶▶ Steeve, replying to CarrieAH, 39, #159 of 2087 🔗

My wife has taken my 97 year old Aunt out every week, she likes to browse in the shops ie M&S have a coffee etc. That’s what she loves doing!
Not something I understand! So when do we ever hear about the importance of this? When do we hear about quality of life over quantity? I mean at 97!
My wife could have said – “Stay in – better safe than sorry!!!!!!”

169525 ▶▶▶▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to Steeve, 9, #160 of 2087 🔗

Absolutely brilliant, more power to you, your wife and especially your fantastic aunt

169388 ▶▶ Nsklent, replying to Steeve, 27, #161 of 2087 🔗

To me, the key is offer support/ protection to the vulnerable, IF they want it. That to me is the key, IF. No-one should be dictating to any group of people what is perceived to be for their good.

169433 ▶▶▶ Stuart Barker, replying to Nsklent, 19, #162 of 2087 🔗

Yes, I think people are misunderstanding. gbdeclaration is not saying retired people should be forced to stay at home. It is saying that the resources currently being thrown at the non-vulnerable should be targetted at those who are vulnerable and wish to stay at home.

It was by far the most sensible option from the very start.

169495 ▶▶▶▶ matt, replying to Stuart Barker, 10, #163 of 2087 🔗

Exactly this. The declaration is well worded, because to say “what we should do is completely ignore the virus and tolerate old people dying” would be unacceptable. It talks about protecting the vulnerable because that’s what people need to hear as part of a herd immunity strategy, but it also says that the vulnerable should have a choice about being protected. It may not go far enough to our minds, but it goes as far as it can to be palatable to the mainstream media message.

169562 ▶▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to matt, 6, #164 of 2087 🔗

‘tolerate old people dying’
They mean if we don’t tolerate it, old people won’t die?

169573 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ matt, replying to annie, 4, #165 of 2087 🔗

That seems to be what most people think, yes. And if old people do die, it’s the government’s fault.

169721 ▶▶▶ Caroline Watson, replying to Nsklent, 7, #166 of 2087 🔗

As a singer, one of my big worries is amateur choirs, in churches and elsewhere. Because of the Gareth Malone effect, choir singing had become very big in Britain again and, although shouty community choirs, performing pop songs by ear, are anathema to me, I know that they provide many retired people with a great deal of pleasure and a social life. Now, not only are those people being told that they shouldn’t go out because they are ‘vulnerable’, singing has been labelled as the Devil’s activity, with those who want to save it accused of murder by some obsessives.
Where choirs have resumed, the restrictions are absurd, with some ‘singing’ in masks!! Apart from my general opposition to the ghastly things, I will not compromise my integrity as a singer to allow a ‘mask’ anywhere near my breathing apparatus when I am in a situation where I am expected to sing. As a teacher, I fear for the technique of young serious singers who are bullied into this absurd behaviour.

169749 ▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to Caroline Watson, 3, #167 of 2087 🔗

Our bedwetting archdeacon thunks it’s mortally dangerous to let muzzled churchgoers hum into their masks. As for singing….

169848 ▶▶▶▶ Silke David, replying to Caroline Watson, 3, #168 of 2087 🔗

I know of a lady who joined a choir for lung damaged people at 91!
It gave her great joy and improved her health!

170332 ▶▶▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to Silke David, 3, #169 of 2087 🔗

Joy is the best medicine!

170331 ▶▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to Caroline Watson, 1, #170 of 2087 🔗

Community singing is a very powerful way to pull people together and create bonds even between strangers. Anthems provide strong evidence of the effect.
That it has been banned is a sinister blow.

170469 ▶▶▶▶ Quernus, replying to Caroline Watson, 1, #171 of 2087 🔗

There is hope! I sang in a small group of 3 at a church in south Manchester on Sunday for the first time since March, at the invitation of the vicar, who is something of a sceptic. We were maskless – I refuse to wear one in any circumstances – but it’s a shame the same couldn’t be said of the congregation. But the church was filled with Byrd’s Mass for 3 Voices, and we also sang the hymns – the congregation weren’t as yet “allowed” to sing those, but hopefully that will change in time.

The vicar’s homily was wonderful – he talked about the story of Jesus healing the lepers, and if He wasn’t afraid to touch the unclean, without risk assessments and social distancing, perhaps we shouldn’t be either. I was waiting for him to exhort everyone to take off their masks and hug each other, but he didn’t go that far…yet. I caught up with him for a few words afterwards, and he lamented the fearful approach taken by those higher up in the pecking order. I said that the change needs to be at grass roots level, and he has a big part to play in helping the local community be less risk-averse. He seemed quite taken with the idea, so let’s see what he says at future services.

171198 ▶▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to Quernus, #172 of 2087 🔗

You are so lucky to have such a vicar, instead of a quavering, gibbering, nappied muppet like ours.

169431 ▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to Steeve, 20, #173 of 2087 🔗

I’m in my 60s and pretty healthy. In fact, I’ve taken steps during this mess to improve my health. I take responsibility for my own health and take no medications. I have things delivered to my home because the government has made shopping a dystopian experience. That’s my choice, not theirs.

The current situation has only increased my distrust of the medical profession. I do not wish to be confined “for my own good”. The government can go to hell if it intends doing that.

169629 ▶▶ karenovirus, replying to Steeve, 4, #174 of 2087 🔗

They should have dusted down the instruction manuals of the old Isolation Hospitals 6 months ago.
Probably haven’t since they won’t be on a spreadsheet.

169637 ▶▶ Suzyv, replying to Steeve, 4, #175 of 2087 🔗

I don’t agree with a lot they have suggested either. It still opens the door for meddling in peoples personal lives. Many retired people are perfectly healthy so I don’t think their words have been chosen properly and they should have said vulnerable people rather than retired. And it should certainly have emphasised that any measures advised are voluntary and individuals should assess their own risks and how they want to live. And how can you meet your family outside during an English Winter when it’s tipping it down and freezing? But reading between the lines I am thinking they have tried to come up with something that will be more acceptable for Governments.

170341 ▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to Suzyv, -1, #176 of 2087 🔗

I thought the wording left a lot of loopholes and much to be desired.

169646 ▶▶ Kevin 2, replying to Steeve, 4, #177 of 2087 🔗

Hear hear.
Lord Sumption is excellent on the point of allowing people to make their own choices, and neatly sidesteps a devious question from the Beeb interviewer:-


170889 ▶▶▶ Steeve, replying to Kevin 2, #178 of 2087 🔗

Thanks for the link!

169376 annie, replying to annie, 43, #179 of 2087 🔗

Consider this from the Paris bullshit:

“Paris has been placed on maximum alert as the Covid-19 incidence rate has exceeded 250 infections per 100,000 among the general public. The maximum alert is also triggered when two other criteria are met — when the incidence rate among those aged over 65 is above 100 per 100,000 people, and when at least 30% of the beds in intensive care units are reserved for Covid-19 patients.”

Do you notice something? Of course you do. No mention of deaths, or illness. And 30% of intensive care beds are not occupied by Covidders, they are reserved for Covidders.

France and the UK are lying from the same hymnsheet, evidently.

There was a time when Paris bars were frequented by Europe’s greatest intellectuals and artists.I suppose none exists these days.

169444 ▶▶ PoshPanic, replying to annie, 14, #180 of 2087 🔗

Macron’s government were one of the ringleaders. I can’t see a way he can climbdown from this without being lynched. So, like here, they have to keep up project fear, whilst they keep on digging.

169478 ▶▶ Basics, replying to annie, 4, #181 of 2087 🔗

France will be held up as reason to tge UK in less than five days. Ican already sense Scottish cmo dentist Leech making notes about Paris to shortly regurgitate.

169519 ▶▶ D B, replying to annie, 6, #182 of 2087 🔗

Which also neatly disproves the masks work theory.

169380 Tim Bidie, 18, #183 of 2087 🔗

Say what you like about President Trump, the leader (King) of the free world…….

That is exactly what ‘covid b*ll*cks’ needed: a shot in the arm….Oh! Hang on……..

169387 Albie, replying to Albie, 23, #184 of 2087 🔗

When tv reporters and newsreaders say figures like “300 positive cases in 100,000 people” I’d like them to be compelled by law to add “or 99,700 people per 100,000 not testing positive”.

169391 ▶▶ Anonymous, replying to Albie, 14, #185 of 2087 🔗

Good grief! The type of reporting issue you describe here has been infuriating me throughout this pandemic. The doomsayer reporters are fond of portraying statistics in a pessimistic way that stirs up panic, instead of in a way that calms the harassed public down.

169393 ▶▶▶ annie, replying to Anonymous, 20, #186 of 2087 🔗

Years ago, my father commissioned a statistical study, I forget the subject. He asked the statistician what result he thought most likely.
‘What result do you want, sir?’ replied the statistician, without a trace of irony.

169395 ▶▶▶▶ Anonymous, replying to annie, 6, #187 of 2087 🔗

Ha ha ha! I’m a statistician with a passion for psychology, so I appreciate stories like this one.

169610 ▶▶▶▶▶ Two-Six, replying to Anonymous, 2, #188 of 2087 🔗

“I’m a statistician with a passion for psychology”
WOW! How does that work?
I could never understand Chi Squared analysis, so that was my psychology A level down the drain.

170365 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to Two-Six, 2, #189 of 2087 🔗

You can prove anything you like with statistics. It’s a matter of how you present them.

169389 RyanM, replying to RyanM, 12, #190 of 2087 🔗

Toby, I love your opener. But I came home early from work today, thoroughly depressed. Even American conservatives are saying things like: “good news is that Trump will be taking covid seriously and masks are to be required in the white house…” Etc… That from the formerly liberty living National Review.

I hate to say it, but I really feel today like the world has gone completely mad, and those people I thought were sane are as mad as the rest. Except here, of course.

On a totally different note: feeling some fondness for Lewis… My wife and I watched (or for her, rewatched) the first episode of Inspector Morse. Loved it.

If I ever do get to visit the UK, and I cannot visit Jack Aubrey, I hope to visit it during the 1980s. Please let me know when you get them back.

169426 ▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to RyanM, 5, #191 of 2087 🔗

Yes please: Aubrey for PM and Maturin for chief medical officer.

170628 ▶▶▶ Graham, replying to Mabel Cow, 1, #192 of 2087 🔗

As long as Maturin no longer insists on bleeding everybody at the drop of a hat.

169504 ▶▶ RyanM, replying to RyanM, 6, #193 of 2087 🔗

What really depressed me is that Trump’s covid attitude is pretty widely rejected. It’s likely that it will lose him the election. We are demanding more draconian measures…

I kind of feel like the one guy in the crowd, looking around, saying “Barabus, really? Because to me Barabus seems like a bad idea… This is not what we should be asking for, guys…” And totally drowned out.

169616 ▶▶ Two-Six, replying to RyanM, 1, #194 of 2087 🔗

Life outside is more like an episode of Dr Who now.

169647 ▶▶ Mark, replying to RyanM, 4, #195 of 2087 🔗

National Review has been pretty much coronapanic central throughout, hasn’t it? Personally I never much trust them anyway because I’ve always been paleocon rather than neocon.

169978 ▶▶ Suburbian, replying to RyanM, 4, #196 of 2087 🔗

You’re talking to different American conservatives than I am. My family/friends are all thrilled with the outcome as they thought the hysteria was ridiculous to begin with.

170423 ▶▶ Polemon2, replying to RyanM, 1, #197 of 2087 🔗

If you do ever get to visit, HMS Trincomalee in Hartlepool is the nearest you will get to Jack Aubrey. Well worth a visit.

171403 ▶▶▶ RyanM, replying to Polemon2, #198 of 2087 🔗

I would be thrilled! Finished all 20 books and have started again…

169396 Recusant, 6, #199 of 2087 🔗

Wow, Trump, get in.

169397 annie, 3, #200 of 2087 🔗

A caution about the Admiral Philips campaign.It doesn’t focus on the current Covid crimes against the old and helpless, but on a previous issue of funding. (Which isn’t to say that it’s not a worthy cause.)

169406 Steeve, replying to Steeve, 38, #201 of 2087 🔗

At 8am
I have to phone the doctors because my Dads Asthma is worse. I phoned at 3pm yesterday to explain about his Asthma but to make an appointment I have to phone back at 8 – that is the rule! and this will be for a telephone consultation! Either AM or PM.
I mean they know he’s not well, why not just book him in? No you have to phone at 8 – listen to all the Covid crap again and get in the phone queue for however long – make your appointment and then wait all morning or all afternoon for the doctor to phone you. Not sure what you have to do to get into the surgery?

My wife tried to phone another surgery yesterday for her Auntie and could not even get through!

Still you are not allowed to just walk in and talk to a receptionist!!!

169410 ▶▶ annie, replying to Steeve, 13, #202 of 2087 🔗

I do hope you get some response soon. Good luck and don’t despair!

169416 ▶▶ p02099003, replying to Steeve, 20, #203 of 2087 🔗

Call 111, ask for an appointment at your nearest urgent care centre or out of hours.

169427 ▶▶▶ Steeve, replying to p02099003, 4, #204 of 2087 🔗

Thanks for that advice!

169480 ▶▶ PaulH, replying to Steeve, 10, #205 of 2087 🔗

Medical dictatorship – but you can’t get an appointment for a serious illness.

Yep, sounds about right for UK 2020.

169621 ▶▶ Two-Six, replying to Steeve, 8, #206 of 2087 🔗

Medical people should be totally ASHAMED if they are supporting this new regime. It’s totally evil.

You are fools.

170005 ▶▶ Victoria, replying to Steeve, 5, #207 of 2087 🔗

Anyone with asthma should increase their resilience by upping vitamin C (at least 2g per day), vitamin A and Vitamin D (at least 10,000IU per day) levels. Always take magnesium and Vitamin K2 with high dose vitamin D.

These things take time so will start seeing benefits in a couple of weeks.

170532 ▶▶ TyRade, replying to Steeve, 2, #208 of 2087 🔗

National Hoax Service

169412 Colin, replying to Colin, 14, #209 of 2087 🔗

I see Toby plagiarized my comment yesterday predicting Trump’s return unscathed, and what it will mean for the election and mask-wearing, basement-cowering Biden. No hard feelings.
It’s amazing how this panicdemic has resulted in people cheering for politicians and reading newspapers we wouldn’t have touched with a barge pole a year ago.

169536 ▶▶ Nick Rose, replying to Colin, 3, #210 of 2087 🔗

Or even six months ago.

169747 ▶▶ Melangell, replying to Colin, 3, #211 of 2087 🔗

Empathise as an ex-Guardianista (never again!) and now (somewhat embarrassed) Tory-graph subscriber (the relentless anti-lockdown comments BTL kept me going for months along with this site)!

169429 Nessimmersion, replying to Nessimmersion, 15, #212 of 2087 🔗

Handycocks Skool Rithmetic

169468 ▶▶ Basics, replying to Nessimmersion, 4, #213 of 2087 🔗

So that’s what an excel spread sheet looks like.

170089 ▶▶▶ TT, replying to Basics, 4, #214 of 2087 🔗

Talking about spreadsheets, and taking in the most recent Excel-related absurdity, closely following the modelling madness:

Did anbody spot the irony in the fact that this is yet another one of Bill Gates’ legacies to science/civilisation?

170435 ▶▶▶▶ Polemon2, replying to TT, #215 of 2087 🔗

It is a well known fact that any spreadsheet software will have a file size limit.

In the 32- bit version of Office, the maximum files size for a workbook containing a Data Model is 2 GB , and the maximum memory that can be consumed by a workbook is 4 GB . If you exceed either of these limits, the workbook cannot be saved.

Maximum Memory or File Size Exceeded – Excel support.microsoft.com › en-us › office › maximum-memory-or-file-size…

169535 ▶▶ arfurmo, replying to Nessimmersion, 4, #216 of 2087 🔗

Yes but to be fair Diane Abbott was the teacher.

169434 PD, replying to PD, 16, #217 of 2087 🔗

I haven’t felt so optimistic in over six months.
Well done President Trump, such a positive response.
Take heed Johnson, Hancock, Whitby and Valance.
”Don’t let it dominate you!”

169463 ▶▶ Basics, replying to PD, 8, #218 of 2087 🔗

Those words in that tweet hit a nail bang in it head. So few words required, just tge right ines in the right order at the right time.

169436 Bart Simpson, replying to Bart Simpson, 47, #219 of 2087 🔗

V&A have announced redundancies:



What really angers me is the continued trotting out of “Covid 19” as an excuse for dire visitor numbers, abysmal figures in auxiliary services such as retail and catering. Why don’t they have the courage to say “it was the lockdown that did this” and admit that it was their cowardice and kowtowing to the government and Visit England’s Covid “safety” measures that will lead to loads of people especially those at the bottom (visitor services, tickets, retail assistants) who will bear the brunt of the job losses.?

169443 ▶▶ alw, replying to Bart Simpson, 9, #220 of 2087 🔗

What did you expect when the woke Tristram Hunt took over. I resigned my membership last year.

169448 ▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to alw, 15, #221 of 2087 🔗

Unfortunately its not only the V&A that is in this pickle. Even where I work which I have documented its woes on its pages is also in the same boat.

That said I agree that many of these institutions were already having problems before this crisis took hold. Just look at the National Trust then followed by the British Museum and British Library among others. I seriously doubt if the directors of these institutions realise that they are simply accelerating their demise.

169584 ▶▶▶▶ Will, replying to Bart Simpson, 4, #222 of 2087 🔗

The National trust going bang would be one of the best things that has ever happened to this country.

169711 ▶▶▶▶▶ karenovirus, replying to Will, 4, #223 of 2087 🔗

What would happen to our properties in their care ?

169608 ▶▶▶▶ davews, replying to Bart Simpson, 14, #224 of 2087 🔗

Until the nonsense stops I, and I guess many, will not visit museums, stately homes and NT as masks and other CV stuff makes them a miserable experience.

169962 ▶▶▶▶▶ Sophie123, replying to davews, 3, #225 of 2087 🔗


170895 ▶▶▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to davews, 2, #226 of 2087 🔗

Well said. Mr Bart and I are boycotting them too and not returning until sanity prevails

169460 ▶▶ Basics, replying to Bart Simpson, 10, #227 of 2087 🔗

I wonder if the economics of these redundencies were baked into that reopened with tiny visitor numbers per day plan back in July(?). Seems as though the top VnA brass might well have calculated as part of their opening package that staff would be layed off.

Unless they’ve been caught out by surprise that the Great British Public have decided not to go visiting when prebooking two hour visits in space suits are required.

I imagine the VnA staff will be sad to have lost their jobs.

169486 ▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to Basics, 9, #228 of 2087 🔗

I think its both. In order to get that “We’re Good To Go” endorsement, museums and heritage sites had to factor in reduced capacities and I suspect many top brass already knew that with reduced capacities alongside with the lack of income during the enforced closure, redundancy will be on the cards.

As someone working in the frontline, I already knew that prebooking, having to don muzzles, sanitise and follow stupid one way systems would not lead to good visitor numbers. TPTB I suspect were labouring under the delusion that people would be desperate to visit and are now panicking that the Great British Public are staying away or are refusing to do repeat visits.

I reckon they are and chances of getting a job elsewhere in he sector will be little to non-existent.

169465 ▶▶ Jonathan Palmer, replying to Bart Simpson, 20, #229 of 2087 🔗

I watched Bbc news last night and there were various stories of economic woe.No one mentioned the cause of this,the lockdown and all the subsequent restriction.
Why is this?

169481 ▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to Jonathan Palmer, 11, #230 of 2087 🔗

Good question. Even when the MSM were reporting about the projected bankruptcies in the charity sector, they still blame the virus.

The narrative needs to change and now.

169720 ▶▶▶ karenovirus, replying to Jonathan Palmer, 11, #231 of 2087 🔗

Every economic and social woe has been blamed by the BBC on the Worldwide Pandemic since day one rather than lunatic lockdown measures.

170388 ▶▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to karenovirus, 4, #232 of 2087 🔗

Not just the Beeb. All the MSM still only refers to the pandemic when lamenting business losses etc.

169466 ▶▶ PoshPanic, replying to Bart Simpson, 11, #233 of 2087 🔗

Sad news. The huge drop in tourism has to be a big factor, as it is for London as a whole.

169479 ▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to PoshPanic, 6, #234 of 2087 🔗

It is. Both local and foreign as the London attractions all lost out due to the lack of summer holiday makers coming to the capital.

I’ve walked past various museums and visitor attractions and there are hardly any queues to the point that the barriers have been taken down and the faded social distancing stickers are not being replaced.

I live not far from the RAF Museum in NW London and seeing how its a virtual ghost town, I seriously doubt that it will survive in its present state.

169511 ▶▶ Recusant, replying to Bart Simpson, 12, #235 of 2087 🔗

I’m sure if they put on a few more exhibitions about White Privilege that will have all the visitors flocking back.

169520 ▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to Recusant, 11, #236 of 2087 🔗

Or not. Just look at the National Trust and their slavery audit which led to more cancelled memberships.

169753 ▶▶▶▶ Melangell, replying to Bart Simpson, 6, #237 of 2087 🔗

I cancelled my NT subscription years ago when they allowed the senseless and unscientifc culling of badgers on their properties. Give all my charity money to the Wildlife Trusts and RSPB instead.

170396 ▶▶▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to Melangell, 4, #238 of 2087 🔗

RSPB is hardly an innocent flower.

170937 ▶▶▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to Melangell, 2, #239 of 2087 🔗

Doesn’t surprise me. I know of people who have cancelled due to the patronising interpretation in their properties and jumping on every woke bandwagon going.

170392 ▶▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to Bart Simpson, 4, #240 of 2087 🔗

Deservedly so!

169587 ▶▶ Thinkaboutit, replying to Bart Simpson, 14, #241 of 2087 🔗

I have no sympathy. They should have said to the government that Covid restrictions were unworkable. The little corner shop can’t do that but big retail, big business, theatres, museums, the CBI, FSB et, all should have protested vigorously.

169607 ▶▶▶ TheOriginalBlackPudding, replying to Thinkaboutit, 7, #242 of 2087 🔗

Why would big museums, theatres etc protest vigorously? They are shielded from economic reality by grant moneys, so there was every incentive not to rock the boat and jeopardise their comfortable lives. Now though, they are running face-first into harsh reality.
But those of us for whom the arts are an important part of life will lose out.
Maybe life would be better if I were just a bovine consumer of nothing more taxing than ‘Enders, Corry and Californian Plonk every night!

170942 ▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to Thinkaboutit, 5, #243 of 2087 🔗

Exactly. I work in the sector and it has angered me that their cowardice has led us into this situation. As they say united we stand, divided we fall – all the museum directors should have banded together, said no and would rather take their chances with the old normal before March 2020.

Now they are paying with their complicity.

169588 ▶▶ Stephanos, replying to Bart Simpson, 19, #244 of 2087 🔗

I used to go to museums (I suppose I should say musea) quite a lot and I would usually spend a LONG time therein. My wife is similar. It is not possible to visit large museums like the Ashmolean, Fitzwilliam or the British Museum in one day; much better, in my view, to concentrate on one specific area and leave the rest for another time. But with all these restrictions (for safety they say, I never felt unsafe before) I refuse to go and it is obvious that I am not alone. Get rid of all the restrictions, face-nappies and anti-social distancing and THEN you will see visitor numbers increase. The first museum that does this and takes down ALL the patronising drivel will soon see a flood of visitors.
While we are talking about the patronising drivel, it must have cost something to (a) buy all those useless signs and (b) employ someone to put them up. Remove all of them and get civil servants to pay for them OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKET. That MIGHT concentrate a few minds. Why should the taxpayer pay for this nonsense?

170957 ▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to Stephanos, 5, #245 of 2087 🔗

I know of people who have visited museums during this time and don’t stay long – they only come for a particular exhibition, don’t bother to view the permanent collection,and avoid the shops and cafes. As one visitor to where I work has asked “why do I want to stay any longer with this piece of cloth over my face?”

I broke my boycott to see the Titian exhibition (as am a member) at National Gallery and the one way system was such an abomination that I wrote them a stinging reply to a survey they sent me. I pretty much told them that it was a waste of time and if I an able bodied person was struggling with the one way route, how much more someone with mobility issues? It really, really angers me that in the name of “safety”, disabled people, those with long term illnesses and with mental health issues have been thrown under the bus.

169437 stewart, replying to stewart, 20, #246 of 2087 🔗

This Trump coronavirus episode has highlighted how many sceptics are actually not so confident in their scepticism, including Toby Young.

Here we are day in day out making the case that this virus isn’t all that dangerous – little more than the flu etc… – and the moment Trump caught it it, the doom set in.

On reflection though, it’s highlighted how much of the British perception of the virus has been shaped by Boris Johnson’s experience with it. Him catching it and having such a bad time of it probably did more to frighten the British public than anything else.

Let’s hope the Trump experience, which is actually the more normal one based on the statistics, has the opposite effect now. Hopefully. everyone in the White House catching and shaking it off will snap the world out of its psychosis.

Go Trump!

169449 ▶▶ wendyk, replying to stewart, 10, #247 of 2087 🔗

Trump trumps the doom mongers. The Donald is back in the ring.

169450 ▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to stewart, 5, #248 of 2087 🔗

Unfortunately, from a brief reading of some comments elsewhere, I’m not sure that will shake the hardened Trump hater out of their dream. And I say that as a hardened Trump hater – who can also read, think, and analyse information, and adapt accordingly.

Trump is a polarising figure and that’s not going to change because he “survives” covid.

169577 ▶▶▶ Will, replying to ConstantBees, 4, #249 of 2087 🔗

It isn’t but it might persuade enough swing voters in swing states to vote for him. I cannot abide the man either, I hasten to add but I think he is going to win this election.

169531 ▶▶ nottingham69, replying to stewart, 6, #250 of 2087 🔗

Johnson was at least 30kg’s overweight. His obesity has been widely underestimated 17 stone plus at 5 9 is dangerous territory with any viral illness and top 1% in population obesity.

What Trump’s recovery should do is reduce fear with people in the late 60’s and 70’s with no pre-existing medical issues. Most are in better shape than Trump, who had high blood pressure pre China Virus..

Also this winter hopefully more bespoke treatment plans, rather than one size fits all will be more prevalent through some NHS Trusts than April.

169662 ▶▶ Kevin 2, replying to stewart, 4, #251 of 2087 🔗

Do you believe the Doris ‘touch and go’ serious illness?
I don’t.

170404 ▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to Kevin 2, 4, #252 of 2087 🔗

I think the “brush with death” story is total bollox.

169698 ▶▶ mjr, replying to stewart, 5, #253 of 2087 🔗

the doom set in only because of the worry that despite our scepticism about how dangerous covid is supposed to be, there was always a possibility that Trump could be seriously ill, given his age. Had that happened then it would have been a real setback to scepticism as this would have been used by the lockdowners.
As it is, Trump’s infection was mild, as we thought it would be.

169743 ▶▶ AngloWelshDragon, replying to stewart, 5, #254 of 2087 🔗

I think people are actually confident in their scepticism. Toby didn’t wobble but his tone recognised that if anything did happen to Trump (no matter how small the likelihood) it would be extremely damaging to our cause. The MSM are going to twist the facts to promote even more hysteria

169441 alw, replying to alw, 26, #255 of 2087 🔗

Making children safe in schools. The whole thing is absolute nonsense. A neighbour’s two grandchildren go to the same school, a child in the younger ones class of 3 year olds contracted the virus and the whole class has to isolate for 14 days now. Yet the older grandchild can go to school and the parents don’t need to isolate. What is the point?

169452 ▶▶ chaos, replying to alw, 11, #256 of 2087 🔗

It’s lockdown by stealth. People (parents) are stupid enough to get tests and voila lots of people get locked up. It’s not supposed to make sense. When someone tests positive in the other class that whole class will be off…

169454 ▶▶ Lockdown_Lunacy, replying to alw, 11, #257 of 2087 🔗

Ha, yeah. My daughter and one of her friends are in different ‘bubbles’ at school. They are both with the same childminder two mornings a week who takes them to school together but has to drop them off at different entrances! Farcical!

169634 ▶▶ bucky99, replying to alw, 4, #258 of 2087 🔗

Yep, we’ve had exactly the same. But I’ve long since given up on trying to rationalise the irrational.

169442 chaos, replying to chaos, 34, #259 of 2087 🔗

blubble bluster wind farms um vaccine green wibble stay indoors wibble come out go in blubba out in out in um get a bicycle arse vagina tits waffle um green no christmas um vaccine save the um nhs blobba you are all um doomed blib tits blub um don’t touch granny…. just um die you plebs. I must build back green for Carrie, Wilf and um Prince Charles. My father was a cunt, I am a cunt.. fuck you all.

169627 ▶▶ Two-Six, replying to chaos, 1, #260 of 2087 🔗


170410 ▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to chaos, 3, #261 of 2087 🔗

That makes so much more sense than the original!

169445 Mars-in-Aries, replying to Mars-in-Aries, 3, #262 of 2087 🔗

Here is a nice explanation of the maths of whether you are or or not infected if you test positive – and the chance if you test positive a second time


170450 ▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to Mars-in-Aries, #263 of 2087 🔗

Good one. Thanks!

169446 ConstantBees, replying to ConstantBees, 18, #264 of 2087 🔗

Ivor Cummins posted a new video focusing on the UK situation: URGENT UPDATE: Societal Damage from Bad Science, not the Virus? Why are they doing this?
The usual calm, measured review of statistics that I love from Ivor. I donate a little money to him when I can to keep him going. He’s really a light in the darkness.

He’s promoting the hashtag #WhyAreTheyDoingThis as a place to promote evidence to counter the scare stories. I’m thinking about setting up a Twitter account just to post links to articles I’m reading and I hate Twitter.

169499 ▶▶ DespairSquid, replying to ConstantBees, 9, #265 of 2087 🔗

#WhyAreTheyDoingThis was trending nicely yesterday. Cue the demands from the usual suspects for twitter to ban it.

169569 ▶▶ annie, replying to ConstantBees, 5, #266 of 2087 🔗

I’d advise against it. Being on Twitter is like swimming in sewage.

169594 ▶▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to annie, 4, #267 of 2087 🔗

I know. It’s definitely a sewer. But as someone who can’t go to demonstrations, I’ve got to do something. I post regularly on the Daily Mail and occasionally on the Guardian (when I can stomach it).

Plus, walking down the street is like swimming in sewage these days. More masked zombies outside now.

169673 ▶▶ GLT, replying to ConstantBees, 6, #268 of 2087 🔗

I set up a twitter account recently just to be another anti lockdown voice on the forum as it seems to have such a large effect on policy and the national conversation.

169453 Poppy, replying to Poppy, 5, #269 of 2087 🔗

Hope matt can post details of his ‘interesting WhatsApp conversation’! My curiosity has been piqued.

(For those who don’t know, yesterday a member on here called matt referred to a WhatsApp conversation he had with a friend who intimated that there ‘may be light at the end of the tunnel before Christmas’).

169462 ▶▶ Poppy, replying to Poppy, 4, #270 of 2087 🔗

Edit: Just seen that he said he couldn’t share… damn. Well, I’ll be keeping my ears to the ground for any interesting developments in the next few weeks…

169471 ▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Poppy, 3, #271 of 2087 🔗

I saw that thread too … come on, I know I’m a bit slow, but please let on!

matt is a sensible poster who should be taken seriously.

169472 ▶▶ Charlie Blue, replying to Poppy, 6, #272 of 2087 🔗

Yes that got my brain whirring too, Poppy. I can’t imagine any one thing that would allow us all to start to undo all the damage but any reason to be hopeful is welcome.

169555 ▶▶ matt, replying to Poppy, 13, #273 of 2087 🔗

Yes, sorry. I can’t quote something I’ve been asked to keep in confidence. I’ll be happy to express it as opinion here and there, though. I should say that this isn’t absolutely a silver bullet, but it does suggest there’s a timetable and hope for the near-ish future, and hope for the future is more than I had yesterday morning.

169464 sky_trees, replying to sky_trees, 6, #274 of 2087 🔗

Trump is definitely the superior candidate in the US for me. However it’s a low bar over there (as it is here). I can’t rule out that for me there’s a reasonable possibility the Covid stuff with Trump has been orchestrated or amplified in a particular way to boost his apparently flagging campaign. Probably not, but the thought has crossed my mind a number of times.

Anyway. If his campaign on Covid is based on ‘living without fear; we’ve got to live our lives’, then that’s fantastic. I can only hope it influences things over here. I don’t see UK government changing direction – they’re way too deep and it’s the fallacy of sunk costs; they’ve staked far too much on their covid response to change direction.

It’ll have to come from parliament or the public. Maybe the votes today and tomorrow will be a pushback – although I should say I absolutely don’t trust Steve Baker, he’s on the right side at the moment but he’s a total flake in my view (where was he for the last six months?) and not someone to be relied upon.

I also would point out that Trump is not out of the woods with Covid – doesn’t the bad stuff tend to hit 10-14 days after infection, often after someone ‘feels better’?

169474 ▶▶ JHuntz, replying to sky_trees, 12, #275 of 2087 🔗

As ever I think the polls are nonsense. Biden is an old creep with young children, despite the media not wanting to talk about it its now well known in the populace.
The Democrats are a toxic party far too aligned with identity politics. The silent majority can’t stand this attack on their culture I suspect a trump win again.

170301 ▶▶ Rowan, replying to sky_trees, #276 of 2087 🔗

I wouldn’t worry about Trump’s health, somehow I don’t think he’s got a real problem. Trump may well be better than Biden but I wouldn’t vote for either of them, even if I could.

169476 ▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to p02099003, 10, #278 of 2087 🔗

They’re now really scrapping the bottom of the barrel with this.

Why don’t they just come out and say that being alive is a symptom of Covid 19? Its now reaching the point where one thinks that this virus is simply being made up to justify this continuing march to authoritarianism.

169483 ▶▶ Charlie Blue, replying to p02099003, 4, #279 of 2087 🔗

Nothing new, though. There was plenty of press coverage about this months back.

169593 ▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to p02099003, 3, #280 of 2087 🔗

I saw someone claim that diarrhoea and vomiting is a symptom. Yes, breathing is a symptom of covid.

169772 ▶▶▶ annie, replying to ConstantBees, 6, #281 of 2087 🔗

Vomiting is a symbol of Coronascepticism, triggered by sight of nappied zombies, government morons, etc.

169605 ▶▶ davews, replying to p02099003, 5, #282 of 2087 🔗

Earlier in the year, after a bout of cold/cough over Christmas, I had persistent nettle rash (urticaria). I mentioned it to my GP (the last time I saw a doctor face to face) at my annual review in March and he wasn’t interested. Still suspect I had the nasty back then.

169719 ▶▶ mjr, replying to p02099003, 4, #283 of 2087 🔗

Daily Reminder .. Local press propagate BBC/Government covid lies and propaganda
BBC employ 149 journalists embedded in local press

The Leicester Mercury and sister papers Nottingham Post and Derby Telegraph have 5 embedded BBC reporters. See page 6

169469 Nobody2020, replying to Nobody2020, 15, #284 of 2087 🔗

It’s is very odd indeed how topsy turvy this year has been.

  • Logic and reasoning must be disregarded if they do not further the cause of saving lives, but not just any lives only Covid related ones
  • The human immune system apparently no longer serves any purpose
  • People will willingly lose their lives and livelihoods because somebody told them there is no other choice, when there is plenty of evidence to show there are other options

But the crowning glory of just how messed up the world has become:

  • A vote for Trump is effectively a vote for freedom
169482 ▶▶ Biker, replying to Nobody2020, 26, #285 of 2087 🔗

From the minute Trump said he was running i said he’s win. It was obvious. The way the media lie about him have exposed their agenda and now everyone who works for the MSM has been shown to be the lying, corrupt deep state stooges they are. All these celebrities, actors, musicians and such who support the government line have been exposed. The problem is the child killing death cult that rules over us won’t let go without a fight. I’d hazard a guess, and i might be wrong, but i’d say if you’re surprised by the idea that vote for Trump is a vote for freedom then you haven’t been paying attention. It is bizarre that such a man would turn out to be the saviour of the west, but he’s not saved us yet. We still need these evil fucks in the old government, the media liars and the corporate shills dealt with.
The people who watch and believe the BBC scare me the most, they think they know what’s going on but they are so brainwashed that they’d go from passive tv watchers to putting a bullet in your head if asked to do so. We truly live in scary times

169596 ▶▶ Thomas_E, replying to Nobody2020, 6, #286 of 2087 🔗

Look we made an illogical fear and blind obedience and VIRTUE! And any logical or skeptical though a HERESY! This is the world we live in and will be for a long ,long time.

169473 Biker, replying to Biker, 48, #287 of 2087 🔗

Nothing changed. Still don’t give a fuck about the virus, couldn’t care who’s had it or died from it. The government is still a lying murderous child raping bunch of wankers who sell bombs to sand savages on one hand and then claim they want to keep us safe on the other. That barren slapper in Scotland who seems infatuated by that Gates new world order muppet giving her “advice” when i suspect thats not all she’s giving her. These people have us locked down, unable to live, can’t visit your friend and parents for nearly 7 months now. It’s to to fucking stop it. Time for each and every one of us to refuse. Time to call out every person you know who supports this in the most aggressive terms. Time to cut ties with people who support this lockdown

169491 ▶▶ jb12, replying to Biker, 7, #288 of 2087 🔗

I live in hope that businesses here tell her to piss off when she announces the long-planned lockdown this week, but I am not optimistic.

170313 ▶▶ Rowan, replying to Biker, 7, #289 of 2087 🔗

Went to the Pharmacy to pick up my wife’s prescription. I was the only unmasked customer and being non-compliant is the way to go. The pharmacy staff were not bothered bothered and were themselves unmasked.

169475 PaulH, replying to PaulH, 31, #290 of 2087 🔗

I know this is off-topic (apologies!) but why on earth is the Bill Gates-sponsored lockdown “scientist” Neil Ferguson being given a platform on BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme yet again this morning? And with soft questioning and no opposing viewpoint…?

Oh wait…I think I have just answered my own questions 🙁

169487 ▶▶ Biker, replying to PaulH, 22, #291 of 2087 🔗

Because the BBC are evil, the people who work for it are liars and they are the mouthpiece of the evil bastards that rule us with an iron fist no problem at all. If the bloke next door was covering up child rape and god knows what else and you found out about it would you keep listening to what they had to say? I now just assume anyone who works for or appears on the BBC is either a child rapist/murderer or supports it or turns a blind eye for money. Fuck radio 4

169494 ▶▶▶ chaos, replying to Biker, 21, #292 of 2087 🔗

If you go to the Bill and Melinda Gates donation page you will see they give money to The Guardian, BBC, Telegraph.. etc etc. For example, all Telegraph articles written by Global Health Security Team are those funded by Gates. You will see this on the Gates donations page – donation Telegraph – Global Health Security… Imperial is one of the biggest recipients of Gates’ money.

169501 ▶▶ Thinkaboutit, replying to PaulH, 21, #293 of 2087 🔗

Defund the BBC. Cancel your licence. Don’t watch the twaddle. For me I’ve gone full convert and don’t listen to R4 either. It used to be the intelligent voice of the nation. Now it’s woke claptrap and propaganda.

169546 ▶▶ nottingham69, replying to PaulH, 7, #294 of 2087 🔗

Had a dip at Sweden as well with no figures. Robinson clearly with a producer in his ear at the end gave another free platform to go at Sweden, again no figures. BBC this morning both Burnham and Ferguson on. If I want information those are about the last two people I would ask.

169612 ▶▶▶ Ned of the Hills, replying to nottingham69, 3, #295 of 2087 🔗

I thought the justifications he gave for dismissing Sewden’s example were a bit lame – something along the lines that a lockdown wasn’t needed because Swedes being more cautious and old people living on their own. I’m quoting from memory – a transcript of his exact words would be useful to read.

169619 ▶▶▶▶ matt, replying to Ned of the Hills, 12, #296 of 2087 🔗

Didn’t hear the interview, but the standard zealot response to “what about Sweden?” is incredibly patronising to the British. It boils down to “the Swedes can be trusted to be sensible, but you lot need to be forced.”

It’s unacceptable. Anyone trotting out that line of rubbish should be ashamed of themselves.

170237 ▶▶▶▶▶ Ned of the Hills, replying to matt, 3, #297 of 2087 🔗

I think you have it bang on there, both to what he said and the implication of what he said.

170369 ▶▶▶▶▶ Rowan, replying to matt, 3, #298 of 2087 🔗

And be told to piss off.

170319 ▶▶ Rowan, replying to PaulH, 4, #299 of 2087 🔗

Because it’s the BBC and Bill Gates feeds money into the Beeb, as well as into Imperial College.

169485 Ned of the Hills, replying to Ned of the Hills, 7, #300 of 2087 🔗

I would be cautious about crowing over Trump’s recovery too soon – he sounded very breathless to me. But so far he seems to have done much better than our blond overweight leader.

169489 ▶▶ Recusant, replying to Ned of the Hills, 16, #301 of 2087 🔗

If he is still sick it makes his words even more priceless: “Don’t let it dominate your life.” We all have to accept that we might get sick. We might have long term complications. If we’re really unlucky we might even die. But screw it, the clock is ticking for all of us anyway, we can’t put our lives on hold waiting for a vaccine that may never arrive. Don’t let it dominate your life.

169497 ▶▶▶ Nobody2020, replying to Recusant, 6, #302 of 2087 🔗

He might as well have said “don’t let them dominate your life” because it’s not the virus that is pulling all the levers.

169545 ▶▶▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to Nobody2020, 1, #303 of 2087 🔗

Yes, I said “don’t let the government dominate your life” but your version is more succinct.

169488 Mark, 12, #304 of 2087 🔗

Peter Hitchens and Mike Graham excellent as always on the coronapanic nonsense. Also some good analysis by Hitchens of our systemic political problems.

…. although the two political parties had many faults and no one’s saying they were perfect, the great thing was that they more or less represented the old divide in the country, which existed I suppose up until the mid-sixties, which was basically a class divide. But since then they don’t represent the divide in the country, which is now something completely different. I’d sum it up in shorthand as the difference between Polly Toynbee of the Guardian, and me. It’s all about social and moral issues, and education and marriage and sex and things of that kind, and not about nationalisation and trade unions any more. The two political parties are basically very much on the Polly Toynbee side. They don’t really have anything to fight each other against, so they have these phony wrestling matches every few years in which they pretend to be opposed to each other and in which huge amounts of money are spent on public relations tricks of various kinds and one party or the other wins….the Tory party nearly died, should have died, in 2010, but was madly saved by the electorate who decided to rescue it from its deserved doom, and also what’s more to endorse David Cameron’s Blairisation of it, so that the Tory party had become under David Cameron a Blairite party and Tory voters rushed to vote to approve this, and so they saved it. If that hadn’t happened the Tory party would in my view have collapsed, been unable to raise funds, or continue, and there would then have been a hole.

Peter Hitchens: “Testing has always been a bizarre fetish”
Hitchens is one of the best analysts of this issue, which he has been examining and writing about for many years, imo, and he puts his finger on why so many Brits (including him and me) are basically unrepresented, because of the collapse of the “Conservative” Party into irrelevance. I abhor almost everything that Polly Toynbee represents and stands for.

169492 Basics, replying to Basics, 12, #305 of 2087 🔗

Crimes Against Humanity
Dr Reiner Fuellmich
50 minutes of clear, detailed, accurate good news.

Just shy of a million views between the English and German versions in two days.


Also available on Bitchute and Brandnewtube.


169530 ▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to Basics, 8, #306 of 2087 🔗

Did watch that. Best one hour summary of the whole crisis narrated in clear, concise and accessible but not patronising language.

169558 ▶▶▶ Basics, replying to Bart Simpson, 7, #307 of 2087 🔗

It has value seen simply, as you say, as a clear summary. That it also promises a potential bite back is uplifting to experience.

169496 TJN, replying to TJN, 12, #308 of 2087 🔗

Just been listening to Sunak being interviewed on R4.

My interpretation is that he failed to give enthusiastic support for the PM, and certainly not for the lockdowns.

Reminds me a lot of John Major in the early days.

169505 ▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to TJN, 16, #309 of 2087 🔗

The cracks in the government are appearing especially as Sunak is giving as good as he gets especially after he was blamed for the rise in “cases” due to Eat Out to Help Out.

If Sunak keeps hammering home the point that the economy is lives and that we can’t carry on living in fear of the virus then he can be on to a winner.

169532 ▶▶ Now More Than Ever, replying to TJN, 8, #310 of 2087 🔗

Yes, he’s just been on TalkRadio too and for all his gush about the PM, he sounds like they’re divergent on lockdown.

169641 ▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Now More Than Ever, 2, #311 of 2087 🔗

On his R4 interview I didn’t hear it as gush, rather as someone going through the necessaries in expressing his support for the PM.

169556 ▶▶ nottingham69, replying to TJN, 6, #312 of 2087 🔗

He will be mad keen to get out of his current job. Guaranteed to be the most hated man in the country very soon is the chancellor. His body language wasn’t positive when he had to announce the extension of the JRS scheme. The original plan was to end it in June.

That extension will be a disaster. Short-term thinking at it’s most ruinous.

169565 ▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to nottingham69, 5, #313 of 2087 🔗

Half the time I notice that Sunak’s body language is of someone who has lost the will to live.

He must be tearing his hair out at the government’s intransigence and he knows that the blame will be laid on him when this all goes belly up.

169503 Basics, replying to Basics, 9, #314 of 2087 🔗

Next item on skynews is an interview with a Long Covid victimee. It may be interesting to learn how they have been declared to have Long Covid.

Is it a requirement to have a Lab test for Covid prior to getting the label Long Covid?

I can only see Long Covid is there to add a deliberate layer of rubbish to the overall farce.

169507 ▶▶ Basics, replying to Basics, 10, #315 of 2087 🔗

Not to say viral infections do not in some cases carry a legacy of issues.

Why is there no footage of people at home with the covid dry cough etc?

Don’t people take selfies of their suffering?

169518 ▶▶ Nobody2020, replying to Basics, 3, #316 of 2087 🔗

Some stats on the actual numbers of sufferers would be useful. I don’t doubt that some people have lingering aftereffects but without numbers it’s impossible to say how much of a problem it is.

Even so, if deaths are or can be minimised then Long Covid on it’s own would not be justification for all the extreme measures taken.

169543 ▶▶▶ Basics, replying to Nobody2020, 1, #317 of 2087 🔗

You put it clearly, yes. I’m not doubting there are lingering effects in some from vital infections.

I’m not buying into Long Covid as a condition. The primary covid infection is defined by lab result not symptoms under WHO guidance. Yet we’re supposed to rely on symptoms alone for long covid? Definition of Long Covid from other legacy illness appears unlikely imo.

169542 ▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to Basics, 2, #318 of 2087 🔗

I wondered the same thing. How can you claim “long covid” if you can’t confirm that you even had covid. And I’ve seen people claiming it from back illnesses back in March or April when you couldn’t get a test unless you went into hospital.

169549 ▶▶ nottingham69, replying to Basics, 3, #319 of 2087 🔗

Yes another propaganda tool to keep the crisis going until Billy’s jabs are ready.

171625 ▶▶ SweetBabyCheeses, replying to Basics, #320 of 2087 🔗

It’ll be the next pseudo illness for the mentally ill like “chronic lime disease” when there’s no evidence that they never even had a tick bite let alone actual lime disease.

169506 annie, replying to annie, 35, #321 of 2087 🔗

With Remembrance Sunday on the horizon, we need a campaign.
Let’s saturate the country with badges, stickers, pamphlets, badges, along these lines:


169523 ▶▶ kh1485, replying to annie, 10, #322 of 2087 🔗

Hear, hear Annie. I always have a Royal British Legion collection tin and I will put that on the box with the poppies in.

169509 Bart Simpson, replying to Bart Simpson, 15, #323 of 2087 🔗

Last Sunday someone here on posted a video from a scientist from South Africa raising the alarm of the vaccine being trialed in Africa.

Rather odd that no-one who has jumped on the BLM bandwagon has anything to say about it.

169514 ▶▶ Jonathan Palmer, replying to Bart Simpson, 16, #324 of 2087 🔗

BLM are only intrested in certain black deaths.Ones they can use to discredit a certain president.
The same tactic was used here during the Stephen Lawrence affair

169524 ▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to Jonathan Palmer, 7, #325 of 2087 🔗

That’s what I’ve always suspected. They don’t care about Africans and they certainly don’t like those who don’t fit into their narrative – upwardly mobile, socially conservative and successful.

169527 ▶▶ Basics, replying to Bart Simpson, 10, #326 of 2087 🔗

This is that video

A thoroughly shocking watch if you don’t know how the poorest communities available are being exploited by the Oxford vaccine trial in order to test the vaccine your mask wearing neighbour is praying for.

Country M a commenter had the gteat idea of posting the vidoe up on facebook with the words – Black Lives Matter – nothing more just the link and those words.

Please watch and shard the video – humans should not be exploited.

169547 ▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to Basics, 4, #327 of 2087 🔗

I watched that last Sunday and it was shocking. Makes you wonder why this isn’t being reported widely.

Cancel that! On second thought….I know why.

169540 ▶▶ PaulH, replying to Bart Simpson, 7, #328 of 2087 🔗

Important to remember that BLM stands for Black Lives Manipulated .

Asking questions about these trials would not suit the agenda of the oligarchs who payroll BLM. They don’t give two hoots about poor Africans, apart from wanting to reduce their numbers.

It’s sickening, but that’s how this works. So “nothing to see here”.

169548 ▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to PaulH, 3, #329 of 2087 🔗

And just like the Chinese, they see Africa as a place to be exploited.


169510 Richard Harrison, replying to Richard Harrison, 6, #330 of 2087 🔗

Crimes Against Humanity: class action with leading tort lawyers against the instigators of the corona-scam : video available : watch this immediately, please.


170057 ▶▶ Paul M, replying to Richard Harrison, #331 of 2087 🔗

Watched this a couple of days ago – highly informative and convincing arguments from someone with a track record of uncovering fraud and corruption. Well worth the 40 minutes. I hope he brings it on and we seen a worldwide reckoning.

In the meantime I hope all goes well for Simon Dolans Injunction hearing, expected next week

169517 kh1485, replying to kh1485, 69, #333 of 2087 🔗

Here is my latest review on TwatAdvisor:

Not COVID Safe
No masks
No sanitiser
No distancing
No real attempt at contact tracing
Watched a very unsatisfactory table clean

I would not recommend this establishment in the current environment

And the best review, I had yesterday from an elderly lady and her 94 year old husband, to my face:

“You are wonderfully normal, thank you”

169521 ▶▶ annie, replying to kh1485, 24, #334 of 2087 🔗

And good riddance to the miserable twat and all its miserable readers. You don’t need their custom.

169528 ▶▶▶ kh1485, replying to annie, 11, #335 of 2087 🔗

And the four people who found it ‘helpful’

169537 ▶▶▶▶ Catherine Young, replying to kh1485, 6, #336 of 2087 🔗

Are you in North Yorkshire? I’ll support your business

169539 ▶▶▶▶▶ kh1485, replying to Catherine Young, 6, #337 of 2087 🔗

I wish I was (I hail from that neck of the woods). Sadly, in NW Essex.

169560 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Jonathan Palmer, replying to kh1485, 2, #338 of 2087 🔗

Whereabouts as it is my neck of the woods

169571 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ kh1485, replying to Jonathan Palmer, 6, #339 of 2087 🔗

People’s Republic of Saffron Walden.

169579 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ matt, replying to kh1485, 7, #340 of 2087 🔗

I truly wish I could come for a cup of tea and a cake. I think my wife would think I’d gone stark raving mad if I told her we were going on a day trip to Saffron Walden, à propos of nothing, though.

169889 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Silke David, replying to matt, 5, #341 of 2087 🔗

It certainly is worth a visit. Beautiful countryside in NW Essex.

169645 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ DocRC, replying to kh1485, 3, #342 of 2087 🔗

I’m in Hadstock so will come and visit. What’s the name of your cafe?

169675 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ steph, replying to DocRC, 8, #343 of 2087 🔗

You can find it on Trip Advisor by filtering on the location and “coffee/tea”. I’m in Essex but a bit far away for a drop in. Looks great and sensible. K has had a torrid time with reviews. Hopefully common sense will prevail soon. I think any contributor close to Saffron Walden should pop in and leave a supportive review..

169708 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ kh1485, replying to steph, 4, #344 of 2087 🔗

Thanks, that’s really kind. I get to the stage where I don’t read them anymore, they just drain me and I’m nearly at the end of my rag anyway.

169716 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ DocRC, replying to kh1485, 7, #345 of 2087 🔗

Found you! Will come in and say hello!

169730 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ kh1485, replying to DocRC, 8, #346 of 2087 🔗

Great! Please just come in – most just hover by the door and ask if it is OK to come in!

170645 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Rowan, replying to DocRC, 2, #347 of 2087 🔗

Now why would you ask that?

169529 ▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to kh1485, 13, #348 of 2087 🔗

Sounds like they are describing the perfect place to go.

Can you tag yourself on TwatAdvisor with #NotAfraid or #NoBedwetters or something?

169538 ▶▶▶ kh1485, replying to Mabel Cow, 37, #349 of 2087 🔗

I was discussing with some LS customers yesterday the possibility of having a carol concert but disguising it as a funeral. I suggested we buy a cardboard coffin and attach the words “RIP British Democracy”

169553 ▶▶ Andrew Fish, replying to kh1485, 8, #350 of 2087 🔗

When I was in Kent for August Bank Holiday I was reccying restaurants and found one in Hythe which had reviews just like your first one. My immediate response was to book and it was lovely. Sane people don’t judge purely on star ratings – I actually only use Tripadvisor for restaurants which don’t have sample menus on their websites (a common problem when travelling in Europe) and I take personal opinions with more than a pinch of salt.

169557 ▶▶ Thomas_E, replying to kh1485, 3, #351 of 2087 🔗

Sounds great! When can I pop in?

169561 ▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to kh1485, 9, #352 of 2087 🔗

I actually saw that review on TwatAdvisor and its made me more determined to visit your cafe.

Am planning a day trip to your neck of the woods soon.

169592 ▶▶▶ kh1485, replying to Bart Simpson, 3, #353 of 2087 🔗

And I’d love to meet you Bart. I think you’d really like SW. It used to have a fantastic concert hall. I had planned this year (BC) to go to several concerts. Nicola Benedetti was a frequent performer there.

170989 ▶▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to kh1485, 1, #354 of 2087 🔗

Ditto!!! Will let you know closer to the time!

169633 ▶▶ jhfreedom, replying to kh1485, 6, #355 of 2087 🔗

Just tell them not to come back if they are that worried. They should stay hiding under the bed, wrecking the economy so they don’t lose their sense of smell for a week. Idiots.

169659 ▶▶ James007, replying to kh1485, 7, #356 of 2087 🔗

I don’t use TripAdvisor, but if I saw that review I would take is as a ringing endorsement. At such a shop I might be treated like a human being, get a ‘good morning’, maybe even a smile!

169660 ▶▶ TJN, replying to kh1485, 11, #357 of 2087 🔗

I wish we had a cafe around here with a review like ‘Not COVID safe …’

Sounds like free advertising for you!

169689 ▶▶ Paul, replying to kh1485, 7, #358 of 2087 🔗

The response from my family to the ‘not covid safe’ review,was.’that sounds perfect,when can we go’ !.

169774 ▶▶ karenovirus, replying to kh1485, 5, #359 of 2087 🔗

I would regard the first five lines as a recommendation and ignore the last as being from a sourpuss.

170639 ▶▶ Rowan, replying to kh1485, 3, #360 of 2087 🔗

You bring a little joy into our lives and boy how we need it.

169526 Jonathan Palmer, replying to Jonathan Palmer, 6, #361 of 2087 🔗

Reported in the Sun.Scotland 2 week circuit breaker lockdown from Friday to coincide with half term

169533 ▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to Jonathan Palmer, 1, #362 of 2087 🔗

I thought John Knox was dead.

169541 ▶▶ Thinkaboutit, replying to Jonathan Palmer, 4, #363 of 2087 🔗

Locking people indoors with their kids in October. When will Scotland rebel?

169544 ▶▶▶ Jonathan Palmer, replying to Thinkaboutit, 1, #364 of 2087 🔗

Working from a plan,it is so obvious now.

169585 ▶▶▶▶ jb12, replying to Jonathan Palmer, 2, #365 of 2087 🔗

Well considering she hinted at this weeks ago, then yeah, it is obvious that deaths, cases, hospitalisations, whatever could be anywhere and this would still be happening. And Scotland won’t rebel because most people here are infatuated with this psycho FM as she claims to be doing things differently than England; and getting it up the English is the most important thing to these morons.

169581 ▶▶ Biker, replying to Jonathan Palmer, 24, #366 of 2087 🔗

She says she knows it’s tough. How does she know? She lives off our tax money to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds. What does he know about how seven months of this nonsense has done to us. We can’t keep locking everyone up. It’s got to stop. She’s not saved a single life. None of the things she is doing can be proven to have saved anyone. Ignore her and her government. They don’t have my consent. This isn’t a government it’s a fascist dictatorship. Can someone tell these motherfuckers you can’t control a virus and if people die because of it then so fucking what. That’s he nature of things. They’ll be no country left to save if she keeps doing this. It’s almost like because she can’t have her delusional independence in Europe while still using the pound as a currency she’s gonna destroy us back into the stone age. And yet there are people out there who think nothing of doing this to us and seem quite happy to do this to us forever. I really really despise the SNP and the absolute mongs that support her. The only good thing about it is all these people supporting her are gonna suffer poverty they’ve never known in the coming months and years. She’ll be fine though because once she’s gone she’ll live on her massive pension and no doubt a job in some sinister Gates run company for psychopaths. They’ll be a book telling us how well she did and how she stood side by side with the public as they lost everything they worked their whole life for. Yeah it’s tough Sturgeon but only because you made it so.

169598 ▶▶▶ kf99, replying to Biker, 9, #367 of 2087 🔗

We shouldn’t even call it a ‘Government’. We didn’t used to. Her ‘Ministers’ now call themselves ‘Secretary of State’. How dare they. She confuses goverment with Country, and party with government. She’s hijaked the flag. Her husband runs the party. She’s Nationalised the Police. She meddles in foreign affairs at our expense. It’s unbelievable.

169638 ▶▶▶▶ Basics, replying to kf99, 2, #368 of 2087 🔗

Executive. That’s all.

Mind Control = Govern ment.

The latin speakers will tell you that’s the correct meaning of government.

170542 ▶▶▶ wendyk, replying to Biker, 1, #369 of 2087 🔗

She must go; she must ; we need rid of her and her creepy cabal of activist control addicts.

I find the mass hypnosis of a formerly robust, humorous independently minded bunch like the Scots of yore to be deeply troubling and I hate it.

What a rancorous censorious self righteous place this now is.

169642 ▶▶ Awkward Git, replying to Jonathan Palmer, 1, #370 of 2087 🔗

Exactly a predicted were by the “leaked document” 2 weeks ago.

169534 kf99, 13, #371 of 2087 🔗

Great update today Toby.

The next debate writes itself.

“what I’m saying is old people, vulnerable people, (looks at Biden) people like you, Joe, yes, people like you I wanna help you, protect you, keep you safe Joe, but healthy people, young people (looks at camera) you good people, don’t be afraid, you can beat this virus, just like I did…”

169551 l835, 4, #372 of 2087 🔗

I see the BBC have managed to find a Dr to rubbish Trumps recovery on the latest Radio2 news…

169563 Shep, 13, #373 of 2087 🔗

Probaly useful to look at Trump’s actions in light of the fact that he is not going to let China take the piss out of America over a fake pandemic. 😎

169570 Dan Clarke, replying to Dan Clarke, 19, #374 of 2087 🔗

The Great Reset which is dismissed as conspiracy theory, seems to be what is happening. The chaos now is to prepare people for a different way of life. The climate change lobby determining the direction.

169626 ▶▶ Basics, replying to Dan Clarke, 1, #375 of 2087 🔗

Look up the planned 2021 Davos meeting and see what are the subjects for discussion.

170163 ▶▶▶ Dan Clarke, replying to Basics, #376 of 2087 🔗

Just saw your reply, yes, all coming from there in January.

169898 ▶▶ Silke David, replying to Dan Clarke, 1, #377 of 2087 🔗

I had a YouGov questionnaire relating to the great reset today.
Scary! One question was really odd: blablabla to create a society to respect all genders/trans gender, cannot remember the exact wording.

170161 ▶▶▶ Dan Clarke, replying to Silke David, 2, #378 of 2087 🔗

Its mainly about sustainability, saving the planet etc. All from the Climate Change lobby. Covid has been a way to slow everything down, apparently, to see how people react to changes, how much they comply etc. The changes are to be revealed in Davos January 2021

169572 jhfreedom, replying to jhfreedom, 16, #379 of 2087 🔗

I get that Trump is divisive but he’s one of the few politicians to have spoken plainly about how our attitudes to the virus need to change. Two key quotes:

In the spring: “We’re going to open up, and people are going to die”

And now: “Don’t be afraid of it. Don’t let it dominate you”.

He is spot on, we have GOT to just take the risks just as we do with driving, eating, flying, living generally etc.

No economy in the world is optimised to create lots of jobs and prosperity while trying to avoid this virus like it’s the Black Death. We must re-open (while being courteous and sensible about hand-washing and if we have a fevers – as you should ANYWAY) and if a vaccine comes great, give it to the old or vulnerable. Otherwise, we have a moral duty to carry on without restriction.

169576 Surfer72, replying to Surfer72, 51, #381 of 2087 🔗

I’ve just posted a complaint to the BBC after listening to Radio 4 this morning. I hope that other’s might consider registering their displeasure. If the BBC continue to give a platform to the likes of Ferguson – whilst failing to balance their coverage – the fearful will never re-engage with life.

Dear Sir,

I am continually surprised by the airtime and credence Radio 4 give to Neil Ferguson.

Notwithstanding his discredited modelling (and indeed his failure to respect the guidelines put in place on account of his discredited modelling), yet again he was given a platform on the Today programme on Radio 4 to give his opinion.

Moreover the questioning by Nick Robinson was nothing like that which would be reserved for a politician. Incredibly Ferguson was permitted to say that if further restrictions were not put in place the NHS will be ‘overwhelmed’ again.

Even during the height of the pandemic the NHS wasn’t even close to being overwhelmed and now the situation is very different. But instead of trying to push back on this claim, Nick Robinson tried to extract a fear mongering quote – attempting to get Ferguson to day ‘There’s a real threat of the NHS now being overwhelmed’ so that the BBC could feature him on hourly news bulletins.

Ferguson’s explanation for why Sweden had faired relatively well – which inconveniently runs contrary to his position – wasn’t questioned either. Robinson should have outlined the counter argument.

Ferguson’s ‘opinions’ were taken as gospel and were not dissected effectively at all.

Moreover, Nick Robinson failed to ask why we should take Ferguson’s opinion as significant, especially considering his weak past record in both modelling and mortality rates.

Aside from his discredited modelling for Covid:

In 2001, he predicted that foot and mouth disease could kill up to 50,000 people. It ended up killing less than 200.
In 2005, he told the Guardian that up to 200 million people could die from bird flu. The final death toll from avian flu strain A/H5N1 was 440.
In 2009, a Government estimate based on one of Ferguson’s models estimated the likely death toll from swine flu at 65,000. In fact, it was 457.

I truly feel that there is a continued and significant lack of balance in the BBC’s coverage of the pandemic .

169589 ▶▶ Sarigan, replying to Surfer72, 14, #382 of 2087 🔗

You forgot to add his rule breaking with a married woman. I heard the interview, it was despicable.

169597 ▶▶ l835, replying to Surfer72, 17, #383 of 2087 🔗

Cancelled my licence fee direct debit. Not paying for this crap!

169625 ▶▶▶ Mark, replying to l835, 5, #384 of 2087 🔗

What took you so long?

169667 ▶▶▶▶ l835, replying to Mark, 3, #385 of 2087 🔗

You are right! What are they going to do, send the TV detector van round? Another massive con by the BBC/GPO!

169636 ▶▶ The Filthy Engineer, replying to Surfer72, 7, #386 of 2087 🔗

In 2001, he predicted that foot and mouth disease could kill up to 50,000 people. It ended up killing less than 200.”

Where is this meme coming from? I’ve seen it repeated here numerous time but it needs to be made clear: FMD does NOT kill humans.

The trouble with making factual errors like this is that it calls into question the veracity of the remaining facts.

169769 ▶▶ Jo, replying to Surfer72, 5, #387 of 2087 🔗

I’m afraid I chickened out and turned the radio off. I didn’t want to risk a heart attack through excess anger.

169578 swedenborg, 13, #388 of 2087 🔗

I updated this late last night.I think it is very extraordinary that Gupta has not been involved much by the Gov and now this speaking with Scott Atlas!

From US Minister Azar
“In the conversation with Martin Kulldorff, PhD (Harvard), Jay Bhattacharya, MD, PhD (Stanford), and Sunetra Gupta, PhD (Oxford), we heard strong reinforcement of the Trump Administration’s strategy of aggressively protecting the vulnerable while opening schools and the workplace.”

Funny.Gupta hardly had an opportunity to speak to Boris J by phone but can fly to Washington and get in touch with the top echelon of US C-19 response!

169590 SweetBabyCheeses, replying to SweetBabyCheeses, 8, #389 of 2087 🔗

Has anyone had any experience with being challenged for your mask exemption – in a place where masks are not legally required please?

Upon reopening, my gym made it compulsory to wear a mask when queuing outdoors, when entering/exiting, when walking around, when using loo, when returning equipment etc – basically all the time except when you’re exercising in your marked box on the floor.

There’s a myriad of other ridiculous rules too, but I made it clear that I couldn’t continue my membership until masks exemptions were accepted, and they just refunded me.

Since it is private premises, are they free to implement whatever rules they want? Or am I being discriminated against under the Equality Act? Pubs, restaurants, shops etc are also private premises, but the Gov seems to have introduced laws there. I can’t find any advice online about whether exemptions are permitted in spaces where the relevant law isn’t even concerned anyway. Any thoughts gratefully received please!

Note: I don’t want to threaten them with anything. As bonkers as the owners are I really miss the community as it was my main social interaction 🙁

169618 ▶▶ Ozzie, replying to SweetBabyCheeses, 6, #390 of 2087 🔗

I suspect that this is in breach of the Equality Act 2010 – it is a bit like banning people due to any other disability. Check the laworfiction.com website – I think that you can post a question there.

169628 ▶▶▶ Ozzie, replying to Ozzie, 4, #391 of 2087 🔗

From the Act:

“It is against the law to discriminate against anyone because of:

“You’re protected from discrimination:

  • at work
  • in education
  • as a consumer
  • when using public services
  • when buying or renting property
  • as a member or guest of a private club or association”

As the legislation regarding facemasks/coverings is self declared, I think that refusal to allow your entry into the gym without a facemask is discrimination. However, I am not a lawyer and this needs to be checked.

169663 ▶▶▶▶ SweetBabyCheeses, replying to Ozzie, 5, #392 of 2087 🔗

Fab thanks guys. I do have a genuine reason that would stand up to cross-examination. Although I would regard this as my private medical history and wouldn’t disclose it without knowing how that info would be used/stored etc. However, I suspect that most people who know me also know I am a sceptic who thinks that the whole mask agenda is a completely unjustified infringement of our liberties.
So it’s hard to be both as I can see how people would doubt 1. if you believe 2!

I am hoping that my gym membership would be covered under “member of a private club or association”.

169630 ▶▶▶ matt, replying to Ozzie, 6, #393 of 2087 🔗

It’s in breach of the Equality Act if they’re turning away somebody who has a genuine reason not to be able to wear a mask that is related to a physical or mental impairment. It’s worthwhile making this point to them and making sure they understand their obligations under the law, but unless you have an actual, provable reason that would stand up under cross examination in court, you are setting yourself up for a fall if you pursue it

169654 ▶▶▶ SweetBabyCheeses, replying to Ozzie, 2, #394 of 2087 🔗

Fab thanks. I had been to laworfiction but I didn’t realise that they had a forum there too.

169623 ▶▶ The Filthy Engineer, replying to SweetBabyCheeses, 6, #395 of 2087 🔗

Your second paragraph just highlights the sheer ludicrousness of the situation: A virus so “dangerous” that you have the energy to get to the gym, never mind participating in strenuous exercise.

To your fourth paragraph: Private premises don’t have the right to implement whatever rules they want if it is contrary to law. What they do retain is the right to refuse admission for any reason whatsoever so long as it doesn’t break one of the anti-discrimination laws.

169669 ▶▶▶ SweetBabyCheeses, replying to The Filthy Engineer, 2, #396 of 2087 🔗

Thanks, that’s really helpful. It is absolutely ludicrous. They’ve gone down the lines of assuming that the only reason people won’t return is because it’s not “safe” enough. I suspect I’m not the only person they’ve put off though. Unfortunately we’re in one of the doomed “local lockdown” areas so set to be under siege indefinitely due to an unending spiral of false positives from perfectly healthy people who’ve just been persuaded to take a test in the park.

169595 Nobody2020, replying to Nobody2020, 27, #397 of 2087 🔗

Kirstie Allsopp asks on Twitter:

Kirstie Allsopp


Is it better to live a final month in love & the comfort of human touch or a final year in isolation, worried that your family have forgotten you. There is a fate worth than death. and we are condemning many elderly people to that fate.


I try to keep my Twitter presence as low key as possible so don’t tend to post replies to this sort of question on there.

However death is something that I do and have thought about. For instance I’ve thought about which of my parents would cope better if the other died first. Some people may shy away from such thoughts but it’s something most people will have to deal with at some point.

But back to the question posed. It strikes at the heart of what I suspect most people fear and that is being alone. The world is a much harsher place if you are alone in even your thoughts.

It’s probably bad enough living a lonely life but there can’t be much worse than dying alone and by that I mean how it might feel in your final moments. Not having been in that situation I can only speculate but imagine how much better it would be if there was at least one close person there to show that you meant something to somebody else during your time on this earth.

If you die alone or in the presence of strangers then your final moments may well be spent wondering what was it all for. In the end it maybe doesn’t matter because once you’re dead everything becomes irrelevant but I’d like to think that we could give people at least the chance of some final moments of happiness or whatever you want to call it.

I don’t really want to ponder on how people would feel if those thoughts were made to drag on for weeks or months.

169615 ▶▶ kf99, replying to Nobody2020, 19, #398 of 2087 🔗

There was a story a few years ago of a young woman cyclist hit by a truck turning left in London. She was stuck under it. A passer by crawled under and held her. He couldn’t do any more than that. No-one could. A few moments later she was dead. Before the ambulance arrived. All the health and safety, our NHS, all the rest of it, none of it helped but maybe the presence of someone in that moment, maybe that helped, a bit. It’s always stuck with me.

169746 ▶▶▶ mjr, replying to kf99, 3, #399 of 2087 🔗

sad story but saying the cyclist was “hit by truck” is not fair on truck drivers. What usually happens is that a truck will stop at lights indicating left. Whilst stopped cyclists will go up the inside and will stop in a place invisible to the truck driver. Lights change, driver cannot see cyclist in his mirror, turns left and the cyclist goes under the truck. And the truck driver is blamed.
City centre cyclists tend to have no respect for drivers, pedestrians or rules of the road.

169762 ▶▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to mjr, 5, #400 of 2087 🔗

Ages ago I got a bit mangled in London when a van turning left knocked me off and drove over my bike.

I harboured a grudge for years, but the reality was that I was at least a much to blame as the driver because I was riding right where he couldn’t see me.

We’re all responsible for our own safety, I guess. Well, we used to be. Now it’s Doris’ responsibility, and we should all be grateful, dammit.

169599 Panda, 15, #401 of 2087 🔗

As Toby points out, Trumps recovery is a major blow to the lockdown zealots and the reactionary left.

Don’t underestimate how important this could be in the forthcoming election and for the US covid response, as his recovery will blow a lot of ‘established narratives’ out of the water in the US. Americans will start asking questions when previously they just accepted the leftist dominated MSM lines.

I know Trump is an extremely divisive figure across the political spectrum, but I think he’s a vital cog in the ongoing culture wars we are embroiled in. We need him to stand up to China and take a metaphorical baseball bat to the long march infested cultural institutions in the US, so our useless government will be forced to do the same in the UK.

169603 Nic, 6, #402 of 2087 🔗

In brazil deaths and infections continue to fall not far off herd immunity , over by x mas,

169606 swedenborg, 5, #403 of 2087 🔗

Nick Hudson South Africa has created a website and remarkble update data about C-19 not only SA but also the world.Very accessible.Pandata


Try the live data stream

169614 PoshPanic, replying to PoshPanic, 20, #404 of 2087 🔗
169620 ▶▶ Basics, replying to PoshPanic, 4, #405 of 2087 🔗


169631 ▶▶ Lockdown_Lunacy, replying to PoshPanic, 2, #406 of 2087 🔗

Made me laugh!

169704 ▶▶ matt, replying to PoshPanic, 6, #407 of 2087 🔗

Or this

169622 Mabel Cow, replying to Mabel Cow, 27, #408 of 2087 🔗

Is this going too far?

169639 ▶▶ Arnie, replying to Mabel Cow, 9, #409 of 2087 🔗

No Mabel. These people will be turning in their graves to see what has happened to our country. I’ll take a hundred please and I’ll spread them far and wide. Keep up the good work. Cheers, Arnie.

169644 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to Mabel Cow, 7, #410 of 2087 🔗

Are you kidding? This is brilliant. Should be posted everywhere, both online and on flyers.

169657 ▶▶ bluemoon, replying to Mabel Cow, 4, #411 of 2087 🔗

Isn’t the main message ‘get a life bin the mask’? So I wonder if it shouldn’t go at the top of the flyer. Most people will glance at the photograph and wonder what it’s about, not bothering to read further.
Sorry, but I have a very low opinion of people’s ability to assimilate anything other than a large well lit MacDonalds sign.

169666 ▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to bluemoon, 8, #412 of 2087 🔗

You make a good point. Here’s why I put the bin at the bottom.

Looking at my original “Get a life / Bin the mask” poster in my car window, somebody said:

“I just looks like an environmental poster telling people to dispose of their masks properly.”

After a deep breath to stop myself from screaming, I realised that they were right. People will read the poster in a way that accords with their beliefs. Sceptics like us get the message instantly, but non-sceptics will simply see the mask going in the bin and think about the environment.

Therefore this morning I resolved to change the poster so that there was no possibility of misinterpretation, even at the expense of more words and a greater chance that someone might not read the call-to-action.

169827 ▶▶▶ karenovirus, replying to bluemoon, 2, #413 of 2087 🔗

‘”The ability of the masses to understand is very low”.
A.Hitler. Mein Kampf.

169658 ▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to Mabel Cow, 11, #414 of 2087 🔗

I’ve changed “They” to “He”, which fits the picture better and also makes it more personal.

Here’s my suggested tagline:

“This November, don’t just buy a poppy. Honour the fallen by standing up to dictatorship.”

169691 ▶▶▶ Nsklent, replying to Mabel Cow, 5, #415 of 2087 🔗

To make it even more direct, what about ‘He died for your liberty’.

169725 ▶▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to Nsklent, 2, #416 of 2087 🔗

Good idea. I did think about something similar, but I was trying to cut the word count down to the bare minimum.

I’m happy to create a family of such posters, each with a different slant on the same theme. I’ll add your suggestion to the list of candidate slogans. Thanks!

169805 ▶▶▶ chaos, replying to Mabel Cow, #417 of 2087 🔗

they is better

169892 ▶▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to chaos, 3, #418 of 2087 🔗

“They” was my preference, but I felt it just didn’t work with the picture I had found. And I really liked that picture. The expression on the chap’s face is enigmatic: he’s bent but not broken, resolute, and slightly accusatory.

I feel that the “He” and the single figure creates a more intimate connection between the soldier and the viewer, the suggestion that it is individual actions that are required.

Jesus, I’m starting to sound like I work in marketing.

170244 ▶▶ Ned of the Hills, replying to Mabel Cow, #419 of 2087 🔗

Not too far at all.

169624 swedenborg, replying to swedenborg, 13, #420 of 2087 🔗

Madrid, Spain
7 million inhabitants
lockdown measures back
number of ICU admissions in last 7 day?
==> EIGHT <===

169643 ▶▶ PoshPanic, replying to swedenborg, 1, #421 of 2087 🔗

Admitted “with”?

169873 ▶▶▶ swedenborg, replying to PoshPanic, 1, #422 of 2087 🔗


C-19 admitted to ICU.But figures above shows clearly reducing cases just when they started with ludicrous new restrictions,late and meningless as usual when politicians are involved.

169635 Richard O, replying to Richard O, 9, #423 of 2087 🔗

We are now in the very strange place that more restrictions, causing even more suffering, might offer the first glimpse of a way out of this. Despite what most people say in public (either mask to mask or online) I am certain that a second national lockdown would be largely unpopular this time. This could have a galvanising effect in just enough of the population – still a minority, but a bigger minority than at any point so far – to get them finally asking some serious questions.

The flip side of this coin is the risk that once we go back into full lockdown, we may never come out of it. Until we are vaccinated of course.

169683 ▶▶ jb12, replying to Richard O, 4, #424 of 2087 🔗

Well you can test your theory on the case-study that is Scotland. I suspect the general population will do as they are told and close their businesses down, stay at home, and pretend they are ‘doing better’ than England..

169697 ▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to jb12, 4, #425 of 2087 🔗

Indeed. If the majority surrender as meekly as they have done to this point, and roll their sleeves up in the final act of supplication to the Covid Cult, then I will not be obliged to participate in society in any way, and can become more reckless and disruptive in my opposition.

169640 Mayo, replying to Mayo, #426 of 2087 🔗

Brilliant spot by Clare – Carl Heneghan-esque. Worth reading in full . Let’s hope some bigwig at PHE reads Clare’s article and fixes the problem.

Yes – it’s a decent article with some good points. However, Lockdown Sceptics need to consider the logic of some of their arguments – two of which are:

1/ IFR is low – around 0.1%
2/ The UK is close to herd immunity.

These are inconsistent with a position which claims that TRUE case numbers are low.

Hospital admissions and deaths are increasing. If IFR is as low as 0.1% then Cases would need to be increasing at around 30k per day.

You can’t have it both ways.

169649 ▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Mayo, 3, #427 of 2087 🔗

If the entire population had a test (and the test was fit for purpose) then there may be more than 30k/day ‘cases’

Very old frail people dying of very oldness get labelled c19 deaths.

169670 ▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Major Panic, -1, #428 of 2087 🔗

Very old frail people dying of very oldness get labelled c19 deaths.

In which case, the all cause age adjusted mortality rate in the UK would be significantly below normal by now.

169676 ▶▶▶▶ steve_w, replying to Mayo, 2, #429 of 2087 🔗

lockdown is killing tens of thousands

169690 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to steve_w, -6, #430 of 2087 🔗

BS. That is not the experience of most people.

Poll after poll shows the public are strongly in favour of stricter lockdowns.

You appear to apply scepticism in one direction but not the other.

169696 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ steve_w, replying to Mayo, 3, #431 of 2087 🔗

16-20k deaths from missed cancer treatments – ONS stats

I agree lockdown is not killing most people but then neither is ‘covid’

171409 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ djaustin, replying to steve_w, #432 of 2087 🔗

Cancer doesn’t kill that fast. All cause mortality just today is above the previous ten year maximum for Week 39. Over the next 24 months, there most likely will be additional cancer mortality. But it is much slower to feed into the data. Deaths from strokes and, heart attacks and suicides have not risen. We will reach the historic 10-year average number of annual deaths by mid November, at least six weeks early.

169727 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Achilles, replying to Mayo, 2, #433 of 2087 🔗

If people’s experience is evidence and your argument is that lockdown isn’t killing people because they are in favour of lockdowns then I assume you must also agree that as pretty much most people’s experience of Covid is not of dying or knowing anyone dying then there isn’t a pandemic.

170049 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Achilles, -3, #434 of 2087 🔗

People’s experience – right or wrong – is that they’re fearful of Covid. LS needs to put forward a better case.

170378 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ wat tyler, replying to Mayo, 2, #435 of 2087 🔗

How do you know anything about what people are thinking .Are you some kind of mind reader ?.a couple of useless online polls which nobody hardly took part in keep getting repeated as evidence on this site. If the people are so scared of covid why have they flocked to the beaches in their thousands all summer to party ,have barbeques ,get drunk and be together. All you keep repeating is lockdown worked but there is no evidence for that anywhere in the world .I would never support lockdown at any price ,our liberty is to precious to ever give away to people like yourself .

169737 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Recusant, replying to Mayo, 5, #436 of 2087 🔗

The public are strongly in favour of stricter lockdowns for other people. Actual behaviour of people who are locked down – about 10% of people self-isolate completely when they are supposed to – suggests that support for it is pretty low.

169758 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Two-Six, replying to Mayo, 7, #437 of 2087 🔗

“Poll after poll shows the public are strongly in favour of stricter lockdowns.”
That’s because they have been systematically traumatised by the most ferocious fear driving psychological warfare program the world has ever seen.

169678 ▶▶▶▶ p02099003, replying to Mayo, 5, #438 of 2087 🔗

Why would it be? CoViD19 is still the 24th cause of death. Alzheimer’s, cardiovascular disease, cancer are still the most significant causes of death. These are not being treated. See Ivor Cummins latest presentation.

169684 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to p02099003, -15, #439 of 2087 🔗

And this is relevant – how?

170037 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mark H, replying to Mayo, 1, #440 of 2087 🔗


170052 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Mark H, -2, #441 of 2087 🔗

Yes – seriously. People are familiar with the risk of cancer etc.

Covid-19 is an unknown.

170859 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Ed Turnbull, replying to Mayo, 1, #442 of 2087 🔗

Covid-19 was an unknown, but no longer. The data are out there for those who choose to read. At this point anyone who’s not in the known ‘vulnerable’ category (very old and / or with co-morbidities) and is still afraid of the Kung Flu is simply a bloody idiot. But they’re bloody idiots who’re complicit in perpetuating this dystopia. A pox (or even a not particularly dangerous Chinese virus) upon them all.

169652 ▶▶ OKUK, replying to Mayo, 3, #443 of 2087 🔗

I’ve always felt the disease is highly infectious and no doubt incidents of infection have risen as we move into Autumn and schools, unis, and offices reopened.

The point about false, trivial and symptomless positives (and false negatives) is that it makes test and trace in a nation of 70 million people, 100 plus languages and widely divergent cultures an ineffective strategy.

169783 ▶▶▶ Kevin 2, replying to OKUK, 3, #444 of 2087 🔗

It’s a good way to waste £100b plus (when we get to Moonshot), and to ensure that a significant proportion of the population at any given time are in enforced isolation.

This is surely the intention behind the strategy.

169655 ▶▶ Basics, replying to Mayo, 2, #445 of 2087 🔗

You’ve modified your approach since last time I chanced upon your post. Nice to see you are listening and learning.

169671 ▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Basics, -4, #446 of 2087 🔗

How have I modified my approach? My thinking has not changed.

169768 ▶▶▶▶ Basics, replying to Mayo, 3, #447 of 2087 🔗

You are wrong mayo. Your thinking had changed, in your post I remarked upon. Now however I see you have deflated to type. Good luck with your feeding.

170060 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Basics, -1, #448 of 2087 🔗

In what way?

I continue to criticise the nonsense put out by this blog.
I continue to maintain that all those who insist that the UK is close to herd immunity are wrong.
I’ve never been in favour of anything more than a short lockdown.

In what way have I changed?

169656 ▶▶ Tim Bidie, replying to Mayo, 5, #449 of 2087 🔗

You have no idea how many ‘infections’ or ‘cases’ there have been in this country this year and, perhaps, even earlier.

Neither does anyone else. And, in particular, no-one has any idea how many people actually died ‘from’ covid 19

All the data is junk except for overall all cause mortality:

‘In August 2020, there were 34,750 deaths registered in England, 2,060 deaths fewer than the five-year average (2015 to 2019) for August; in Wales, there were 2,379 deaths registered, 116 deaths fewer the five-year average for August.

The leading cause of death in August 2020 was dementia and Alzheimer’s disease in England (accounting for 10.9% of all deaths) and ischaemic heart disease in Wales (11.0% of all deaths); both leading causes of death were the same in July 2020.

The coronavirus (COVID-19) did not feature in the top ten leading causes of death in August 2020, in England or Wales. In England, COVID-19 was the 24th most common cause of death and in Wales it was the 19th most common cause of death, for deaths registered in August 2020.’


169679 ▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Tim Bidie, -5, #450 of 2087 🔗

Please don’t quote figures at me unless you’re intending to make a point. Citing August mortality without context is meaningless – as is the most of the rest of your comment.

Please explain how anything you’ve written debunks anything in my comment.

169705 ▶▶▶▶ Tim Bidie, replying to Mayo, 3, #451 of 2087 🔗

You say:

‘Hospital admissions and deaths are increasing. If IFR is as low as 0.1% then Cases would need to be increasing at around 30k per day.’

I say junk!

The only useful figures are all cause mortality and those show that any consideration given to hospital admissions from covid 19 (junk data) and deaths from covid 19 (junk data) is just plain silly since it was, certainly for August, only the 24th most common cause of death in England.

Which makes your entire comment, above, otiose; completely daffy.

169706 ▶▶▶▶▶ steve_w, replying to Tim Bidie, 1, #452 of 2087 🔗

there was a spike in covid deaths ‘with’ months ago. From early June until now covid deaths have been below other cold/flu deaths

169809 ▶▶▶▶ mhcp, replying to Mayo, 2, #453 of 2087 🔗

And yet you sight “cases” without context!

170094 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to mhcp, -1, #454 of 2087 🔗

I am not making any comment about cases other than to say that, if cases are low then IFR must be high.

169738 ▶▶▶ Achilles, replying to Tim Bidie, 2, #455 of 2087 🔗

I agree that all cause mortality is the best of a bad bunch of data that we have but it is unfortunately complicated by the impact of lockdown and the difficulty of picking it apart.

170048 ▶▶▶▶ Tim Bidie, replying to Achilles, 2, #456 of 2087 🔗

The key fact is that overall all cause mortality has been plumb normal except for the period immediately after the discharge of tens of thousands of patients from hospital at 24 hours notice.

That is all anyone needs to know; a complete false alarm…….again…..

170058 ▶▶▶ helen, replying to Tim Bidie, #457 of 2087 🔗

Yes excellent post Tim

169681 ▶▶ steve_w, replying to Mayo, #458 of 2087 🔗

infections are probably higher than 30k per day

‘cases’ are about 10k per day
KCL covid tracker estimates 20k ‘symptomatic cases per day’
total probably 100k per day given that 80% are asymptomatic

169686 ▶▶ Nobody2020, replying to Mayo, #459 of 2087 🔗

The IFR would be whatever it happens to end up as once everything settles. It’s not based on whatever the numbers happen to be at any particular moment in time and that’s assuming all the data is correct.

What we do know is that the IFR tends to go down over time as more data comes in.

169701 ▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Nobody2020, -2, #460 of 2087 🔗

The ONS have carried out random testing for several months.

The government started doing ‘targeted’ testing in February. Positivity rate back then was about 0.2%. It was only when they switched testing to hospitalised-ONLY patients did the rate increase appreciably.

How come there is no “moment in time” where the number of cases indicates widespread community infection.

169709 ▶▶▶▶ Nobody2020, replying to Mayo, 2, #461 of 2087 🔗

So you’re suggesting the majority of infection happened in hospitals then.

170098 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Nobody2020, -1, #462 of 2087 🔗

A lot did in the early days but the increased positivity was mainly due to the fact they were testing a much higher proportion of clearly sick patients.

169699 ▶▶ mhcp, replying to Mayo, 3, #463 of 2087 🔗

You are forgetting that the measurement of Covid is fraught with uncertainties. So attribution errors abound. And the PCR test is being driven at high cycles so all you are seeing is noise.

Like from the start, if you can parse the actual data you’ll see that Covid-19 appears to be an acute disease for a very small subset of people

169703 ▶▶▶ steve_w, replying to mhcp, 4, #464 of 2087 🔗

It made me laugh when the MSM were grabbing their petticoats over the fact that Trump went for a drive in his motorcade. I don’t expect his driver and security were 90 year old diabetics recruited from a nursing home!

169717 ▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to mhcp, -1, #465 of 2087 🔗

Sorry – you’ll need to explain your point. I know all about PCR tests & cycle thresholds. I understand the issues involved.

Do we have large numbers of cases or not. If we don’t have high numbers does this mean the IFR is high?

Covid-19 appears to be an acute disease for a very small subset of people

No it doesn’t. It appears to be an infectious disease particularly for people who are in close contact with each other, e.g.

1/ Johnson, Hancock, Ferguson & Whitty.
2/ Trump & his wife & aide
3/ Cruise ships
4/ Close religious sect in South Korea

169732 ▶▶▶▶ matt, replying to Mayo, 7, #466 of 2087 🔗

Mayo, can you lay out what your actual position is, please? To date, your entire purpose seems to be to criticise absolutely any interpretation of data above the line in this blog, but I’ve never seen you actually give an analysis or an express an opinion of any substance beyond an attempted debunking of something someone else has said. Many here, myself included, may be insufficiently critical of an analysis that appears to support our thinking. Fine – granted that everyone has a tendency towards confirmation bias. What, in your opinion, should we be thinking, because I’m jiggered if I have the faintest idea what you think?

169756 ▶▶▶▶▶ Basics, replying to matt, #467 of 2087 🔗

Bit of a racy comment that matt. Thumbs up.

169763 ▶▶▶▶▶ Recusant, replying to matt, 4, #468 of 2087 🔗

In fairness, he doesn’t need a position. Someone who is sceptical of the sceptics is extremely valuable in preventing group think, which doesn’t just happen to other people.

169766 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ mhcp, replying to Recusant, 2, #469 of 2087 🔗

No, the problem with Mayo is that is that he is ignorant of the basics of Science. As in you need to make sure you are measuring the thing you say you are measuring before trying draw associations.

The figures bandied about about cases and IFR are all noise when you realise this.

169778 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ matt, replying to Recusant, 4, #470 of 2087 🔗

Richard Pinch comes here and challenges the group think when it comes to data and does it in a constructive (albeit condescending) way and I respect him for it. Mayo comes here and throws peanuts from the gallery without, it seems, actually having a point to make. If all he has to say is “that’s wrong, this is wrong, he’s stupid, she’s stupid” then I suppose he should feel free to say it, although I’d prefer he didn’t bother, but I shall feel free to ignore him.

170101 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to matt, -1, #471 of 2087 🔗

Here for you in simple terms

High Number of Cases = Low IFR
Low Number of Cases = High IFR

Which is it?

169755 ▶▶▶▶ mhcp, replying to Mayo, 6, #472 of 2087 🔗

If you don’t measure something properly then you sample noise and any artefacts and behaviours you see are the result of your sampling process and not the intrinsic behaviour of what you sample.

Saying that the disease appears to be infectious for people in close contact has not negated what I said. That Covid-19 appears to be an acute disease for a small subset of people.

The vast majority don’t know they have it, if they have it because attribution is so loose, and the protocols of testing (PCR) have very lax quality controls.

The argument for saying the IFR is 0.1% is actually a summary of the logic that population-wise this is at most the same as the flu. Of which we don’t go into mass panic.

It doesn’t matter if the IFR is 50% for the small amount of people who get Covid-19. The reality is that IFR is only of interest for modellers. The actual metric is:

How Many People Will Die If We All Get It?

And currently that looks to be no more than other respiratory conditions each year. Then add in that the deaths we have seen have high uncertainty in the cause due to the premise of how they are attributed. That the “gold standard” test of PCR is nothing like this.

And you have a magical mix of horseshit that any 1st year Physics student would spot a mile off.

But apparently you can’t

169764 ▶▶▶▶ mjr, replying to Mayo, 5, #473 of 2087 🔗

Cases? No we dont have a large number of cases. We might have a “large” number of tests that showed a “positive” result and a vastly larger number of tests carried out.

Has the proportion of “positives” gone up? we dont know.
How many “positives” are actual positives? We dont know
How many “positives” have symptoms? we dont know.
How many “positives” are sick. We dont know

Thousands of students are being tested. A large number are “positive” . none are ill, none have died (well not from covid…. but some from suicide/drugs)

After 6 months testing is still a farce and the statistics are still meaningless because only half the data is available

170126 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to mjr, -1, #474 of 2087 🔗

Right – so we don’t know how many cases there are or have been. So tell me this

How do we know what the IFR is?

169710 ▶▶ Mark, replying to Mayo, #475 of 2087 🔗

1/ IFR is low – around 0.1%
2/ The UK is close to herd immunity.
These are inconsistent with a position which claims that TRUE case numbers are low .”

Seems pretty easy to generate consistent scenarios to cover those postulates, if herd immunity is achieved at much lower levels than assumed by the panickers (and there seems reason to believe that is the case), and if you assume that the herd immunity threshold rises somewhat with the season (as you’d expect for a common cold-type virus). .

169734 ▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Mark, -1, #476 of 2087 🔗

Ha – that ‘if’ word. And what is the evidence for this much lower herd immunity? When over 5k members of a religious sect in South Korea contracted the virus was that because none of them just happened to belong to this wide subset of the population who were naturally immune?

Johnson, Hancock, Whitty & Ferguson. None of them belonged to the fortunate majority.

Trump nor his wife – nor his Aide – nor his Press Secretary nor several other members of WH staff got away with it.

Sorry, the clusters suggest natural immunity, if it exists, is limited to a small proportion.

169761 ▶▶▶▶ mhcp, replying to Mayo, #477 of 2087 🔗

How many died, Mayo? How many were attributed to Covid-19 that actually have a large degree of uncertainty about them?

It doesn’t matter if every one gets it if it is a nothing burger.

170105 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to mhcp, -2, #478 of 2087 🔗

Give it a rest.

All countries (not just UK) have recorded a significant number of Covid deaths.

It doesn’t matter if every one gets it if it is a nothing burger.

So why are you concerned about case numbers.

169790 ▶▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Mayo, 2, #479 of 2087 🔗

Could an extremely sensitive PCR test not be positive for someone whose natural immunity despatches the virus without (or with mild) symptoms?

170108 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Major Panic, -1, #480 of 2087 🔗

Yes – so what?

170199 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Mayo, #481 of 2087 🔗

”Trump nor his wife – nor his Aide – nor his Press Secretary nor several other members of WH staff got away with it.
Sorry, the clusters suggest natural immunity, if it exists, is limited to a small proportion.”

How many of these ‘cases’ tested positive though their t-cell or other immunity were dealing with c19 and they had little to no symptoms – you seemed to suggest that any who tested positive could not have been naturally immune – other than trump – how many had symptoms, they may all have already been immune

169806 ▶▶▶▶ Nobody2020, replying to Mayo, #482 of 2087 🔗

If everyone was equally susceptible then you wouldn’t expect to see clusters but a more even distribution.

Clustering or superspreading events would be expected in a population with some level of immunity within it.

170125 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Nobody2020, #483 of 2087 🔗

There is a lack of homogeneity due to geographical separation. That’s obvious. In fact that’s the theory behind lockdowns.

170279 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Nobody2020, replying to Mayo, #484 of 2087 🔗

Well if you say there’s only one explanation then it must be so.

169852 ▶▶▶▶ swedenborg, replying to Mayo, 1, #485 of 2087 🔗

The Korean cluster was a person who might have transmitted to 5000 memebers of the cult.But almost all of the them were asymptomatic.
And they might have had the infection but mildly because of this possibility


Recent endemic coronavirus infection is associated with less severe COVID-19

”Importantly, the patients with a previously detected eCoV had less severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) illness. Our observations suggest that pre-existing immune responses against endemic human coronaviruses can mitigate disease manifestations from SARS-CoV-2 infection.”

170118 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to swedenborg, #486 of 2087 🔗

Right so are you saying that an asymptomatic case should not be counted as a case?

If so you must agree that the IFR can only be calculated using SYMPTOMATIC cases.

170172 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ swedenborg, replying to Mayo, #487 of 2087 🔗

Never said that.IFR is calculated on all infected,whether symptomatic,mild or no symptoms.

170024 ▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to Mayo, #488 of 2087 🔗

that ‘if’ word .”

“If” is all that is needed to refute your claim of internal inconsistency.

And what is the evidence for this much lower herd immunity?”

Most plausible explanation so far proposed for why the epidemics have been self limiting in so many countries. Particularly as there are plausible and increasingly supported mechanisms (pre-existing resistance, non-homogenous spreading) to explain it.

Easier to explain a small number of overshoots than believe that ramshackle and hugely varied government efforts at suppression had such widely similar results.

170110 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Mark, -1, #489 of 2087 🔗

Most plausible explanation so far proposed for why the epidemics have been self limiting in so many countries.

Seasonality is a more than plausible explanation.

170437 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to Mayo, #490 of 2087 🔗

But seasonality is at root just herd immunity. The season changes, herd immunity threshold changes to reflect different context/conditions/behaviour (whatever it is), infections rise/fall appropriately.

169729 ▶▶ Recusant, replying to Mayo, #491 of 2087 🔗

The UK has a lot of people in it. It is possible for some areas of the country (eg London) to be closer to herd immunity than others (eg the North West) because of the numbers who caught covid in the spring. Which is what we are seeing now – hospitalisations increasing in Liverpool, but not in London.

169742 ▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Recusant, #492 of 2087 🔗

Yes I know. That’s exactly why talk of ‘peaks’ is misleading. We might just be seeing local ‘peaks’. Sweden may only have had a peak in Stockholm.

169760 ▶▶▶▶ Recusant, replying to Mayo, 1, #493 of 2087 🔗

Given the population density outside of Stockholm, that could well be the only peak Sweden ever has.

170113 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Recusant, -1, #494 of 2087 🔗

Yep – but we can’t be certain.

That’s not the case in the UK though.

171194 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ BJJ, replying to Mayo, #495 of 2087 🔗

Why worry about cases? Tests?

169648 Tim Bidie, replying to Tim Bidie, 6, #496 of 2087 🔗

President Trump back in the White House

Ian Botham in the House of Lords.

It’s all starting to come together…….

169651 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to Tim Bidie, 3, #497 of 2087 🔗

Mention of Ian Botham takes me back to the Headingley test match in 1981.

Australian players laying money on England to win at odds of 500-1 after following on. Cue the great man’s 149 not out and a miraculous victory.

169661 ▶▶▶ stefarm, replying to Richard O, 3, #498 of 2087 🔗

Ian Botham is my hero, still brings a tear to my eye when I watch it.

169664 ▶▶▶ NorthumbrianNomad, replying to Richard O, 2, #499 of 2087 🔗

I was there, although I was too small to see over the seat in front. Don’t forget Graham Dilley, who made 50 at the other end I think – and Bob Willis, who took 8 wickets for spit to win the match

169695 ▶▶▶▶ Tim Bidie, replying to NorthumbrianNomad, #500 of 2087 🔗

Legends all!

Botham to hit covid quaking for six!

169739 ▶▶▶▶ Nic, replying to NorthumbrianNomad, 1, #501 of 2087 🔗

Agree ,they opend the bowling as well and unfortunately wev lost them both , different era real men

169653 James Leary #KBF, replying to James Leary #KBF, 20, #502 of 2087 🔗

My grandson was sent home from kindergarten with a cough last week. Can’t go back till tested. Whole family isolated including my SIL who is in the police (serious crime, so unlikely to be beaten up by him in Trafalgar Square) No symptoms then or since amongst any of them. Tested next day. Nothing. No results three days later. Probably fell off the edge of a spreadsheet. Our lives and livelihoods are in these moron’s hands. How much longer will we be able to resist storming the citadel?

169672 ▶▶ p02099003, replying to James Leary #KBF, 1, #503 of 2087 🔗

can a preschooler be tested?

169800 ▶▶▶ Janice21, replying to p02099003, 1, #504 of 2087 🔗

Yes, various of my friends have had their little ones tested.

169985 ▶▶▶ Victoria, replying to p02099003, 1, #505 of 2087 🔗

Good question. Not recommended for small children as they can get injured when ‘thing’ stabbed into their noses

169665 Mark Tinker, replying to Mark Tinker, 6, #506 of 2087 🔗

Four young people died of drugs…that is the same as the total number of under 19 year olds (with no co-morbidities) who have died with Covid.

169791 ▶▶ RickH, replying to Mark Tinker, 2, #507 of 2087 🔗

I think that’s the important point, rather than trying to link what we don’t know directly to Covid.

Important to keep a sense of the factual if we are to combat the fiction of the official narrative.

169668 AnotherSceptic, replying to AnotherSceptic, 36, #508 of 2087 🔗

Well, in Scotland the dictatorship, this is more than likely going to happen.
It is absolutely outrageous & the best of it is, the majority of the sheeple will just accept it. This time though, there will be no closing of schools, but there will be restrictions on travel etc.

I am seriously considering leaving this earth now, I am a big Sceptic, but, there appears to be no end to this.
It will impact me as my partner stays about 30 minutes away from me & she is worried about me going to her house & her neighbours grassing her in to the police because I am at hers (I have been going to hers regardless of this stupid rule of not visiting any other households) but, the travel restrictions & the loss of liberty is starting to grind me down now.

When are the majority of people going to make a stand on this? It seems that we on here are the minority, people are just going to do what that little dictator sturgeon says.

I cannot go on like this for much longer, I am genuinely suffering now, it seems like this nonsense is never going to end.


Fuck you Sturgeon, Fuck you Boris. You utter utter scummy cunts.

169674 ▶▶ jb12, replying to AnotherSceptic, 13, #509 of 2087 🔗

I am sorry to read this. It might help you to know that if you or your partner live alone, you can claim some extended household bullshit, so that it is ‘legal’ for you to meet her. I am all for telling the police, the neighbours and whoever else to ‘fuck off’, but it might make her feel better to know that you aren’t breaking any law. As to the rest, I feel you. I just wish people would see Stalin for what she is, but Scottish people as a whole lack any sort of vision or insight at all.

169677 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to AnotherSceptic, 12, #510 of 2087 🔗

Everyone is sick and tired of this. I won’t bother with empty platitudes of encouragement, we are beyond that here.

Despite what people may say in public, I simply cannot accept that there won’t be more questioning of a second lockdown this time around. Especially with much weaker medical data to support it and steadily growing media scepticism. The harder and faster the state pushes, the more precarious their position becomes.

169680 ▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to AnotherSceptic, 13, #511 of 2087 🔗

Print out a stack of these posters and hand them out in the town centre. You’ll probably get spat on, but at least you’ll go down fighting.

169748 ▶▶▶ kf99, replying to Mabel Cow, 4, #512 of 2087 🔗

Can I suggest for the main slogan ‘Get a life / Bin the masks / End the lockdown’

just to broaden it slightly. (Maybe even ‘Trash the masks’)

169771 ▶▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to kf99, 3, #513 of 2087 🔗

Oooo, I like. I’m on it.

169833 ▶▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to kf99, 9, #514 of 2087 🔗

Do you think this works better?

I dropped the hashtag in favour of a Remembrance-themed call to action.

Switching from Bin to Trash makes the poster more internationally acceptable: good shout.

If people like this version, I’ll post it on my website.

169850 ▶▶▶▶▶ Thomas_E, replying to Mabel Cow, 4, #515 of 2087 🔗

Best one yet

169872 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to Mabel Cow, 3, #516 of 2087 🔗

The above is now the official version of the poster.

170323 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ wat tyler, replying to Mabel Cow, 3, #517 of 2087 🔗

Can you make stickers and somewhere here to buy them ?

170549 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ James Bertram, replying to Mabel Cow, 1, #518 of 2087 🔗

Mabel – best if you put in small print, at the bottom, your website address?
Stickers would be brilliant too.
Too, a method of us purchasing from you? (Two-Six can best explain?)

170876 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to James Bertram, 1, #519 of 2087 🔗

Bertram, @wat tyler: Probably best if we move this over to the Posters and t-shirts topic in the General Discussion section of the forum. I’d like to discuss stickers and stuff propertly, and the sands of time are running out for today’s comments.

171123 ▶▶▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to Mabel Cow, 1, #520 of 2087 🔗

Perfect in the run up to 11 November!

169759 ▶▶▶ Stephanos, replying to Mabel Cow, 4, #521 of 2087 🔗

This would be a good poster for 11th November. We need to plaster it around the churches, the town. T-shirts would be good.
Also, send a copy to those MPs (like mine) who voted with government last week. The honourable 24 need something different.

169722 ▶▶ stefarm, replying to AnotherSceptic, 4, #522 of 2087 🔗

Share your pain, absolute tyranny in sturgeonstan, my neighbour is a taxi driver and is averaging 1 job an hour, he has had enough.

I’m seriously considering a leaflet drop, has to be the only way, or as someone mentioned co-ordinated small team demonstrations handing out leaflets.

169724 ▶▶ annie, replying to AnotherSceptic, 8, #523 of 2087 🔗

Stay with us, defy the buggers, keep strong, never lose hope.We need you!

169803 ▶▶ Janice21, replying to AnotherSceptic, 6, #524 of 2087 🔗

I really feel for you, I think Sturgeon is the worst of them all and Scotland most draconian.

170031 ▶▶ Nick Rose, replying to AnotherSceptic, 4, #525 of 2087 🔗

I don’t think people are going to be as accepting as in March. More importantly, neither are the Press.

169692 ▶▶ Mark, replying to Sarigan, 1, #527 of 2087 🔗

And CEBM are tracking “cases” here (updated yesterday I believe):

Tracking UK Covid-19 cases

169714 ▶▶ steve_w, replying to Sarigan, 1, #528 of 2087 🔗

all cause mortality normal
deaths ‘from’ covid miniscule and far below colds

169757 ▶▶ RickH, replying to Sarigan, 1, #529 of 2087 🔗

All-cause mortality is tracking completely in line with previous years. The false uptick from the bank holiday has flattened (the ‘new exponential’) has flattened – as expected.

Ooooo – it must be the lock-up and masks keeping it under control!

169775 ▶▶▶ RickH, replying to RickH, 1, #530 of 2087 🔗

… and in terms of the last quarter century, is close to the minimum level!

169688 Bugle, replying to Bugle, 9, #531 of 2087 🔗

Toby, you say you’ve had your reservations about Trump in the past. I have been following Trump’s progress since his campaign in 2015. I’ve never had any doubts that here was a great leader, infinitely preferable to the corrupt Dems, and have no doubts now that Trump is the anchor of freedom in the West. Show me any western leader to match him, least of all our own. I’ve unsubscribed from the feeble Spectator, so I won’t be able to read your forthcoming pro-Trump piece.

I’ve also never had any doubt from the beginning that the reaction to Covid-19 was a hoax. Your efforts on this have been heroic and appreciated.

169702 ▶▶ RickH, replying to Bugle, -7, #532 of 2087 🔗

Trump a ‘great leader’.

At least I had one good laugh this morning as the serial bankrupt and crap businessman received that accolade!

169726 ▶▶▶ Londo Mollari, replying to RickH, 6, #533 of 2087 🔗

But he hasn’t started any new wars – unlike Obama and HRC.

169904 ▶▶▶▶ James Bertram, replying to Londo Mollari, 5, #534 of 2087 🔗

Very effective handling of North Korea – unlike other appeaser presidents.

169861 ▶▶▶ Biker, replying to RickH, 4, #535 of 2087 🔗

Trump has the backing of 80 million Americans and will win a landslide second election. You might not like that but in a poll of what counts as a good leader getting all them people to support you is pretty good. Off course you’re a lefty and have very little understanding of life and instead choose to live inside a lefty utopian bubble where we can all live like kings if only we do as you say never once stoping to ask yourself what would give you the right to think for one fucking second a twat like you should have any say over what i do, in any way, shape, form whatsoever.
You don’t know but each and every post by a lefty like you makes a Butterfly live a day longer.

169882 ▶▶▶▶ RickH, replying to Biker, -1, #536 of 2087 🔗

Trump has the backing of 80 million Americans”

A bit like the popularity of foetid masks,.

He is a documented spoiled over-privileged baby idiot. Stopped clocks get things right by accident.

170796 ▶▶▶▶▶ Nigel Sherratt, replying to RickH, #537 of 2087 🔗

Now do Biden

170921 ▶▶▶▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to RickH, #538 of 2087 🔗

That leaves about 170 million adult Americans who don’t back him. Have fun downvoting an American for pointing that out.

170920 ▶▶▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to Biker, #539 of 2087 🔗

Biker, you may not wander back this far in the comments, but there are 250 million adult Americans, so 80 million is peanuts. But it’s that old undemocratic institution, the Electoral College, that actually decides who becomes President of the United States. Except when the Supreme Court does, as in 2000.

169715 ▶▶ Recusant, replying to Bugle, 4, #540 of 2087 🔗

If he were a great leader he would be able to persuade people who don’t like him to change sides and follow him. Ronald Reagan did that. Tony Blair did that. They are great leaders. Trump is too disordered in his character to bring order to his country, so I can’t support him.

But he is correct about Covid. His instincts have been correct right from the start.

169788 ▶▶▶ mjr, replying to Recusant, 7, #541 of 2087 🔗

Tony Blair?? as the saying goes you can fool some of the people all the time and all of the people some of the time etc… eventually everyone realised what a lying b’stard he was. A great leader? dont make me laugh

169814 ▶▶▶ Harry hopkins, replying to Recusant, 6, #542 of 2087 🔗

Unfortunately, you have fallen into the trap of believing that ‘actors’ and those schooled in spin and PR make great leaders. This is a modern phenomenon probably started with JFK.
‘Great leaders’ are (or certainly should be) judged by their actions and not their performance before the media. Your ‘great leader’ (Blair) is a war criminal and a mass murderer.
Your criteria for judging ‘leadership’ needs a serious re think.

169824 ▶▶▶▶ Ewan Duffy, replying to Harry hopkins, 2, #543 of 2087 🔗

Even his signature success – the NI peace process – was Blair turning up at the last minute and claiming credit for all of the years of work that had been done beforehand. In fact, if Major had not been reliant on Ulster Unionist support in the final period of his government, it is possible that what became known as the Good Friday Agreement could have occurred on his watch.

169905 ▶▶▶▶ Recusant, replying to Harry hopkins, 1, #544 of 2087 🔗

There is only one criteria for being a great leader, and that is if people follow. Blair persuaded the electorate to vote for a Labour government in 1997, and then twice more. In fact he is the only Labour leader to have won a majority at a general election in my lifetime, and I am not young any more. Furthermore, when he wanted to go to war he lead his party, and the opposition, into following him. I make no judgement as to his morality, his effectiveness or his achievements, as they are irrelevant to leadership. That fact is that where he lead, people followed. Where Trump leads, they do not. So Blair is a great leader and Trump is not, even though Trump is correct about more things than Blair.

169965 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to Recusant, 2, #545 of 2087 🔗

That’s one way of defining “great leader”, but it does have the drawback that it would include the likes of Hitler, Mussolini, Castro, Mao, Napoleon, who were all enthusiastically followed while they were winning.

But I’m not sure you can even honestly say what you say about Trump. He won election with the votes of 63 million Americans, many of whom he won over from being quite opposed to his candidacy, in the teeth of the massive anti-conservative mainstream and social media machine. It remains to be seen if he can win again, and if he does it will be a genuinely great achievement.

For sure he’s a “divisive figure”, but that’s mostly because he’s a conservative (of sorts) and therefore irredeemably hated by the media consensus.

I’m ambivalent about Trump personally, but the jury is still out on greatness, by your own definition.

170929 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to Mark, #546 of 2087 🔗

And his opponent got 65 million votes. I understand this is not an American site, but you should know that the Electoral College decides our presidential elections, not the popular vote.

171638 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to ConstantBees, #547 of 2087 🔗

I understand that perfectly, having followed US politics closely for decades. And I also understand that it’s irrelevant. The same thing can happen in any constituency based system, including our own.

170149 ▶▶▶▶▶ Kevin 2, replying to Recusant, 2, #548 of 2087 🔗

If you lead people to disaster, you are not a great leader.
Blair was a disaster, and now has joined the evil elite.
Trump is simply less of a threat to the world compared to the Dems (never thought I would say that..).

169693 Caramel, 2, #549 of 2087 🔗

New Plan B webinars. They’re a group from NZ.

169700 RickH, replying to RickH, 11, #550 of 2087 🔗

Unlike Bartleby, I can’t feel any real sense of a turning tide.

The big distraction of Trump heads this update. We have a big enough two-headed mess in UK politics without spending too much time comtemplating the trans-Atlantic double-header of electoral ordure, even if there are some parallels.

Then there’s the syndrome of ‘be grateful for small mercies’:

“there’s a possibility that a sufficient number of Conservative MPs, as well as the Parliamentary Labour Party, will vote against the renewal of the 10pm curfew”

Well – big deal! So there might be a muster of MPs to overturn one totally ridiculous, but minor measure – as a token to show that the children are still awake.

But probably not the equally invasive and stupid ‘rule of six’.

The basic framework stays in place, with the major issue of the moment – PCR testing – staying in place as a raddled justification for policy.

Yes – I know – I may be pessimistic, but seeing last week’s vote and reading John Ashworth’s retelling of fables in the Commons yesterday, how could I not be at the miniscule level of opposition?

Then, even the generally praiseworthy and welcome initiative of the ‘Great Barrington Declaration’ is compromised by intimating that the infection is serious enough to recommend that the ‘vulnerable’ at home should meet their families ‘outside’ and have grocery deliveries, rather than just making the same sort of risk judgments as they always have done (given, particularly, that other potential respiratory diseases are actually more of a current threat).

This may sound like looking gift horses in the mouth : but I’ve been around politics too long not to know the old ploy of making minor concessions in order to make the fundamentally egregious acceptable.

169713 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to RickH, 5, #551 of 2087 🔗

The Overton window has shifted further than ever in 2020, driven in the UK by the demons at the Behavioural Insights Team.

I am not ashamed to be a complete outcast, and accept that in all probability this will be my social status for the rest of my life. Which may not be long at the current rate our so-called society is descending.

169822 ▶▶ Mark, replying to RickH, 7, #552 of 2087 🔗

I think you are overly pessimistic here, though in truth it’s hard to criticise anybody for that at the moment.

On the specific points you raise, I’d say that parliamentary resistance takes time to build, and we were unlucky in this nonsense arising at the very beginning of a new government that had just won a solid majority. For that to have dissolved into the level of grumbling it already has, in less than a year, with no meaningful pressure from the supposed opposition, is actually pretty remarkable. It has further to go, for sure, but at least there is clear movement in the right direction.

Second, regarding the Great Barrington declaration, I think you are being overly critical. The key to this aspect of the declaration is in the final paragraph, wherein it clearly states that shielding of the vulnerable is to be voluntary:

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish , while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity .

I’m sure we would all like to tighten up the wording in various areas, but imo it’s as good as we are likely to get and still have a chance at mainstream tolerance. No mention of masks is a major bonus, for me.

I think this initiative is vitally important, and our best hope yet for breaking through to the mainstream. Those putting it forward are as close to bulletproof as it is possible to be, in this time of intolerance of dissent – eminent experts in relevant fields, at top institutions (Oxford, Stanford, Harvard), and broadly lefties (Gupta and Kulldorff for certain, don’t know about Bhattacharya), so they cannot be written off as “uncaring right wingers”, as our mainstream and social media have been wont to do.

169875 ▶▶▶ RickH, replying to Mark, 2, #553 of 2087 🔗

On the ‘Declaration’ :

it clearly states that shielding of the vulnerable is to be voluntary:”

I wasn’t suggesting that they were recommending compulsion – only that in this recommendation they are falling into the trap of reinforcing the ‘unprecedented’ narrative.

169937 ▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to RickH, 1, #554 of 2087 🔗

Yes, but in this I feel you are indeed being over critical. “Looking a gift horse in the mouth”, as you yourself put it.

169718 Harry hopkins, replying to Harry hopkins, 16, #555 of 2087 🔗

He is risen.

Of course he is risen! There was never any doubt about it. I’ve never been one to crow but my post of two days ago was spot on:


Trump has played his cards well and is now positioned to appeal to the very many millions who see through this whole Covid scamdemic. With Scot Atlas by his side and his *full recovery* he is in a position to wipe the floor with Biden and to inject some common sense into the world.
I never thought I would say this a year ago but I now see Donald Trump as the spear point of restoring freedom to a world endangered by vested interests/ Fascism/costly and dangerous vaccinations and those who would subjugate the world to their unholy ambitions

169735 ▶▶ Nobody2020, replying to Harry hopkins, 7, #556 of 2087 🔗

Simply put if the election is about how to deal with the virus, people are being given a choice between being told how to live in every aspect of their lives (Biden) or to have more responsibility in how they choose to conduct their lives with limited controls (Trump).

I’m not a Trump supporter but on the fundamental issues of how the world has approached this pandemic my thoughts are more aligned with him on this. I see people in power deciding that it’s ok for everyone to suffer and for some to even die because they believe their cause is just.

This to me is a far greater danger to humanity than any virus.

170912 ▶▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to Nobody2020, #557 of 2087 🔗

As an American voter, I have to agree with you. I’m sitting out the election this year. Can’t vote for Biden. Not about to vote for Trump.

169723 AidanR, replying to AidanR, 7, #558 of 2087 🔗

Ladies and gentlemen,

We are through the looking glass, out the other side and looping around for a second pass.


169728 ▶▶ Cicatriz, replying to AidanR, 1, #559 of 2087 🔗

Is that the Real Donald Tusk?

This really is bizzarro world now.

169736 ▶▶▶ calchas, replying to Cicatriz, #560 of 2087 🔗

He is referring to Donald Trump in that remark.

Look at his Twitter

169741 ▶▶▶▶ Cicatriz, replying to calchas, #561 of 2087 🔗

Ah, I see. I try and avoid twitter.

169744 ▶▶ Basics, replying to AidanR, #562 of 2087 🔗

Did I just hear that mariana BBC Disinformation Unit spring have a little hissy outburst?

Busy day in the home study for some.

169810 ▶▶ Ewan Duffy, replying to AidanR, #563 of 2087 🔗

Could have described any EU official with that tweet.

169825 ▶▶ OKUK, replying to AidanR, #564 of 2087 🔗

A fake Pole spreading fake news.

169863 ▶▶ Mark, replying to AidanR, 2, #565 of 2087 🔗

Cynical powerful people spreading lies

And one of the very first people I’d drop right into that category is Donald Tusk. He’s an arsehole of the first water.

169878 ▶▶ Nobody2020, replying to AidanR, #566 of 2087 🔗

Something doesn’t add up. Trump is constantly being accused of not doing enough and now he’s dominating people’s lives?

169733 Basics, 2, #567 of 2087 🔗

Richie Allen Show last nights media analysis – focuses on Ireland’s lockdown for the first few moments, then goes into a longer look at krankies alarmism yesterday and the ‘cabinet’ meeting this morning – Scotlands looming house arrest.

Then follows a BBC 1 knockout punch delivered yesterday morning by a scientist in a live interview talks out about the ineffectiveness of PCR testing, or in other words the fraud of the thing. Good listening.

They rest of the monolgue is an unknown mystery to me…

Click the link, it’s radio, listen while you work – https://youtu.be/YI673IEPbxU

169740 StevieH, replying to StevieH, 27, #568 of 2087 🔗

Just got back from the surgery after having some blood taken for tests. Got talking to the phlebotomist about the current madness. She told me that it’s no longer about a virus – it’s about control! (and masks are useless).

169754 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to StevieH, 6, #569 of 2087 🔗

Encouraging coming from within the NHS, but would she be willing to give a sworn statement to this effect I wonder? Or has she been cowed into silence by the NHS bureaucrats?

169939 ▶▶ annie, replying to StevieH, 2, #570 of 2087 🔗

That’s one undeceived, at least.

169745 Chicot, replying to Chicot, 5, #571 of 2087 🔗

Another day, yet another BBC scare-mongering article on the horrors of Long Covid. I think they have to have at least one per week.


169780 ▶▶ Adam, replying to Chicot, 7, #572 of 2087 🔗

I am seeing more and more such articles. My theory is that because deaths are still flat-lining, the media now has to dream up something else to whip up panic about, so they are making a bigger deal about this long covid silliness.

169794 ▶▶▶ mhcp, replying to Adam, 3, #573 of 2087 🔗

Yep. Also no context. It happens with other viral infections, just not in large enough numbers to talk about. But if you shine a spotlight on it…

169983 ▶▶▶ Chicot, replying to Adam, 1, #574 of 2087 🔗

Yes, they are getting desperate. They had this yesterday (with the obligatory photo of an attractive young woman):


So we are supposed to lock down the whole world because some people have a (probably temporary) loss of smell/taste ?!

170182 ▶▶ BeBopRockSteady, replying to Chicot, 1, #575 of 2087 🔗

Anyone who mentions long Covid in a lockdown debate should be ht with “not an argument for Lockdown, end of”. Its not even in the realms of what is important in this debate

169750 Smelly Melly, 6, #576 of 2087 🔗

Apparently a hospital in Surrey has been put into lockdown because of the “killer” virus. What are the Nightingale hospitals for?

169751 Jay Berger, 3, #577 of 2087 🔗

Everyone should know by now some undisputed facts about the PCR tests and come to following conclusions:
-the virus has not been isolated correctly.
-the PCR method has not been invented for diagnostic purposes but for replication.
-a PCR test does not tell one that the tested person is sick.
-false positive test results could make up all or the vast majority of the positive test results during periods of low prevalence, like now.
-the tests are neither standardized nor certified. Their sale and application would in any other situation be highly illegal. Comparisons, particularly internationally, are therefore alone basically impossible, wrong and irrelevant.
-most tests and labs only search for and replicate only one DNA fragment of the virus, instead of for 2 or 3 as would be appropriate. Simplified, that’s why e.g. butchers show up as positive.
-most tests omit the necessary confirmation phase after the search phase.
-most importantly, there must be just one fixed number of permitted ct cycles for any test (not a maxum.or a a range) to render them at least halfway correct, useable and comparable at all.
As long as that number is not determined and mandated, papayas can and will shop up as positives, and they are basically just a, very successful and expensive, fraud.

169752 dhpaul, replying to dhpaul, 9, #578 of 2087 🔗

Yesterday, as is my usual habit when not out, I watched a bit of Bargain Hunt on TV whilst having lunch. It was obvious that the episode shown had been filmed recently, as the participants were leaping out of each others way whilst attempting to look at potential purchases from a distance. But what really pissed me off was seeing the actual auction without the participants who watched it remotely because of “restrictions”, those attending the auction were only shown from behind, because they were all muzzled! Obviously not a good look for a popular TV show to promote. Interesting that the auctioneer didn’t wear a muzzle. The whole thing just looked a bit artificial and joyless.

169765 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to dhpaul, 13, #579 of 2087 🔗

The whole thing just looked a bit artificial and joyless.

Exactly like our whole society at present. I need to stop using the word “society” actually, because this is the one thing it is not.

169834 ▶▶▶ Thomas_E, replying to Richard O, 3, #580 of 2087 🔗

”The whole thing just looked a bit artificial and joyless.
This is the whole society right now..

169796 ▶▶ Two-Six, replying to dhpaul, 6, #581 of 2087 🔗

Total mind-fuckery. The BBC are evil.

169885 ▶▶ Gtec, replying to dhpaul, 3, #582 of 2087 🔗

I started to watch a live classical concert performance on TV a short while ago, but turned it off very quickly as it not only looked but sounded odd, with all the performers, including some singers, all separated from each other like mannequin dummies in a shop window.

Apart from not looking normal in any respect – their was no audience either – it didn’t sound quite right to me; the violin section was spread across nearly half the stage, so the sound was not exactly ‘balanced’ to my ear, but maybe that’s just me!

What was even more appalling was watching a delayed Summer Concert broadcast live from Vienna, by the Vienna Philharmonic on BBC4 at the weekend, which looked pretty normal, although we were informed – I don’t know why we needed to know – that the numbers had been restricted this year.

The most annoying and upsetting thing was that in trying to enjoy some light-heated classical music in what looked like pretty normal surroundings – which allowed you to forget for a while that the chances of you ever going to Vienna to hear it in person were diminishing by the day! – was the frequent references by the commentator about mask wearing rules for the audience!

Then zooming in on mask wearers, of which there were very, very, few, regardless of the ‘advice’ they had been given. The BBC just couldn’t let the bloody death porn alone even during a live classical concert from another country.

They absolutely spoilt the broadcast which, I had stumbled across and was rather enjoying until the shrill reminders about wearing masks, outside, at an open air concert, in another country. It’s now all I remember of the the concert, not the music. I was going to complain, but as it would have been an exercise in futility, I didn’t bother.

Will stick to watching old movies on Talking Pictures TV instead; they show some really good gems from the past – worth a look if you like films from the 1940s to the 70s, together with some other intriguing items as well.

169910 ▶▶▶ maggie may, replying to Gtec, 1, #583 of 2087 🔗

So what i find weird is watching some rugby yesterday, no masks, nor are footballers wearing masks. So if that’s all okay, what on earth is the point of making concert goers wear masks? Especially when outside. And i have been fortunate enough to go to the Schoenbrunn, i hope you get a chance to go one day. Keep the faith!

169925 ▶▶▶▶ Gtec, replying to maggie may, #584 of 2087 🔗

Thank you, I will!

169767 chaos, 7, #585 of 2087 🔗

and eyes and ears and windfarms for Carrie, heads, Davos, chins and nose, wind and blows…

169770 Awkward Git, replying to Awkward Git, 14, #586 of 2087 🔗

Below an abridged modified version of my FOI request to DHSC sent yesterday that this morning I sent to the 5 local councils in my area:

So basically as admitted by the DHSC answer Reference FOI-1240596 you are using tests that are “unreliable” to say the least, have no reference standard to double check the accuracy against and that have results that means nothing medically.

PCR tests are also, as admitted by their inventors, not a diagnostic tool nor test and should not be used as such in any circumstances.

My questions are:

1 – based on the above statements how can a positive PCR tests be termed as a “case” medically?

2 – based on the above statements how can positive PCR tests be used as a justification for local lockdowns and other general restrictions?

3 – based on the above statements how can positive PCR tests be used as a justification for enforced self-isolation of individuals tested “positive”?

4 – based on the above statements how can positive PCR tests be used as a justification for enforced self-isolation of those who have been in “close contact” with an individual who tested “positive”?

5 – based on the above statements how can positive PCR tests be used as a justification for closing down or fining a business when customers have been tested “positive”?

6 – please supply the official document(s) and guidance (not the legislation but the supporting documentation) that DHSC has supplied to local Councils that justify local lockdowns, business closures and isolation of segments of the population based on an unreliable test that does not mean the person is infected with anything, that has high false positive rates and no independent verification the results are correct?

7 – please supply the official document(s) and guidance that DHSC has supplied to local Councils that allow the PCR tests to be used as a diagnostic tool/test that is outwith it’s intended use by it’s inventors.

Will post any answers when they get round to giving me one.

170178 ▶▶ BeBopRockSteady, replying to Awkward Git, 1, #587 of 2087 🔗

This is excellent

169773 TJN, replying to TJN, 18, #588 of 2087 🔗

Regarding the instruction/request by some schools for parents to wear masks when dropping off and picking up their chidren from school. This has been discussed on here a few times (most recently I think by Country Mumkin a few days ago).

I wrote to UsForThem about this, and they replied that ‘this is a worrying trend and we’re seeing it in a number of schools around the country’. They confirmed that there is no legal basis for this requirement, which is thus only a request, and enclosed the Public Health England briefing to headmasters answering the following question:

Due to [sic] a lack of adherence to repeated requests for people to keep their distance whilst dropping off and picking up their children, we have asked adults to wear masks on school property. Would we be within our rights to refuse admission to the playground if someone refuses to wear a mask?

PHE answer (my emphasis ):

The government has set out some venues where face coverings are required by law, such as on public transport. School guidance states that head teachers have the right to request visitors wear face coverings when in indoor areas such as corridors where social distancing is more difficult. Government guidance also states that some people are exempt from wearing face coverings, such as those who cannot put on, wear or remove a face covering because of a physical or mental illness or impairment, or disability.
Thus, although you may wish to encourage people to wear face coverings whilst in the school playground, it cannot be legally enforced. In addition we recommend that schools continue to promote social distancing amongst parents at drop off/pick up times in their communication with parents and also by reviewing the plans they have in place, such as one-way systems at entry/exit points and signage.

So it is clear: there is no legal obligation to wear masks when dropping children off at school, and the headmasters know this.

I hope Country Mumkin sees this post, and anyone else who is concerned.

169787 ▶▶ Stringfellow Hawke, replying to TJN, 9, #589 of 2087 🔗

In my local news recently – not featured prominently but shoved down the bottom of a ‘masks outside school story’ – at least two occasions, attempted abductions of school children just yards from the school gates during the day… thankfully unsuccessful. They’re on the case though; Police have got descriptions of 2 suspects seen in a van: they’re guys with big black masks on their faces.

169793 ▶▶▶ Tenchy, replying to Stringfellow Hawke, 5, #590 of 2087 🔗

Masks for parents outside school – what could possibly go wrong!

169815 ▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Stringfellow Hawke, #591 of 2087 🔗

Whereabouts has that happened? Scary stuff.

169819 ▶▶▶▶ Stringfellow Hawke, replying to TJN, #592 of 2087 🔗

Kent news (incidents reported around greater London area)

169938 ▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Stringfellow Hawke, #593 of 2087 🔗

Thanks – it’s always useful to know where these sorts of things are going on.

169813 ▶▶ Jonathan Palmer, replying to TJN, 6, #594 of 2087 🔗

No legal requirement for children to wear them in school either except in areas with special measures.
It’s amazing how many of our fellow citizens love the opportunity to boss other people around

169936 ▶▶▶ Country Mumkin, replying to Jonathan Palmer, 3, #595 of 2087 🔗

Absolutely. The little hitlers are loving it!

169933 ▶▶ Country Mumkin, replying to TJN, 2, #596 of 2087 🔗

Thank you. Read with gratitude.

That’s great you contacted “us for them”. I also heard similar from them about it being a worrying trend.

Good that it is not legally enforceable and that has been made clear.

The mask wearing has abated a bit at my daughters school, so it’s about 50:50 at the moment.

I’m pushing back on these things in a non-confrontational way and will continue to do so.

Had an idea re the NHS. That will follow in next hour or so, I will post on the comments

Thank you


169941 ▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Country Mumkin, 1, #597 of 2087 🔗


More like 99:1 here, with me being the 1.

169964 ▶▶▶▶ Country Mumkin, replying to TJN, 1, #598 of 2087 🔗

Oh no, I’m sorry to hear that. It’s awful.

Why do you feel people are doing it? Just because they’ve been asked? Genuinely worried about the “virus”? To not feel socially shamed? To “protect others”?

One of my ideas locally (in my village) is to do a survey and find out how people really feel. Not try to change their minds, just understand.

Then ask them if they’d like a copy of the report afterwards. That being the opportunity to open minds and challenge falsely held beliefs with a few facts.

169998 ▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Country Mumkin, 1, #599 of 2087 🔗

We’re in a village too. I’m sure most people do it because they are asked and feel socially pressurised.

Several of us drop off our little ones at the school, all masked bar me, and then go on to the nursery where they drop off their littler ones, unmasked. The conclusion is obvious.

170136 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Country Mumkin, replying to TJN, 1, #600 of 2087 🔗

That’s an amazing observation. I think you probably need to have a chat with them. Or if you don’t want to do that, do a survey to see how they feel about mask wearing. Ask the questions. No judgement with the response. The dissonance in them, once articulated, may help to change behaviour.

170312 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Country Mumkin, #601 of 2087 🔗

I’m talking gently with people who I think are receptive. But a side effect of the muzzles is that is makes it much harder to strike up a conversation with someone you don’t already know, and as I’m with all the other new-starter parents I don’t know many of them.

Hard going!

169776 chaos, replying to chaos, 23, #602 of 2087 🔗

Davos found the perfect patsy. Boris, stunted arrested development (hence a girlfriend half his age and inability to be faithful).. he’s going to save the world. With wind farms. Lockdown was never about covid. Covid was just siezed upon for the great reset.. impossible now to deny. Why would you build bicycle lanes during a pandemic? Why would you announce now, amongst the carnage, massive windfarm expansion? The future is kinda green. Say goodbye to the foreign holidays folks. And the gas boilers and ICE engines. The conservative government is finally going to conserve something.. energy.. and our movement.

169779 ▶▶ Two-Six, replying to chaos, 1, #603 of 2087 🔗

Conspiracy theorist, it’s just about The Virus.

169786 ▶▶▶ chaos, replying to Two-Six, 1, #604 of 2087 🔗

he he ha ha I watch television he he ha ha durr durrr BBC he he durrr strictly come dancing durr he he durrr

169829 ▶▶▶ Biker, replying to Two-Six, 8, #605 of 2087 🔗

As much as Chaos chooses to act like a dick (hey Boorishness is as good as any persona) , he’s not wrong on their plans to get rid of your gas boiler and your internal combustion engine. They know we can’t keep reprocessing our atmosphere like we do any more. The plan has already been spelt out in their green agenda. You might have missed it. They say no new ICE’s from 2035 and they mean it. The consumer society is over. Be thankful you’re in Britain because some places on this earth are going back to 17th century levels of Humans. It’s gonna be grim. Not as bad for us but still a massive change gotta come.

169839 ▶▶▶▶ Two-Six, replying to Biker, 2, #606 of 2087 🔗

It will be fine, we can learn to cook on a candle. It’s not that different from using a slow cooker. Cycling is good for you too!

It’s not like people NEED to go anywhere now either. We can all just live online, we can even run our phones from solar.

170891 ▶▶▶▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to Two-Six, #607 of 2087 🔗

If you wander back this way, look up “rocket stoves”. There’s an Irish model called a Kelly kettle. Also seen them called storm kettles. That may be the wave of the future! Cooking with twigs.

169841 ▶▶▶▶ Tyneside Tigress, replying to Biker, 1, #608 of 2087 🔗

If XR gets its way, so will we!

169845 ▶▶▶▶ mjr, replying to Biker, 10, #609 of 2087 🔗

too right.. why do you think they want us to have smart meters? So that when the power cuts are looming (windless winter evenings – no wind no solar, no baseload, bulk storage will never work) they can switch us off remotely

169871 ▶▶▶▶▶ Two-Six, replying to mjr, 3, #610 of 2087 🔗

Energy storage. I read about a way of storing energy that sounded like a really good idea. Winding a huge weight up a deep shaft using excess energy then when needed letting the weight fall back down the shaft. A very efficient way of storing energy.

169955 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to Two-Six, #611 of 2087 🔗

Use Boris as the weight then.

170065 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ mjr, replying to Two-Six, #612 of 2087 🔗

works on grandfather clocks. !
but only very short term.. like batteries now – can be used for balancing, (in the same way they used to switch on dinorwic pump storage when everyone put the kettle on at full time) but to cover off several hours of no wind you’d need a hell of a lot of holes.. (maybe try Blackburn)

169858 ▶▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Biker, 10, #613 of 2087 🔗

If going back to the 17th Century (i.e. living like the Amish) is the worst that will happen, I can live with that. I quite fancy building my own barn. It’s the dystopian hell of 1984 that I want to avoid.

170069 ▶▶▶▶▶ mjr, replying to Mr Dee, 1, #614 of 2087 🔗

and all those wonderful diseases they had … real diseases ..

169795 ▶▶ Basics, replying to chaos, 8, #615 of 2087 🔗

Why build bike lanes in a pandemic?

For me, contemplating that question ought to get many many people connecting the dots that something is properly amiss.

Installing them during the crazy freak out has only served to make this entire pandemic fraud feel like it is something special. Literally street theatre to alter perceptions.

169854 ▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Basics, #616 of 2087 🔗

I hope they are weather proof

169921 ▶▶▶ Mark H, replying to Basics, 4, #617 of 2087 🔗

Bumbling incompetence on a global scale, coincidentally coordinated. Nothing to see here.

169799 ▶▶ kf99, replying to chaos, 6, #618 of 2087 🔗

Boris’s windfarms – I thought relying on wind/solar power for ‘baseload’ is impractical because of the lack of pumped storage potential (not enough mountains). But now normally sensible Denmark seem to think they can do it. Even flatter and just as cloudy as us. Can anyone explain how?

169816 ▶▶▶ Tyneside Tigress, replying to kf99, 5, #619 of 2087 🔗

Denmark has a lot of Combined Heat and Power (CHP) plants that act as one form of backup. They import hydro power from Norway, and lignite from Germany. Then, when they have excess wind, which is often, they dump it into the North German power grid. This means German coal/lignite fired power stations that have been ramping up to full power for 4 hours then have to back down, but stay hot, just in case the Danish wind drops. This wastes huge amount of heat, and of course, emits a lot of CO2. That’s how Denmark makes wind work in its tiny economy. (from Mr TT)

169837 ▶▶▶▶ mhcp, replying to Tyneside Tigress, 4, #620 of 2087 🔗

Also the Danes sell their excess energy below or at cost to Norway who then charge them a high premium to use their hydro when generation is low in Denmark. Works great for Norway

169879 ▶▶▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to mhcp, -1, #621 of 2087 🔗

rome wasn’t built in a day

169843 ▶▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Tyneside Tigress, #622 of 2087 🔗

maybe, one day, excess wind energy will be stored for when the demand exceeds supply…
I thought turning excess windy lecky into h2 then using scaled up h2 fuel cells where demand requires, but I’m sure there is much better thinking out there…

169856 ▶▶▶▶▶ mhcp, replying to Major Panic, #623 of 2087 🔗

I always point out about the space industry when people talk about solar. They have good batteries on spacecraft too. Yet point the wrong way for an hour and you lose your spacecraft.

And that’s in almost perfect illumination environment for orbits such as sun-synchronous or GEO.

Solar is an idealists dream

169877 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to mhcp, 1, #624 of 2087 🔗

I’m not keen on solar in uk – its dark all winter – places like spain though

some friends have a holiday home up on one of the western isles – they say getting out the door is an effort due to the strong winds

iceland has constant thermal activity that can be used to generate power, just need a long cable

169899 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ kf99, replying to Major Panic, 5, #625 of 2087 🔗

Some interesting further reading… all we can do is try to educate ourselves. Which is more than the politicians seem to do.

Staying on topic, I do wonder if power related “lockdowns” are the future.

“I don’t charge my car to protect the NHS’s power supply” “I turn off my heating to protect the local care home’s supply” and so on, with a series of actors dressed up as “ordinary” people…

169867 ▶▶▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Major Panic, 1, #626 of 2087 🔗
169808 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to chaos, 12, #627 of 2087 🔗

I cannot believe that the lying fat fuck conned so many millions into voting for him last year. Leave the EU only to be first in the queue for the Great Reset Covid New World Order that will supersede the EU.

169820 ▶▶▶ Jonathan Palmer, replying to Richard O, 2, #628 of 2087 🔗

Brexit is just a change of branch office I’m afraid.We are destined to rule by unelected technocrats who know what is best for us

169855 ▶▶▶▶ RickH, replying to Jonathan Palmer, #629 of 2087 🔗

… including kneeling subservience to the US.

169857 ▶▶▶▶▶ mjr, replying to RickH, 3, #630 of 2087 🔗

no – it will be kow-towing to the chinese

169896 ▶▶▶▶▶ Jonathan Palmer, replying to RickH, #631 of 2087 🔗

True.Ever since we bankrupted ourselves during World war 2.

170899 ▶▶▶▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to RickH, #632 of 2087 🔗

Hey, but y’all asked for it, didn’t you? Dissing us back in the 1700s. We haven’t forgotten.

169817 ▶▶ Thomas_E, replying to chaos, 12, #633 of 2087 🔗

Don’t be a conspiracy theorist (rolls eyes) .I have been saying this for months and everybody reacted like that.. Now it’s all over the MSM and the sheeple are still blind. My wife this morning actually said sorry to me about not believing me and thinking I’m overreacting. She works in the local government and the fact that she is now woken up gives me a very slim glimmer of hope.

169859 ▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Thomas_E, 7, #634 of 2087 🔗

Three cheers for your wife!

170025 ▶▶ helen, replying to chaos, 2, #635 of 2087 🔗


169777 Basics, replying to Basics, 18, #636 of 2087 🔗

Question for sturgeon in the event this lockdown spectre materialises.

A two week lockdown you demand. How many lives will that save?

The calculation must have been done in order for the decision to be made. Unless the motive is not to save lives, which is what my own opinion happens to be.

169797 ▶▶ stefarm, replying to Basics, 8, #637 of 2087 🔗

She is a puppet, all this is planned and smoke and mirrors. As Richie A says covid is a massive fart to hide the smell of other damaging smaller farts…….we are being shit on.

169919 ▶▶▶ Mark H, replying to stefarm, 4, #638 of 2087 🔗

The latest Plandemic documentary has a super-cut of politicians around the world all saying virtually the same thing, almost as if they’ve been given a script to read. But it’s all just bumbling incompetence.

169781 Tenchy, replying to Tenchy, 12, #639 of 2087 🔗

Why does the MSM still give that bugger Ferguson a platform? This from The Telegraph live feed (my emphasis):

Paris-style bar and restaurant closure may be needed to keep schools open, warns Prof Neil Ferguson

“Whilst we don’t think primary schools are a major vector of transmission, older teenagers do transmit the virus. We don’t yet know if we can control this virus with high schools open. If we want to keep schools open we have to reduce contacts in other areas of society by more. In other areas we may have to give up more to keep them open,” the Imperial College London epidemiologist told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

Asked if bars and restaurants should be closed entirely, like in Paris, he said: “We see from the contact tracing data that attending bars, restaurants, hospitality venues is a risk. We may need to consider those measures, particularly in hotspot areas where case numbers are increasing fast.

“The death rate has gone down, we know how to treat cases better, hospitals are less stressed and we have new drugs. But admissions to hospitals and deaths are all tracking cases. They’re at a lower level but they’re doubling every two weeks.

“We just cannot have that continue indefinitely. The NHS will be overwhelmed again. If we allow the current trends to continue, modelling indicates there’s that risk .”

169789 ▶▶ chaos, replying to Tenchy, 4, #640 of 2087 🔗

Imagine what kind of freak fucks someone elses wife?

169835 ▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to chaos, 12, #641 of 2087 🔗

Imagine what kind of wife fucks such a freak?

169926 ▶▶▶ annie, replying to chaos, #642 of 2087 🔗

Er …lots of freaks in world literature then…
But none so utterly odious as Psntsdown

169804 ▶▶ Tyneside Tigress, replying to Tenchy, 10, #643 of 2087 🔗

He is more than a mere ‘scientist’. He is a political animal in every sense, and as such, he is no more than a lobbyist for other(s) interests.

169812 ▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Tyneside Tigress, 11, #644 of 2087 🔗

He’s a political careerist, and possibly a psychopath. I’m not sure you’re correct in saying that he’s a scientist – certainly not in the sense I would use the term.

169823 ▶▶▶▶ matt, replying to TJN, 8, #645 of 2087 🔗

He’s a theoretical mathematician and yes, a political lobbyist, a self publicist and I also suspect a psychopath. This interview is very nicely timed to illustrate the point I was making yesterday. Regardless of how defensible his original model might be, his actions in deliberately publicising it and continuing to use the numbers to maintain the fear at every opportunity are immoral.

169838 ▶▶▶▶▶ Tyneside Tigress, replying to matt, #646 of 2087 🔗

That’s surely a condition of the funding. It’s similar to the matter of all politicians, civil servants, and academics who have had any monies from the EU have to sign a pledge to always promote its underlying interests (four pillars).

169868 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ matt, replying to Tyneside Tigress, #647 of 2087 🔗

No doubt. But furthering your career is the opposite of a justification for immoral actions.

169830 ▶▶▶▶ Tyneside Tigress, replying to TJN, 1, #648 of 2087 🔗

Agree, which is why I put ‘scientist’.

169915 ▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Tyneside Tigress, 1, #649 of 2087 🔗

I understand your inverted commas now – read it a different way at first, as in meaning the pristine sense of the word.

Punctuation can mean a lot!

169980 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Tyneside Tigress, replying to TJN, #650 of 2087 🔗

Sorry, my fault. I am a natural scientist by background, and was never too good with grammar! I refer to ‘the science’ and ‘scientist’ when speaking about Ferguson-type modeling and experts such as Devi Sridhar, who is neither a scientist nor a medic.

169990 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Tyneside Tigress, #651 of 2087 🔗

Nah, it was my fault for not reading correctly enough. Your ‘scare quotes’ are quite right – picks the word up and hangs it there for all to examine.

So much of ‘science’ is now corrupt and useless.

I did engineering-science at Uni, so haven’t done any schooled grammar since secondary school. And my spelling was better than I was about 9 than it is now.

Still holding you to the Ides of October for the economic collapse!

169929 ▶▶▶▶ Basics, replying to TJN, 2, #652 of 2087 🔗

Without flippancy I wonder if tgHre is an unusual/atypical lifestyle followed. A value system seems missing.

We know Eric Gill was deviant.

I feel something may reach across certain institutions to bind these people together. It’s more than a common derangement imo.

169932 ▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Basics, 3, #653 of 2087 🔗

I’m not a psychiatrist and can’t define it, but an inner sense tells me there is something very wrong about him.

169967 ▶▶▶ nottingham69, replying to Tyneside Tigress, 3, #654 of 2087 🔗

Very much Billy’s top boy. Bought and paid for

169975 ▶▶▶▶ DRW, replying to nottingham69, 3, #655 of 2087 🔗

Hence why he keeps getting the BBC mics.

169807 ▶▶ Jonathan Palmer, replying to Tenchy, 8, #656 of 2087 🔗

When was the NHS overwhelmed?
Whitty told us this much before the schools reopened that we couldn’t have both.
This is a script that is being followed worldwide.
Cue the circuit breaker lockdown just to destroy any business that has managed to survive up yo now

169821 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to Tenchy, 4, #657 of 2087 🔗

The powers that shouldn’t be are laughing at us by wheeling out this prick to torture us even more. It’s probably an inside joke. I bet they cannot believe the level of retardation in the population that people are still swallowing this garbage.

They should go all the way and have Johnson announce the next round of restrictions live from a mass orgy at an Eyes Wide Shut party. People would still follow every order.

169840 ▶▶ RickH, replying to Tenchy, 5, #658 of 2087 🔗

The NHS will be overwhelmed again. If we allow the current trends to continue, modelling indicates there’s that risk .”

What a load of shite. Either a liar or amazingly incompetent. All-cause mortality is currently at at near the lowest level in 27 years (the past decade has been one of generally low mortality).

As you say, the NHS was spectacularly underemployed – not ‘overwhelmed’. Which was excusable at the start when measures were put in place. Now – it’s outrageous.

If the present trend continues (which it won’t), crap modelling tells me that we will soon be at an all-time low of mortality. That prediction is known as a ‘Witless and Unbalanced’ chart..

Faker Ferguson needs a mask – tightly bound over his gob.

169907 ▶▶ Cicatriz, replying to Tenchy, 4, #659 of 2087 🔗

That guy has some serious cognitive dissonance going on. Do you think he’s ever had any doubt of his own ability, ever?

169909 ▶▶ Poppy, replying to Tenchy, 5, #660 of 2087 🔗

I’ve always thought that it’s an irrelevance quibbling over the accuracy of Ferguson’s models, because he broke rules to which his own work heavily contributed. Either he didn’t believe the danger himself, or he didn’t care.

169916 ▶▶ Mark H, replying to Tenchy, #661 of 2087 🔗

Ferguson’s Wikipedia entry claims he’s an epidemiologist. However, the only source to back this claim up is a dubious website with a photo-less image place holder and a line of text saying he’s an epidemiologist.

169974 ▶▶ DRW, replying to Tenchy, 3, #662 of 2087 🔗

So overwhelmed, nurses had time to film well-rehearsed dance videos.

170179 ▶▶▶ hat man, replying to DRW, #663 of 2087 🔗

The comeback from lockdown zealots is that there was a big shortage of ICU nurses at the height of the crisis, other nurses had to be drafted in instead, hence they could’t deal with other patients, hence lots of wards had to close. It’s claimed that 6 nurses were necessary per one ICU patient. Does anyone know if this story has been debunked?

170814 ▶▶ AidanR, replying to Tenchy, #664 of 2087 🔗

What does he mean ‘again’?

169784 John Ballard, replying to John Ballard, 14, #665 of 2087 🔗

Probably already on here, but latest ONS stats…215 with covid deaths….18 under the age of 60. 9634 total deaths in England and Wales, so about 2%. 5 year average 9377 so within spitting distance of normal.
Well worth ruining 60 million peoples live for.

169802 ▶▶ FlynnQuill, replying to John Ballard, 2, #666 of 2087 🔗

My thoughts exactly. It’s like being in the worst Hollywood Dystopian B movie.

169785 James Bertram, 6, #667 of 2087 🔗

Have sent the declaration https://gbdeclaration.org/ to my own MP (hopeless), Sir Desmond Swayne, Rishi Sunak, and Nigel Farage.

169792 Paul Mendelsohn, replying to Paul Mendelsohn, 6, #668 of 2087 🔗

This is the German/American lawyer who is one of the team putting forward a class action against the perpetrators of this scamdemic. Goes into forensic detail. Worth a watch and forward if you haven’t seen it already.

170784 ▶▶ Nigel Sherratt, replying to Paul Mendelsohn, #669 of 2087 🔗

Being brought up here constantly, it will come to nothing apart from money for lawyers and their acolytes.

169798 swedenborg, 13, #670 of 2087 🔗


This has been referred to yesterday about Sweden’s decision to have SD for at least a year. This is the whole interview with Johan Carlsson ,the Chief of the Public Health agency. It is more nuanced than reported and definitely not introducing lockdowns or masks. But they are going to keep the mild SD for a long time but at least he admits that the population is tired. Giving some quotes

“People are getting tired after so many months but contrary to other European countries  we don’t see that anger and aggression as in Europe”

“It can become necessary with local restrictions if we have a big outbreak in a town or a village. It could be necessary to reduce the collective traffic or restrictions of attendance in shops apart from food purchases”

They will now allow visits to care homes and there is a suggestion from the Agency of raising to 500 the attendance which would save a devastated cinema, theatre etc but I think the government will have a last say on that decision.

“The important thing is to keep distance, avoid crowded spaces, stay at home even with mild symptoms and if you can work from home, continue doing that. These restrictions must continue at least a year”

And the final

“Those restrictions now used in Europe are not sustainable. We are trying to have a steady state of restrictions which keeps the transmission down but we are not going to eradicate it but keep it on an acceptable level”

Sweden missed the chance to scrap totally the SD in June at the end of the pandemic and then let it run through the young population whilst sheltering the elderly, and they would have reached herd immunity now. But compared to what is happening in Europe at least better.

169811 RickH, 3, #671 of 2087 🔗
169818 Margaret, replying to Margaret, 34, #672 of 2087 🔗

Some subtle changes are taking place at Asda. There is now a notice stuck to the original notice about mask wearing, saying that exemptions apply. Originally, they made an announcement on the tannoy regarding exemptions but probably no-one listened to it.

Since last week when all the staff were forced to wear masks, those who can’t are now wearing badges to say so. I had a friendly chat with one of the order pickers today and told her that I was pleased to see Asda had taken these steps. I said that my ex d-i-l had tested negative for Covid but was in hospital with bacterial pneumonia. l was of the opinion that this could only have come about as a result of wearing a mask. She has been working at home throughout all of this but had to attend a meeting last week where she would have had to have worn a mask for several hours.

The Asda worker agreed with me as her husband, a delivery driver, has a skin infection on his face as he too has to wear a mask whilst working.

I had a similar conversation yesterday with the security guard on the door. He knows that there have been no risk assessments done by ASDA on mask wearing.

Hopefully, next year, instead of the “Have you been mis-sold PPI?”, or “Have you been involved in an accident that wasn’t your fault?”, we will be listening to lawyers asking “Has your health been damaged by lockdown or mask wearing?”

169828 ▶▶ Two-Six, replying to Margaret, 10, #673 of 2087 🔗

About time, Asda are just a little less evil. Their evil dial is now set on 10, not 11.

169888 ▶▶ p02099003, replying to Margaret, 7, #674 of 2087 🔗

Could it be because ASDA are no longer part of Walmart?

171258 ▶▶▶ Bart Simpson, replying to p02099003, 1, #675 of 2087 🔗

Possible as well that the threat of boycott and negative publicity surrounding several branches and their treatment of customers with exemptions has forced Asda into an embarrassing U turn. There was one I recall which made it to the BBC when their staff harassed a man with dementia because he wasn’t wearing a mask.

169826 Stringfellow Hawke, replying to Stringfellow Hawke, 5, #676 of 2087 🔗

Received an email reply the other day from my MP (Labour) to which I had written prior to the vote on renewal of emergency powers act last week.

Ran into well over a page(!) some of it entirely predictable, lots of faff about how desperately we need this testing, some of the accuracy questionable: ‘the only way to control the virus is to control testing?’ hmmmm. Apparently it was “with a heavy heart” Labour did not block the passage of renewal.

However – she did point out their frustration about the overall clarity of the rules how things are being done, and said pointedly “ things simply cannot carry on as they are.” and this interesting snippet: “Labour believes that ministers must therefore come back to Parliament not in six months’ time, as set out in Act, but every month to answer for the use of these powers.”

No real answers to any specific questions, eg. – the clarity and suitability of the PCR test, the possibility of basically excluding people from society who don’t submit to health tracking, the long term mental health issues to children and adults alike from lack of social cohesion – I think most here would agree that Labour have been worse than a disappointment throughout the last few months; but at the same time, trying to look on the positive side, I think their blind faith in the Government is wavering.

170818 ▶▶ AidanR, replying to Stringfellow Hawke, #677 of 2087 🔗

It’s more candour than I’ve had out of the slippery Tory shyster round here.

169831 Awkward Git, replying to Awkward Git, 19, #678 of 2087 🔗

Seen the Unison advert on the internet?

Slogan – “no going back to normal”.

All about the NHS and key workers deserve better – well I’m a key worker in 2 industries and been made redundant and cannot get a job in one had a business collapse in the other so I deserve ebbtetr don’t you think but Government just keeps giving me a kicking hen I’m down.

No wonder iIm getting very bitter, angry and belligerent.

169842 ▶▶ Mark, replying to Awkward Git, 20, #679 of 2087 🔗

I’ve observed before that a nation in which its small businessmen and entrepreneurs are robbed of the fruits of their hard work, and embittered against the government policies that have done so, is a nation in deep trouble. These are the men and women with the drive, energy and ability to cause a lot of trouble if thwarted.

169927 ▶▶▶ Thinkaboutit, replying to Mark, 2, #680 of 2087 🔗

They are destroying the kulaks so the state can take over.

170042 ▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to Thinkaboutit, 1, #681 of 2087 🔗

Thing is, if you are going to destroy such people it’s advisable to make a thorough job of it. Because otherwise they’ll make you regret it.

169846 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to Awkward Git, 22, #682 of 2087 🔗

That’s an interesting shift. The jaunty “We’re all in this together” and “Let’s get back to things we love” has been dropped for a much more aggressive and dispiriting message.

NHS workers do not deserve better, they deserve investigation and if necessary prosecution for their role in the crimes against humanity.

169860 ▶▶▶ annie, replying to Richard O, 10, #683 of 2087 🔗

Not all of them. But how many have had the courage to breathe a squeak of protest?

169886 ▶▶▶▶ Country Mumkin, replying to annie, 4, #684 of 2087 🔗

Ann I think this very very pertinent. I’m writing up an idea on this in a moment. It is abhorrent they haven’t spoken out.

169900 ▶▶▶▶▶ JHuntz, replying to Country Mumkin, 4, #685 of 2087 🔗

To be fair I think there was a heavy clamp down on any whistle blowing.

169920 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Basics, replying to JHuntz, 3, #686 of 2087 🔗

That is true and vicious it is to – the gag. However, people are dying – sorry a little greta there – but these NHS staff from the ground up know what PPE is and does. They take an oath – why? – so they can dine out on vol-au-von’s and mingle in cosy wood panelled scoiety chambers. It appears actually that this IS what the oath means to these people. Spineless cowardly weasels.

And yet I absolutely respect the courage it takes to work in care and put your own person in that position of absolute respinsibility for otgers.

They simply need to stand up as humans and each of their own lives will immediately be better, they don’t have the imagination to see or the courage to do.

170143 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ charleyfarley, replying to JHuntz, #687 of 2087 🔗

No doubt, but the law protects whistleblowers in the NHS.

169902 ▶▶▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to Country Mumkin, 7, #688 of 2087 🔗

Health workers will be first in the queue for the vaccine, and it will not be optional. No further retribution may be required.

169922 ▶▶▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Country Mumkin, #689 of 2087 🔗

Thread hijack – Hi CM. Last week you were concerned about wearing a mask when dropping you child off at school: I’ve posted further on this below (summary, it cannot be a ‘requirement’).

169957 ▶▶▶▶ nottingham69, replying to annie, #690 of 2087 🔗

They are gagged. My daughter is a Nurse. State secrecy is drummed in, or else.

170040 ▶▶▶▶ p02099003, replying to annie, 1, #691 of 2087 🔗

You’ll notice that John Lee is a retired pathologist. Vernon Coleman is a retired GP. The person who questioned the Leicester lockdown on this site works in the Leicester hospitals but felt they had to hide behind a pseudonym. The German doctor who was arrested the other week conicidentally had previoulsy worked in the Emergency Department in Leicester. In GP land there is Malcolm Kendrick and a few others prepared to be sceptical.

169917 ▶▶ Cicatriz, replying to Awkward Git, 1, #692 of 2087 🔗

Which is all well and good, but who pays for it? We’re deliberately making a massive proportion of the workforce redundant, we’re deliberately reducing commerce and likely going to see a paycuts for a lot of people who will retain their jobs. Increasing taxes will only further exacerbate the problems for a recovery.

There will be emotional blackmail on those who don’t lose their jobs to justify higher taxes on possible lower incomes.

The rhetoric of essential workers (and in reality it’s just the subset who are having to do more during the current ‘crisis’) deserve better in contrast to those who are losing their livelihoods and those who’ve had theirs diminished is just going to increase societal division. Quite obviously, and therefore it’s probably deliberate.

169954 ▶▶ nottingham69, replying to Awkward Git, #693 of 2087 🔗

Public Unions should be outlawed.

169832 OKUK, replying to OKUK, 22, #694 of 2087 🔗

Questions that should be put to the PM by our useless media but won’t be:

No. 1 Can we assume, now everyone is wearing masks, there won’t be a flu outbreak this winter? If not, why not? Because masks don’t protect against virus transmission?

169851 ▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to OKUK, 14, #695 of 2087 🔗

His response to such a line of thought would be to use any flu outbreak as evidence that people are “not following the rules” and then tighten the grip yet further.

“When violence was your solution and it didn’t work, you didn’t use enough violence.”

169945 ▶▶▶ OKUK, replying to Mabel Cow, 1, #696 of 2087 🔗

Maybe eventually but I think Johnson and Hancock have persuaded themselves that masks are effective and I think they would initially be at a loss to give any answer.

169880 ▶▶ PoshPanic, replying to OKUK, 5, #697 of 2087 🔗

C’mon, keep up with the program, they’re smart masks. The simple act of wearing one makes you much smarter than anyone who doesn’t.

170028 ▶▶▶ p02099003, replying to PoshPanic, 4, #698 of 2087 🔗

It’s not the masks that are ssmart, it’s SARS-COV-2 that has the intelligence. It knows to avoid masks and only come out at 10PM, unlike it’s less intelligent cousins that cause influenza and other respiratory diseases.

169849 Basics, replying to Basics, 3, #699 of 2087 🔗

17 mins in Peter Hitchins on talk radio “testing has always been a bizarre fetish”.

169862 ▶▶ Kevin 2, replying to Basics, 3, #700 of 2087 🔗

And also Ivor Cummins now on Talk Radio interviewed by JHB.
Excellent stuff.


169940 ▶▶▶ OKUK, replying to Kevin 2, 3, #701 of 2087 🔗

Ivor Cummins is brilliant. A very effective explainer and nicely measured in his delivery. Talk Radio is doing a great job in combatting mass hysteria whereas Sky, BBC and ITV fuel it constantly.

169949 ▶▶▶▶ nottingham69, replying to OKUK, 1, #702 of 2087 🔗

No Dr Vernon Coleman yet though. Vernon is the most direct straight talker. Come on Ian Collins, get Vernon on. We want Vernon!

170819 ▶▶▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to OKUK, #703 of 2087 🔗

I just used PayPal to donate to Ivor (again). He really deserves financial support. It’s not like he’s got a radio station or someone paying him for doing all this analysis.

169864 ▶▶ Basics, replying to Basics, 3, #704 of 2087 🔗

Guardians northern editor in recorded interview Q: How much evidence is there lockdowns are effective? A: Almost none.

Follows on from Hitchens above.

169984 ▶▶▶ stefarm, replying to Basics, 2, #705 of 2087 🔗

Same as the doctor on a Sunday morning interview who said the PCR tests are useless.

170010 ▶▶ RickH, replying to Basics, 1, #706 of 2087 🔗

A good demolition job by Hitchens. I particularly agreed with his closing comments that people just ignoring restrictions on the streets isn’t going to cut the mustard – there needs to be a political impulse.

169865 Sarigan, replying to Sarigan, 3, #707 of 2087 🔗

Can this be a reliable test of active infection rates? (Rhetorical)

Sewage analysis shows sharp increase in COVID 19 virus in Stockholm

169914 ▶▶ Mark, replying to Sarigan, 3, #708 of 2087 🔗

Can this be a reliable test of active infection rates?

It’s shit.

(I’ll get my coat…)

170169 ▶▶ BeBopRockSteady, replying to Sarigan, #709 of 2087 🔗

This has been a common thing across the globe.

169866 PoshPanic, 3, #710 of 2087 🔗

A tragic local story here, which may or may not have some connection. I fear that this could just be the tip of the iceberg that’s hit care homes worldwide..


169870 JohnMac, replying to JohnMac, #711 of 2087 🔗

Am I the only one to find today’s headline thoroughly tasteless?

169912 ▶▶ Mark, replying to JohnMac, 4, #712 of 2087 🔗

It’s a joke. Is it “tasteless”? Maybe for some, but you’d have to be pretty fanatical to regard it as unacceptably so, surely?

169930 ▶▶ Stephanos, replying to JohnMac, 1, #713 of 2087 🔗

No, you are NOT the only one. I didn’t like it either. Toby (or whoever) please change it.

169981 ▶▶ bucky99, replying to JohnMac, 1, #714 of 2087 🔗

Yes, a little. And the story itself is one that would be best viewed through a skeptical eye, I’d think.

170073 ▶▶ jakehadlee, replying to JohnMac, -1, #715 of 2087 🔗

In what way? It’s funny. Let’s not be “that” kind of place.

170130 ▶▶ Melangell, replying to JohnMac, -1, #716 of 2087 🔗

I thought it was hilarious – loved it!

169874 Janice21, replying to Janice21, #717 of 2087 🔗

What are the rules for staying in a hotel in N Ireland? My aunt and my sister and I had booked a hotel room for three of us for this weekend. As we are from three households, is this allowed? Hotel hasnt rang me to say any different. Also supposed to be meeting 2 others for a meal…..has anyone been able to continue going to a restaurant if there are more than 2 households? How can they enforce it really??

169884 ▶▶ JHuntz, replying to Janice21, #718 of 2087 🔗

Pretty sure you would be breaking the rules Janice but alas nothing is clear at the moment.

169901 ▶▶ Two-Six, replying to Janice21, 2, #719 of 2087 🔗

I think if you all wore cardboard boxes on your heads with a net curtain stretched over a mouth sized hole in the box when in contact with your mixed bubbles you would all be fine.
I think new guidance will be issued soon. Stay tuned to RTE for the latest updates!
The main thing is, enjoy your stay-away but Stay Safe!

169934 ▶▶ Tom Blackburn, replying to Janice21, #720 of 2087 🔗

Think hotels are fine for gatherings, even in local lockdown areas. Check Law or Fiction website.

169876 Jules, replying to Jules, 15, #721 of 2087 🔗

Another load of environmental cack (emphasis on the mental bit) from the Nazi Johnson. Yet more ways of screwing us for more tax. He is not a conservative, he is a leader in name only. However, better news from the States!

169887 ▶▶ Tyneside Tigress, replying to Jules, 13, #722 of 2087 🔗

I am watching his speech. It is breathtaking – total and utter bull…. Can’t the rest of his colleagues see he is mentally ill?

169999 ▶▶▶ Nick Rose, replying to Tyneside Tigress, #723 of 2087 🔗

Perhaps they can…

169918 ▶▶ Mark, replying to Jules, 3, #724 of 2087 🔗

He is not a conservative

Gee, ya think?

169881 Sarigan, replying to Sarigan, 7, #725 of 2087 🔗

Changed his tune somewhat. Still would like to punch his face but is this zealots beginning to cover their own arses?

Dr Hilary Jones explaining why masks don’t work and could be dangerous for the user! https://twitter.com/kvwatchtay7/status/1313128109932195840?s=21

169883 ▶▶ Janice21, replying to Sarigan, 7, #726 of 2087 🔗

He is an actor never mind a Dr! When he changed his tune you could tell by his eyes he is lying.

169891 ▶▶ Two-Six, replying to Sarigan, 2, #727 of 2087 🔗

Was that video before he changed his message and said masks were effective?

169903 ▶▶▶ Sarigan, replying to Two-Six, #728 of 2087 🔗

May well be. My mistake if so. Still cannot stand his smug face regardless.

169908 ▶▶▶▶ Two-Six, replying to Sarigan, 2, #729 of 2087 🔗

Yer it was back in about April he said that masks were not effective, he changed his position after the WHO did. I can’t stand his stupid evil orange face and his glow-in-the-dark white teeth either. An utter Muppet.

169893 ▶▶ Awkward Git, replying to Sarigan, 6, #730 of 2087 🔗

Quite a few people in the public eye seem to be trying to backpedalling and arsecovering the past few days.

Know their days are numbered?

169895 ▶▶ PoshPanic, replying to Sarigan, 6, #731 of 2087 🔗

I think this is old. He’s just rabbiting on about whatever the latest craze is. Dr, I wouldn’t let this fucktard within a million miles of my family.

169890 Awkward Git, replying to Awkward Git, 40, #732 of 2087 🔗

Doing well today – sneaked 2 sceptic comments onto the Daily Fail’s stories about Scotland’s half-term imprisonment and French bars closing:

Exactly as predicted 2 weeks ago by the leaked paper from Scotland and reported on independent social media, here comes the half-term lockdowns in Scotland – but when this was pointed out to the sheeple we got slagged off. When will the accepting majority wake up? -This one15 to 3 thumbs up

They have worn masks for longer than us in more places than us with stricter enforcement and no legal exemptions than us so why do they still have “cases”? Is it because masks do not work? Same happening everywhere they mandate masks. Facts show they do not work to stop anything and do more harm that good – acne, impetigo, skin problems, meth/mask mouth, pleurisy, pneumonia leading to death to name a few plus spreading bacteria everywhere on your hands as people constantly touch them and do not wash hands afterwards plus psychological problems. Wake up people, it’s about control and compliance, not health or protecting others. – This one 8/3 thumbs up as just posted.

170006 ▶▶ Countrygirl, replying to Awkward Git, 4, #733 of 2087 🔗

At least the DM is letting anti mask/lockdown comments through. Most other papers bar the DT remove them, that’s if they get through in the first place.

170033 ▶▶▶ Awkward Git, replying to Countrygirl, 2, #734 of 2087 🔗

For a few weeks not too long go they would not let em post anything, today it’s going straight on.

170030 ▶▶ Awkward Git, replying to Awkward Git, 7, #735 of 2087 🔗

Got a few more through – this one typical:

“To all those who claim lockdowns work I’ll ask again – you really believe that? Data shows lockdowns have not worked anywhere – local or national – and the countries with the strictest, longest lockdowns have the worst death numbers. Look at Peru, Argentina, New York and others. Plus a positive test is not a “case”. CMO Whitty on the 21 July 2020 in televised parliamentary committee hearing stated quite clearly and openly the measures in place before 23rd March 2020 had the outbreak under control so the lockdown had no additional effect – never reported on MSM anywhere nor on social media as it is immediately deleted. Why? . You can go to parliamentlivetv and watch it yourself. A positive test means exactly zero medically – I have this in writing in a FOI from the DHSC so it is official and the Government know this. So why do they insist otherwise? Do some research independently then we’ll have a sensible discussion.”

For some reason none of those posting pro-lockdown posts ever reply.

Cheered me up no end to wind up the sheeple and 77th trolls trying to change the course of the comments.

Off to cook chilli paneer and all the trimmings for tea I’m in such a good mood.

169906 Biker, replying to Biker, 44, #736 of 2087 🔗

Jesus ,the speech Boris is giving is scary as shit. We can’t go back to normal says him, we need to make it better. There is nothing as scary on this earth as the government saying we’re here to make it better.

169913 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to Biker, 19, #737 of 2087 🔗

All three words of the new slogan “Build Back Better” are a lie and the exact opposite of what is being done.

Build = Destroy
Back = Poverty/Enslavement
Better = Worse

They are laughing at us, every day, in every conceivable way.

169986 ▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to Richard O, 6, #738 of 2087 🔗

“[Political language] is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.” — George Orwell

Politics and the English Language

170120 ▶▶▶ Thomas_E, replying to Richard O, 5, #739 of 2087 🔗

”War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.” We now live in 1984!

169924 ▶▶ Nobody2020, replying to Biker, 15, #740 of 2087 🔗

One of my comments a few months back in the Daily Mail:

“A group just came along and demolished my house. It’s ok because they’ve offered to help rebuild it and make me pay for the privilege.”

169943 ▶▶ Basics, replying to Biker, 1, #741 of 2087 🔗

Haven’t seen the speech was it teeing up the idea of dropping off furlough into the pit but to be saved by the hand of government reaching out to put people into employ building a ‘green’ utopia?

If it was I won’t try to catch the lowlights.

170164 ▶▶▶ BeBopRockSteady, replying to Basics, 3, #742 of 2087 🔗

Caught a bit on the radio, you scan your health passport as you jump into an eco powered uber.

Sounds horrific.

169969 ▶▶ Tyneside Tigress, replying to Biker, 2, #743 of 2087 🔗

If only there was a William Holden to put Alex Guinness (aka Boris Johnson) out of our misery!

170076 ▶▶ nocheesegromit, replying to Biker, #744 of 2087 🔗

We remember what happened when Bliar said “Britain deserves better”…

170100 ▶▶ The Filthy Engineer, replying to Biker, 3, #745 of 2087 🔗

That was exactly the phrase that made my skin crawl. It looks for all the world like the XR/Green agenda has got to him with all this wind farm nonsense.

My conspiracy is that trying to lock us up like this and establishing a level of compliance we are being assessed as to how far we can be pushed. The end result is that we will be locked up when they have to implement rolling blackouts using smart meters because the wind isn’t blowing.

And wasn’t is President Reagan who said the scariest phrase in the English language is, “I’m from the government and I’m here to help”.

169923 Jules, replying to Jules, 5, #746 of 2087 🔗

Apologies if you have seen this before: https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/grieving-son-told-move-chair-19056395

The wrong people are dying.

169931 ▶▶ Cicatriz, replying to Jules, 1, #747 of 2087 🔗

Have they changed the rules at funerals? I went to one in July, and the only limitation was on the number of people allowed into the hall. No one stopped people sitting together other than the 18 inside rule.

169946 ▶▶▶ Jules, replying to Cicatriz, 8, #748 of 2087 🔗

“at least 2 metres (3 steps) away from others.” My loathing for the bastards who devised, drafted, support and implement this knows no bounds.

169942 ▶▶ bluemoon, replying to Jules, 8, #749 of 2087 🔗

What I found so incredible about that clip is that the family complied when the nazi came into the room. Why on earth didn’t they tell him go away? Or words to that effect.

169956 ▶▶▶ Basics, replying to bluemoon, 8, #750 of 2087 🔗

I thought that too. Putting myself in the situationI suppose the last thing you as a caring person want to do is create an unpleasant scene at that moment.

Perhaps the large goon doing the states bidding was knee-capped round the back later. The video shows but a few seconds of compassionate behaviour confronted by tyranny.

169948 ▶▶ Tenchy, replying to Jules, 5, #751 of 2087 🔗

So people attending a funeral are now described as “guests” by the council! And WTF!!! why is a funeral being films by a spy camera?

169958 ▶▶▶ Jules, replying to Tenchy, #752 of 2087 🔗

No doubt it was being filmed for track and trace purposes.

169959 ▶▶▶ CGL, replying to Tenchy, 1, #753 of 2087 🔗

Its so that family and friends who arent allowed to go can still ‘attend’ online.

170014 ▶▶▶ Ken Turner, replying to Tenchy, #754 of 2087 🔗

Some are live streamed to allow those who can’t attend can still view the service. I’ve attended 2 in Wales remotely. You are given a username and password to join the livestream as well as the start time you can join. Limited to a specific funeral.

169996 ▶▶ IanE, replying to Jules, #755 of 2087 🔗

Yes – it should be Bozo, Wancock and the rest of this shambolic government!

169928 Caramel, replying to Caramel, 1, #756 of 2087 🔗

Have you guys sent any good emails refuting some of the other side’s points that you’ve willing to share to use as guides?

169977 ▶▶ JohnMac, replying to Caramel, 1, #757 of 2087 🔗


Top and bottom graphs. Top one shows the deaths from emptying the hospitals into the care homes. Bottom one shows that 2020 was an ordinary year.

170017 ▶▶▶ Caramel, replying to JohnMac, 1, #758 of 2087 🔗

Thank you. It doesn’t look like much at all when it’s broken up like that. That and the treatments have improved now.

169935 Tenchy, replying to Tenchy, 4, #759 of 2087 🔗

Masks for all, everywhere outside – in Italy at least (Telegraph live feed):

Italy confirms mask wearing to be made compulsory outside

The Italian Government has confirmed reports that it will make the wearing of face masks outside compulsory across the country, reports Nick Squires in Rome.

Currently just a few regions, such as Lazio and Campania, have decreed that everyone must wear masks when they are in outdoor public spaces. But that will soon be extended to the whole country, says health minister Roberto Speranza, who is presenting a new anti-virus decree to Parliament.

“There has been a significant leap in the number of cases in two months,” the minister said. “At the moment 3,487 people are in hospital (with Covid-19) and we have 323 in intensive care.

“Today these figures are sustainable for the national health service.

“It is clear that the situation is manageable compared to the most difficult days (of the emergency), when we had 4,000 people in intensive care.

“But the virus is circulating and it continues to put people into a state of great suffering”.

169947 ▶▶ Basics, replying to Tenchy, 8, #760 of 2087 🔗

After 6 months of various medical interventions did they provide the evidence to show that a farmer tending his crops needs to wear a mask to save lives?

169952 ▶▶ Cicatriz, replying to Tenchy, #761 of 2087 🔗

It will be in the UK soon enough.

169961 ▶▶▶ Jonathan Palmer, replying to Cicatriz, 7, #762 of 2087 🔗

Meanwhile WHO and PHE have announced masks don’t work in the rain

169968 ▶▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to Jonathan Palmer, 11, #763 of 2087 🔗

I don’t give a flying fuck what those lying, murderous cunts say.

169973 ▶▶▶▶▶ Jonathan Palmer, replying to Richard O, 4, #764 of 2087 🔗

Nor do I l,just pointing out the contradictions in the official narrative

169982 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to Jonathan Palmer, 12, #765 of 2087 🔗

I did shoot the messenger there, not my intention. Anything about extended mask regulations sends me into an apoplectic rage.

170001 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mrs issedoff, replying to Richard O, 2, #766 of 2087 🔗

I’m just the same. Even though I don’t really have a ‘genuine’ reason not to wear one, the fact that I want to scream out loud and thump someone if I put one on is my excuse and I’m sticking to it!. I keep waiting for it to become mandatoryhere to wear them outside as well. I’m convinced the sheep will follow the rule as I see plenty doing it now.

169989 ▶▶▶▶ Nick Rose, replying to Jonathan Palmer, 10, #767 of 2087 🔗

They don’t work in fine weather either

170064 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Nick Rose, #768 of 2087 🔗


170177 ▶▶▶▶▶ Cicatriz, replying to Nick Rose, #769 of 2087 🔗

They don’t work.

No qualification needed.

170023 ▶▶▶▶ Nsklent, replying to Jonathan Palmer, 1, #770 of 2087 🔗

Tell that to the miseries I have seen walking with hoods up masks on, so they look like a soggy grim reaper.

170061 ▶▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Jonathan Palmer, 1, #771 of 2087 🔗

We’ll all be wearing those old Victorian diving suits next.

169979 ▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Cicatriz, 4, #772 of 2087 🔗

I will refuse to comply. It’ll be the naughty step for me for the next few months.

170092 ▶▶▶ JulieR, replying to Cicatriz, #773 of 2087 🔗

It is impossible to police.
But they will just brainwash people into that like the Italians are brainwashed into wearing masks everywhere.

169953 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to Tenchy, 10, #774 of 2087 🔗

Following the script. Expect the same in Scotland, England and Wales within a few weeks.

These demons will not rest until every human being on the planet is wearing a mask 24/7 and being fucked in the ass by the Great Reset.

169960 ▶▶ Two-Six, replying to Tenchy, 3, #775 of 2087 🔗


169988 ▶▶ Liam, replying to Tenchy, 4, #776 of 2087 🔗

“A new anti-virus decree.”

Why doesn’t anyone seem to stop, for just one second, and think about how completely insane that notion is?

169995 ▶▶ mattghg, replying to Tenchy, 2, #777 of 2087 🔗


170003 ▶▶ Sophie123, replying to Tenchy, 2, #778 of 2087 🔗

Well that’s scuppered my trip to Venice then.

170383 ▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Sophie123, #779 of 2087 🔗

However, Venice is the one place on the planet where it’s ok to wear masks all the time. Just dress yourself up like it’s Carnival time.

170022 ▶▶ Nsklent, replying to Tenchy, 1, #780 of 2087 🔗

Oh no, I can see Hancock already rubbing his little hands together in glee, as he sees this as an opportunity to impose more misery on the guise of we are watching our friends in Europe and we are just 2 weeks behind Italy.

170045 ▶▶ swedenborg, replying to Tenchy, 4, #781 of 2087 🔗

The Italian politicians are just following France and Spain. Both those countries early introduced masks after the first wave. First it was compulsory when visiting shops and indoors. The cases started climbing and then they switched to compulsory out door and cases still rising. But France and Spain in panic are now introducing closure of bars and restrictions localized but really not a true lockdown. More annoying, meaningless theatre for the public. And mask falls into that category of actions.
Italy has seen an increase in cases and but has been lower than in Franc and Spain mainly because they have been a bit smarter until now not including asymptomatic cases I think. They have so far resisted earlier closure times for bars etc but has now fallen for compulsory masks outside. So they still have bar closures as a card in the sleeve for the next theatre action. The cases will naturally climb now as Italy has not yet reached herd immunity especially in the South. First lockdown just postponed the reckoning and now they have no clue what to do except blaming the citizens and punish them all with face nappies.

170090 ▶▶▶ JulieR, replying to swedenborg, 1, #782 of 2087 🔗

I was in South Italy at the end of September. Already many people were wearing masks outside.
It is so depressing to see masks everywhere.
But my husband and I never wore masks anywhere and nobody said anything. But we stayed in small hotels and went to mostly outdoor restaurants.
In a hotel in Sorrento we were the only guests.

170062 ▶▶ arfurmo, replying to Tenchy, 2, #783 of 2087 🔗

I just don’t get this -what scientific evidence is there? There can’t be any for being in the middle of a field with the nearest human yards away.

170114 ▶▶▶ Thomas_E, replying to arfurmo, 5, #784 of 2087 🔗

Can all of you people just stop being so outraged by this clear stupidity!! There is no scientific evidence , there does not need to be any, have you not grasped this fact in the last 6 moths !! They wear mask because they are TOLD TO DO SO!! For 99% of the people that is all they need ! The people who are awake to this madness have been for months, for the rest there is no hope.

170137 ▶▶ Silke David, replying to Tenchy, 2, #785 of 2087 🔗

I saw a video yday of a farmer reporting that a colleague had been told he cannot attend to his cattle as he is supposed to isolate in his house.
Bavarian officials have gone totally wuhu.

170673 ▶▶ Ned of the Hills, replying to Tenchy, #786 of 2087 🔗

Well that decides me – I shan’t be plodding the Via Francigena this year.

And the mortality figures are so low in Italy! What is it these governments are expecting to happen if they don’t apply restrictions?

169951 2 pence, replying to 2 pence, 6, #787 of 2087 🔗

“So the dopes in gov telling musicians and people in arts to retrain and get another job what and become massive cunts like you nah yer alright c’mon you know “


169963 ▶▶ JHuntz, replying to 2 pence, 6, #788 of 2087 🔗

It’s amazing how often I hear people saying just get a new job or the fittest businesses will survive.

169971 ▶▶▶ Cicatriz, replying to JHuntz, 8, #789 of 2087 🔗

That may be a somewhat reasonable point sometimes. It’s not when the government arbitrarily decides to shut down enitre, viable, industries.

169966 Suitejb, replying to Suitejb, 16, #790 of 2087 🔗

Just sent the following email to my MP regarding the vote to end the 10pm Curfew citing how this has had a detrimental effect on a local hostelry in a quiet, rural village. I’m not hopeful as she tends to toe the party line, but you never know.

Thank you for replying to my earlier letters. I appreciate the sympathy you have with some, if not all, of my points.
However my reason for writing today is to ask you to vote to throw out the 10.00pm Curfew rule for pubs and restaurants in the Commons vote on Wednesday evening.
This is one of the most arbitary and senseless rules in the whole sorry saga and is having huge repercussions within the hospitality industry and impacting on people’s social lives even futher.
I would like to cite one example in your own constituency. xxxxxxxxx You may know it. It is an extemely popular, award winning pub and restaurant. It’s success is purely down to the hard work and dedication of the owners over many years. They spent time and money preparing their establishment to re-open in line with Government guidelines and since re-opening have been almost fully booked. They re-arranged tables throughout the pub, utilising areas more often used for special events, and were able to offer two sittings per evening.
Gradually they started to make headway then the 10.00pm curfew arrived. This effectively put paid to two sittings as they would have to start service at 5.30 and few people want to eat at that time. It would also not be worth paying staff to come in earlier. In addition the rule denies diners the chance to leisurely end their evening with another drink or two, coffee, liquers etc. In a stroke this arbitary rule has reduced trade by at least a third.
The pub is also losing trade from its late evening drinkers, particularly at weekends. Those who tend to go out for a drink after the dining rush has abated do not wish to finish their evening at 10.00pm. In fact the curfew, together with the tighter rules around table service and masks, have made the whole idea of going to the pub for a drink very unappealing. I can see no evidence that this measure is necessary or effective. In fact what evidence there is seems to show that virus transmission in pubs is only around 3%, significantly lower than the rate in other indoor places including the home.
If you plan to vote to repeal this measure then I thank you. If however you intend to vote to continue it, I would be grateful if you could send me a link to the actual evidence that has persuaded you.

169972 ▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Suitejb, 1, #791 of 2087 🔗

I’ve done exactly the same thing and got this rather disappointing reply.

Thank you for contacting me about these two issues; I always appreciate hearing the views of the Wrexham constituency and hearing such views really does inform my own Parliamentary work.

I am aware of both votes and I will be looking at all the evidence in order to decide on which way I shall vote. I understand the strength of feeling among some sections of MPs on both of these issues; indeed, I have spoken personally with a number of these MPs and I can certainly appreciate their point of view.

In relation to the 10pm curfew, the closing time is part of a package of measures that aim to strike a balance between what is reasonable and proportionate to slow the spread of the virus and taking into account usual human behaviour. There is strong evidence that social mixing encourages the spread of the virus and we know that if left unchecked, this will lead to a greater level of hospitalisation and tragically a greater level of deaths.

Furthermore, the ‘rule of six’ was also part of the package of measures that was put into place on the advice of scientific and medical experts. I do appreciate the frustration in some quarters about the ‘rule of six’ and its efficacy and I am looking forward to receiving more information from the Government about how well the measure has worked, once a suitable amount of time has passed to allow conclusions to be made.

Once again, thank you for contacting me about this.


Sarah Atherton MP
Member of Parliament for Wrexham

169993 ▶▶▶ IanE, replying to Mr Dee, #792 of 2087 🔗

Ye gods, I hate these sh*ts – my MP is just he same. I keep remembering that school-year’s ditty, “Build a bonfire, build a bonfire ….. “.

170000 ▶▶▶▶ petgor, replying to IanE, 3, #793 of 2087 🔗

My MP is Tobias Ellwood, so I have no representative in parliament.

170046 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to petgor, 4, #794 of 2087 🔗

You’re in a military dictatorship then… rule by the 77th Brigade.

170018 ▶▶▶ Nsklent, replying to Mr Dee, #795 of 2087 🔗

Do what part of only 3 or 4% of cases have been attributed to pubs and the like, does she not understand. She remarks on ‘the frustration…’ a somewhat understatement – they really are so removed from reality. We could all be begging in the street hslf starved, and she would still empathise in terms of understanding our frustration at being hungry

170038 ▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to Nsklent, 1, #796 of 2087 🔗

The problem is that coronapanickers see “only 3 or 4%” as “more than zero!!!!”

If it saves one life….

170059 ▶▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Nsklent, #797 of 2087 🔗

I don’t think she’s removed from reality. Back in Spring, she volunteered to return to her former role as a nurse in the local hospital. And she’s very involved in the local community.

Where she has free rein to express her views, she’s very passionate and vocal (for example against the county-wide lockdown in Wrexham, imposed by the Labour-run Welsh government, or against the 5-mile limit imposed back in late Spring). Her response in this case is VERY different – a stage-managed reply.

I think she’s been told by her masters to give this response to constituents asking questions about the rule of 6 and the curfews, or kiss her short political career goodbye.

170086 ▶▶▶ Suitejb, replying to Mr Dee, 1, #798 of 2087 🔗

Oh I see now. It’s a package deal! Like a holiday or buy one get one free!

170079 ▶▶ nocheesegromit, replying to Suitejb, #799 of 2087 🔗

I have emailed my home MP too. Quite hopeful as he voted against the renewal of the Act.

169976 Basics, replying to Basics, 9, #800 of 2087 🔗

Carrie did a good job of pointing to Hancock’s petulance towards another MP and therefore the people. Here is a short video clearly showing just one instance of why hancock needs removing.

Most Contemptible MP EVER? Matt Hancock HDTV Astounding Arrogance

170015 ▶▶ Nsklent, replying to Basics, 3, #801 of 2087 🔗

Even knowing what an arrogant tick Hancock is, this still made my draw drop. I don’t think I could have contained myself if I had been that MP.

170081 ▶▶▶ Nsklent, replying to Nsklent, #802 of 2087 🔗

That should have been ‘jaw’ not ‘draw.’

170067 ▶▶ Tom Blackburn, replying to Basics, 2, #803 of 2087 🔗

The speaker should’ve made him stand back up again.

169987 Basics, 11, #804 of 2087 🔗

“Kate Shemirani
Oh oh oh. So after 32 hours in custody, bailed not to be in London or be involved in any protest, I file to challenge the bail and voila… CPS have refused to charge me with either the s46 incitement charge or the conspiracy to cause a public nuisance. ”


169997 Sarigan, replying to Sarigan, 34, #805 of 2087 🔗

If I said to you by going outside you had a 0.175% (UK rate of Covid 175 per 100,000*) chance of being hit by lightning and if, in the unlikely event that happened you had between 99.98 – 96.4% chance of surviving the incident dependent on your age (over 70% of the time probably not even noticing the lightning hitting you) – would you go outside? Of course you fucking would. If you had an underlying condition such as a metal plate or pacemaker or were carrying a metal umbrella, you may take extra precautions and wait until the storm passed.

When are people going to assess the risk sensibly? So angry right now and listened to arseholes saying that the Trump address was insensitive to all those who have died as a result of this ‘killing machine of a virus’ (yes they actually called it that!). How about all those that have died due to late diagnosis, missed and delayed treatments and all other diseases killing more than Covid? Do we just ignore them?

I truly despair at the rationality and mentality of the population. It is driving me slowly but surely insane.


170004 ▶▶ mhcp, replying to Sarigan, 2, #806 of 2087 🔗

Put it another way: When you get the flu if you were told at worst you have a 1 in 2000 chance of dying of it. And that going into work with the flu then gives those chances to someone else, would you do it?

The numbers would give you pause but then reality would set in.

170082 ▶▶ matt, replying to Sarigan, 2, #807 of 2087 🔗

If you said that to me, I would think you were mad both for assessing the odds of being hit by lightning as being so high and for thinking that the damage caused by being hit by lightning was so likely to be trivial.

But yes, I’d still go outside anyway.

170140 ▶▶▶ Sarigan, replying to matt, #808 of 2087 🔗

Was trying to come up with a non-virus analogy to illustrate to stupidity of the awareness of risk. I have no idea how likely I am to be struck by lightning but accept the risk however trivial it is.

170002 Basics, 14, #809 of 2087 🔗

King of the mask wearing muppets makes a good point.

Liam Gallagher
So the dopes in gov telling musicians and people in arts to retrain and get another job what and become massive cunts like you nah yer alright c’mon you know LG x
12:12 pm · 6 Oct 2020·Twitter

170007 Fiat, replying to Fiat, 2, #810 of 2087 🔗

From Hansard, reporting on yesterday’s debate:
Grahame Morris (Lab, Easington): “The Secretary of State is full of bravado and bluster, despite a catalogue of mistakes and regular statements. When the truth is spread thinly, people start to see through it. We hear the expression “world-beating test and trace system”—how would Ricky Tomlinson describe it?”
Matt Hancock: “I don’t know.”

170011 ▶▶ Basics, replying to Fiat, 1, #811 of 2087 🔗

Add to that entry the smirk and giggle that went round the chamber. It was disgusting.

170055 ▶▶▶ Tom Blackburn, replying to Basics, 1, #812 of 2087 🔗

I must be a sadist but have you a clip of that?

170524 ▶▶▶▶ Basics, replying to Tom Blackburn, #813 of 2087 🔗

Caught that one live in yesterdays common coverage. He also did little fist pumps yay when the MP from stoke said a measure had been relaxed. The entire hancock performance yesterday at the dispatch box was tending towards the arrogantly unstable.

171090 ▶▶▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to Basics, #814 of 2087 🔗

Drugged up. He’s obviously developed a taste for the uppers.

170054 ▶▶ Tom Blackburn, replying to Fiat, #815 of 2087 🔗

Haha. What a thick fucker he is

170009 Richard O, replying to Richard O, 7, #816 of 2087 🔗

In my darkest moods (like today) I often think that if depopulation is the ultimate goal here then it is probably a good thing. An overwhelming majority of the human race have proven themselves to be beneath contempt, and not worthy of life, let alone liberty or prosperity. If this means that the small percentage worth saving has to go down with the sinking ship, then so be it. If you zoom out far enough, it’s a piss in the ocean.

170041 ▶▶ Chicot, replying to Richard O, 2, #817 of 2087 🔗

My darker thought is that it’s a pity that Covid doesn’t actually have the potential to wipe out the human race, as so many of the imbeciles seem to believe. I’m not sure that our species has any right to survive given our pathetic response to this virus.

170053 ▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to Chicot, 2, #818 of 2087 🔗

Great point. A real pandemic of Black Death proportions would be exactly what we deserve. I think our dear friend Dr. Gates might be working on something along these lines.

170123 ▶▶▶▶ nottingham69, replying to Richard O, 1, #819 of 2087 🔗

Dr Gates lol

170116 ▶▶ Silke David, replying to Richard O, #820 of 2087 🔗

It’s just a shame that depopulation is not happening in the “right” areas. It happens in the poorest countries, where people are starving, dying of dirty water diseases and other health issues, like TB, malaria etc.
It does not hit the “developed” countries, responsible for climate change, use of most of the energy and resources.

170129 ▶▶▶ steve_w, replying to Silke David, #821 of 2087 🔗

Covid is such a first world problem. Lockdown will be felt most by the developing countries. There will be a huge death toll.

170156 ▶▶▶ Jonathan Palmer, replying to Silke David, #822 of 2087 🔗

Those problems are not related to climate change.
If you believe in this so much why don’t you do the decent thing and depopulate yourself and your family.

170208 ▶▶▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to Jonathan Palmer, #823 of 2087 🔗

You reminds me of the DM commenters who say “I hope you get sick from covid and die.”

170554 ▶▶▶▶▶ Jonathan Palmer, replying to ConstantBees, 1, #824 of 2087 🔗

If you read the post I replied to he said it was a shame people were dying due to climate change in poor countries and not rich ones.
Climate change zealots are anti human and those who claim they are worried about overpopulation should take it to the logical next step.
They won’t because they are like our wonderful leaders with their constant flying and multiple homes.

170300 ▶▶ Two-Six, replying to Richard O, 3, #825 of 2087 🔗

Why do people wear masks?
I think it’s because they hate themselves and they hate other people.

They hate “society” and “life” they hate seeing other people better off than themselves. They hate feeling jealous of others. They love the idea of other people having a worse time than themselves. They think that “other” people deserve to be punished and treated like children because they are stupid. They deserve it. They are rule breakers. They are anti-government and anti social and inconsiderate

The mask says to people: You are a filthy disease carrier and your breath is poisonous and will harm other people. Talking to others is going to harm them, laughing is going to harm people, so is singing and shouting. Your face is harmful. Your expressions are worthless. Your voice is unwanted. Interaction with others is risky and irresponsible. Your very existence is poisonous. Your very life is polluting everything around you. You should be ashamed to breath freely.

It’s hard not to fall into the trap of hating other humans. The psy-op is working on me too. I am so divided from other people now it’s incredible. This IS why they mandate masks.

Mask wearing is poisonous to humanity.

170012 Banjones, replying to Banjones, 8, #826 of 2087 🔗

”… deaths from COVID yesterday in the entire North East of England were zero. ”
Yet STILL these (often false) positive test results are being referred to as ”cases”. They’re obviously NOT ”cases”.
The sooner we sceptics stop referring to them by this emotive word, the sooner the more gullible will begin to see the real picture.

170102 ▶▶ BeBopRockSteady, replying to Banjones, #827 of 2087 🔗

Often false? Vast majority. And loads of false negatives. So you lockdown people who are not infectious and miss a tonne who are.

Track and trace cannot work with PCR, even if it ever could anyway.

170214 ▶▶▶ Malcolm Ramsay, replying to BeBopRockSteady, #828 of 2087 🔗

“And loads of false negatives”

What are you basing that on?

As I understand it, false negatives are usually estimated by reference to the number of (true) positives – i.e. 2% false negative rate would mean 1 in 50 cases are missed – so, if there are very low numbers of true positives, there’s no basis for assuming a lot of false negatives.

170204 ▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to Banjones, 1, #829 of 2087 🔗

I always refer to them as “positive tests” followed by an explanation of the chain necessary to get to a death from said test. With all the problems with tests, I stick to the simplified version of that mess.

170013 Ozzie, replying to Ozzie, 15, #830 of 2087 🔗

Just seen the following headline on the DT site:

“Boris Johnson pledges to use Covid as ‘trigger’ to fix country’s problems”
It would be laughable if it wasn’t so tragic.

170044 ▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to Ozzie, 8, #831 of 2087 🔗

Fuck me. You mean the problems that he himself has caused?

What’s next? Heavy investment in vaccine, testing, and mask companies as the UK reinvents itself as the world leader in the tools of oppression?

“Support the economy, wear a mask!”

170068 ▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to Mabel Cow, 2, #832 of 2087 🔗

I think we can call this the medical-pharmacological complex.

170183 ▶▶▶▶ Cicatriz, replying to Richard O, #833 of 2087 🔗

It’s probably older than the military one.

170510 ▶▶▶ Basics, replying to Mabel Cow, #834 of 2087 🔗

Problem caused by them
Reaction holy eff we say
Solution they hand it to us as always intended before they caused the problem.

170071 ▶▶ Nsklent, replying to Ozzie, 2, #835 of 2087 🔗

Translated:impose the green zero carbon agenda. As they stated months ago, the national recovery will be a green recovery.

170084 ▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to Nsklent, 1, #836 of 2087 🔗

Zero carbon means no electricity, no transportation, no communications, no buildings, no technology and no food.

170147 ▶▶▶▶ Jonathan Palmer, replying to Richard O, 1, #837 of 2087 🔗

70 million people are only sustained on these islands by the use of fossil fuels.
I beginning to think that this is all a ruse to usher in the Zero Carbon future.A reason why the aviation and travel industry have been destroyed.Prince Charles calling for a military style society to bring this about.Johnson trying to make us the Saudi Arabia of wind power.The surveillance society to nullify any opposition

170370 ▶▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Richard O, #838 of 2087 🔗

No cremation. No burial either. I’m sure decaying meat gives off carbon. They’ll have to put us in a blender and use as fertiliser.

Also, no exhaling. What will the poor trees exist off?

170151 ▶▶ Achilles, replying to Ozzie, 2, #839 of 2087 🔗

Well Covid did almost fix this country’s problem but he survived.

170372 ▶▶▶ Nick Rose, replying to Achilles, #840 of 2087 🔗

And it’s brought the comedians out below to cheer us all up. Hopefully a new sketch tomorrow.

170016 Achilles, replying to Achilles, 12, #841 of 2087 🔗

The two week circuit breaker has to happen for the government because it is another opportunity to muddy the waters for assessing the impact of the existing mitigations, ascribing natural immunity, counting cases, etc. Each time one of these interventions occurs it makes the real data a little bit harder to get to. If “cases” drop off after half-term we still won’t know whether it was the lockdown or would have happened anyway. Of course as has been mentioned many times before the argument is tautological. If cases go down the mitigations worked, if cases go up they weren’t strict enough. All starting from the unproven belief that they work. We are dealing with a belief system not science.

170026 ▶▶ Margaret, replying to Achilles, 4, #842 of 2087 🔗

As much as I loathe and detest the idea of this circuit breaker, if it gives this inept government and Handjob in particular, a way out of the mess they have created, then let them go ahead, PROVIDING that in early November, they declare victory over the virus and open everything up again.
Once they do that, let the hounds out to do their job of ripping the government and (lack of) opposition to pieces. Get the popcorn ready.

170032 ▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to Margaret, 6, #843 of 2087 🔗

Not a chance. It will be extended for two more weeks due to a sudden increase in cases cooked up by the Excel geniuses to ensure that we are in full lockdown when furlough ends.

“Just two weeks to break the circuit”. Heard that one before, haven’t we. Absent a popular uprising, the second lockdown will be permanent.

170039 ▶▶▶▶ MiriamW-sometimes-AlanG, replying to Richard O, #844 of 2087 🔗

Yes, There is no chance of them stopping now. MW

170070 ▶▶▶ matt, replying to Margaret, 4, #845 of 2087 🔗

They need an opportunity to declare victory and claim credit, while avoiding taking the blame for the bad decisions. They also need to show that they are doing something to mitigate the alarmist “not a prediction” scenario from SAGE, which showed 10s of thousands of additional deaths in the next few weeks. The rule of 6 and the curfew may or may not feel like it’s enough and so a 2 week circuit breaker wouldn’t surprise me. When the 10s of thousands of deaths don’t appear, it gives them the perfect opportunity to start following the advice of some of the… Er… less cautious, more pragmatic scientific voices (while credibly still following “the science”). Just in time for Christmas.

170087 ▶▶▶▶ Margaret, replying to matt, 3, #846 of 2087 🔗

Completely agree Matt. It’s all been so, so predictable, done in the hope that none of us will have noticed what’s really going on. We have, of course noticed, in fact we probably know a lot more about PCR tests, lockdowns and numbers etc. than they do.
It makes me so angry to be treated as a stupid, gullible voter (or bigot, as Gordon Brown said once) Will they ever stop playing these stupid games with us?

170354 ▶▶▶▶▶ Nick Rose, replying to Margaret, #847 of 2087 🔗

Yes, our government is getting desperate, lol.

170355 ▶▶▶▶ Nick Rose, replying to matt, #848 of 2087 🔗

Not sure they’ll get away with it though :o)) Nor do they deserve to.

170074 ▶▶▶ 6097 Smith W, replying to Margaret, 2, #849 of 2087 🔗

It will last months not weeks

170106 ▶▶▶▶ Thomas_E, replying to 6097 Smith W, 1, #850 of 2087 🔗

Correction…it will last years not months. After they do the first round, they will need to do a second round and then another version of Covid will come up and yeah, you guessed it, new vaccines. Then they will have to find a way to track this and make sure you are taking all of it, something like a Vaccine passport, yeah that could work. And of course you will be able to refuse ,this is a free country after all and they would never infringe on you individual rights or body sovereignty. But unfortunately now you are not able to go to work anymore, or go shopping, to a pub, restaurants, cinema any live events or sports and god forbid on public transport or travel abroad. You are free but for the benefit of the nation you have become a slave..

170122 ▶▶▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to Thomas_E, 1, #851 of 2087 🔗

Agreed. I wonder if they will go so far as to freeze all the assets of anyone who refuses the vaccine i.e. literally the mark of the beast?

170160 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Thomas_E, replying to Richard O, 1, #852 of 2087 🔗

I believe that will be the next step. That is why they are rushing way from cash towards a complete online banking system. Plus throw in that wonderful Social credit System from China..it works so well there does it?

170344 ▶▶▶ Nick Rose, replying to Margaret, #853 of 2087 🔗
170468 ▶▶▶ Sue, replying to Margaret, #854 of 2087 🔗

once implemented it will never be reversed until next year. don’t every trust this shower of cabinet ministers!

170097 ▶▶ Will, replying to Achilles, 1, #855 of 2087 🔗

I am not sure it is a belief system, I think it is a deeply cynical exercise to manufacture a second wave of the virus which can then be “defeated”, a “victory” for which the government and the corrupt advisors will claim credit.

170103 ▶▶▶ Achilles, replying to Will, 2, #856 of 2087 🔗

Possibly so, unfortunately it all means the same shit for us either way.

170127 ▶▶▶ steve_w, replying to Will, #857 of 2087 🔗

I think they still believe Fergusons model

170146 ▶▶▶▶ Achilles, replying to steve_w, #858 of 2087 🔗

I’m inclined to agree. Everything they’ve done still fits in with his original forecast and model.

170019 MiriamW-sometimes-AlanG, replying to MiriamW-sometimes-AlanG, 9, #859 of 2087 🔗

Masks a Crime Against Humanity and Child Abuse:

Here is the transcript of a German video by Dr. Margarite Griesz-Brisson MD, PhD is a Consultant Neurologist and Neurophysiologist with a PhD in Pharmacology, with special interest in neurotoxicology, environmental medicine, neuroregeneration and neuroplasticity.

This is what she has to say about masks and their effects on our brains. The whole thing is excellent but here are a couple of snippets.

‘There is no unfounded medical exemption from face masks because oxygen deprivation is dangerous for every single brain. It must be the free decision of every human being whether they want to wear a mask that is absolutely ineffective to protect themselves from a virus.’

‘To coerce an entire population to use an absolute medical contraindication by force, there must be definite and serious reasons for this, and the reasons must be presented to competent interdisciplinary and independent bodies to be verified and authorised.’

‘When in ten years, dementia is going to increase exponentially, and the younger generations couldn’t reach their god-given potential, it won’t help to say “we didn’t need the masks”.’

[At one point she mentions that doctors in Germany are being penalised for issuing exemption certificates to people. How criminal does it get?]

https://thewallwillfall.org/2020/10/05/covid-19-masks-are-a-crime-against-humanity-and-child-abuse/ MW

170021 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to MiriamW-sometimes-AlanG, 10, #860 of 2087 🔗

Hence the reason why masks are being mandated. The goal is a vastly reduced, massively impoverished sub-human race of brain damaged slaves.

170036 ▶▶▶ MiriamW-sometimes-AlanG, replying to Richard O, 1, #861 of 2087 🔗

Obviously, I agree, Richard, I posted this in case anyone wants some ammo. MW

170047 ▶▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to MiriamW-sometimes-AlanG, 2, #862 of 2087 🔗

It’s a great article. Sometimes I feel we are stockpiling weapons that have no use, but it is nice to be able to send eloquent pieces like this, if nothing else to annoy people who want to believe in their slavery.

170056 ▶▶▶▶▶ MiriamW-sometimes-AlanG, replying to Richard O, #863 of 2087 🔗

Yes, I’ve got a few candidates myself! 🙂 MW

170080 ▶▶ Banjones, replying to MiriamW-sometimes-AlanG, 1, #864 of 2087 🔗

Thank you.
I’m continually amazed that nearly everyone wearing a muzzle is using one of these silly Chinese paper things. Why don’t more people simply wear a light silk scarf, loosely around their lower face? (Just as effective as the piece of paper, of course.)
Are they wearing these things as some sort of badge of virtue? Do they know how ridiculous and cowed they look?
If you MUST wear something – make it a statement to show you think it’s nothing but coercive tripe.

170095 ▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to Banjones, 2, #865 of 2087 🔗

I now call them government gimp masks whenever the topic comes up in conversation. I am not popular.

170168 ▶▶▶▶ charleyfarley, replying to Richard O, #866 of 2087 🔗

Face panties.

170191 ▶▶▶▶▶ ConstantBees, replying to charleyfarley, #867 of 2087 🔗

Gob rags.

170109 ▶▶▶ Silke David, replying to Banjones, 2, #868 of 2087 🔗

I was thinking that yesterday, a light scarf will do. Most women certainly have one already. Some of the fc are ridiculously expensive, and the waste they create!!

170150 ▶▶▶▶ Banjones, replying to Silke David, 2, #869 of 2087 🔗

Yes indeed – and as far as ”waste” is concerned, if they were THAT effective in trapping the virus, then surely they’d be ”hazardous waste” and proper bins should be provided for their disposal. Instead, they’re just dumped in car parks, or, worse, in shopping trolleys.
It’s ALL nonsense. Coercive, manipulative nonsense.

170243 ▶▶▶ Nsklent, replying to Banjones, #870 of 2087 🔗

I have a nice, small, ostrich feather fan in the car, which I keep for emergencies, should the petrol station start getting difficult. Opens and covers the face, though admittedly one hand short.

170363 ▶▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Nsklent, #871 of 2087 🔗

I’ve got something called ‘my hand’ which I’ll use to cover my face in emergencies.

I’ve seen someone in the local Co-Op use a pizza box to cover her face, loudly exclaiming she didn’t have a mask on her. I’ve a feeling she was taking the piss out of the situation.

170321 ▶▶▶ Nick Rose, replying to Banjones, #872 of 2087 🔗

Such as a snood.

170461 ▶▶▶ Sue, replying to Banjones, #873 of 2087 🔗

yes i use a cambodian cotton scarf which i can kind of wrap loosely away from touching my face and usually below my nose – it is a bit different, a little individuality and a little defiance in a small way to not follow the sea of masks. I shop once a week on my own generally and can’t be bothered with the mask nazis and associated stress – so this works for me within the bonkers rules.

170020 godowneasy, replying to godowneasy, 3, #874 of 2087 🔗

A question to fellow Lockdown Sceptics regarding the legal position if a Corona test is refused. I’m thinking particularly of my elderly parents both of whom have multiple health issues but it could equally apply to any of us.

It is evident from examples described on this site and from my parents’ own experience, that a corona test is increasingly being used as a gateway in order to access non-Covid related healthcare.

So what happens if someone refuses to be tested? Is the NHS legally obliged to provide healthcare or can it refuse?

I am considering advising my parents to avoid being tested because of the possible ramifications if one of them tests positive. They live together in their own home and are dependent on each other. Any disruption to that could be catastrophic. Any help is appreciated.

170051 ▶▶ Tom Blackburn, replying to godowneasy, #875 of 2087 🔗

From what you are saying, I’d go along with the test. If your parents’ health is that precarious, I wouldn’t be taking any chances and would pick my battles elsewhere. We don’t want any martyrs.

170104 ▶▶▶ RickH, replying to Tom Blackburn, 2, #876 of 2087 🔗

It’s not that simple, even leaving aside the matters of scientific/medical principle. In practical terms,the fraudulent testing is being used for pseudo-medical purposes, and is, of course, of no real use, but can have consequences.

An enforced (albeit indirectly) test goes against the basics of the Nuremberg principles.

170119 ▶▶ Keen Cook, replying to godowneasy, #877 of 2087 🔗

Why do they need to be tested? What am I missing? If they have to go into hospital I believe testing is done automatically? If they have been offered a test because everyone in the area is offered a test then my immediate response would be why should I have it? Are they showing symptoms?

170138 ▶▶▶ godowneasy, replying to Keen Cook, #878 of 2087 🔗

One recent example. Father had an appointment at the cancer clinic. My mother had to have a corona test to be allowed to go in with him! Neither have had any corona symptoms.

170289 ▶▶▶▶ Tom Blackburn, replying to godowneasy, #879 of 2087 🔗

Ultimately it is up to your parents but I would suck it up and get tested. We aren’t talking masks in shops here/arguments with bus drivers on this occasion.

170029 leggy, 2, #880 of 2087 🔗

Regardless of what you think about UKIP, a video just popped up on their FB page – that in itself is worth a watch, but I’m really concerned by the comment on there from a lady called Nicole – if you can, please give her some support, I fear she might be about to do something terrible to herself:


170035 Harry hopkins, replying to Harry hopkins, 23, #881 of 2087 🔗

Being a non mask wearer and proud, in the past months I’ve negotiated shops, buses, dentist, library, optician, pubs, and restaurants. The only place I haven’t been, or indeed had the need to visit, is my medical practice. This will be rectified in two weeks time when I am scheduled to get my flu jab. I did question the wisdom of having this but seeing as I’ve had it for the past ten years or more and never having had the flu or indeed any side effects, I’m going ahead with it. I also didn’t want to let the Covid hysteria, and my determination NOT to have anything to do with a Covid vaccine, put me in a position where I might cut my nose off to spite my face….. so to speak.

Anyway, my doctor’s receptionist rang this morning to book me in and to go through the list of do’s and dont’s at my appointed time. I am to get to the BACK door of the surgery at 13.53pm on the day, wearing a short sleeved shirt ‘but you can wear a jacket if it’s cold but one that you can remove quickly for the jab’ Great stuff, I thought, at least they’re thinking that standing outside in late October in the freezing cold and wind might, just might, necessitate wearing a jacket. But as the next appointment was at 13.57pm ( I know this because it is Mrs. Hopkins) nothing can be allowed to interfere with the continuous motion of the human sausage machine that obviously constitutes the ‘flu jab mass production line. Her parting shot was ‘and you must wear a face mask’. I then said, ever so gently and quietly, that I had an exemption to which she said ‘on what grounds’? Now, if this hadn’t been my doctors receptionist I would have politely told her it was none of her business but my response was measured and, I must confess, pre-determined. I replied ‘It’s all in my medical history’ knowing full well that she was in no position to question my personal medical details. Mind you, I’m not sure that “won’t wear a mask on the basis of he thinks it’s all a load of bollocks” appears anywhere in my notes but there you have it.

Much to my pleasure she replied ‘thank you Mr Hopkins, I’ll make a note of your exemption for you’. and it was done.

So it looks as if I will be squaring the circle with my mask refusal. Medical practices like you to believe in the sanctity of the ‘the mask’ even though the doctors themselves think it a load of rubbish—-I’m simply not playing their game—-bugger it!

170099 ▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to Harry hopkins, 4, #882 of 2087 🔗

Just tell them that you are allergic to Bulls××t, Harry.

170171 ▶▶▶ Harry hopkins, replying to Fingerache Philip., 2, #883 of 2087 🔗

Definitely allergic to that Philip—-and I don’t think they’ve yet developed an antihistimine that helps to suppress it!

170184 ▶▶▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to Harry hopkins, 1, #884 of 2087 🔗

An old friend of mine (now sadly “gone to his reward”) favourite saying was “Bulls××t baffles brains”

170043 Tom Blackburn, replying to Tom Blackburn, 17, #885 of 2087 🔗
170077 ▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Tom Blackburn, 12, #886 of 2087 🔗

Donald’s obviously been catching up on previous updates of Lockdown Sceptics while in hospital.

Flu season is coming up! Many people every year, sometimes over 100,000, and despite the Vaccine, die from the Flu. Are we going to close down our Country? No, we have learned to live with it, just like we are learning to live with Covid, in most populations far less lethal!!!

This is something I think all of us here knew way back in March.

170112 ▶▶ nottingham69, replying to Tom Blackburn, 3, #887 of 2087 🔗

Love the guy the DEPLOREABLE HULK

170121 ▶▶ RickH, replying to Tom Blackburn, 1, #888 of 2087 🔗

Have you been tested for Covid fever? 🙂

170231 ▶▶ FlynnQuill, replying to Tom Blackburn, 2, #889 of 2087 🔗

Me to, never thought I’d say that about Donald. He speaks much more sense than the bunch of utter thick nutters we have in charge. Boris Makes him look like a Noble Prize winning scientist.

170050 James Marker, replying to James Marker, 2, #890 of 2087 🔗

I’m still shaking my head at yesterday’s events. Handcock promised a “world-beating” test and trace system. He could have used other superlatives, such as a Rolls Royce of a system, or the ultimate accolade: a Douglas Hurd of a test and trace system. Spitting Image once had Margaret Thatcher calling Douglas Hurd “Douglas Turd”. And that is a pretty good description of the whole thing. Really, you have to laugh. If ever they make a new series of the office, Handcock should audition for the part of David Brent. Mr Cock-up, indeed.

170096 ▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to James Marker, 1, #891 of 2087 🔗

Come on,even David Brent wasn’t as big a pratt as Wankcock.

170072 Gladiatrix, replying to Gladiatrix, #892 of 2087 🔗

A friend of mine sent me this, which I have tried to email to Toby, we don’t know what to make of it. https://youtu.be/kr04gHbP5MQ . Is it genuine or a practical joke?
Toby: why is there no contact email on the site?

170083 ▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Gladiatrix, 1, #893 of 2087 🔗

He’s got it

170091 ▶▶ matt, replying to Gladiatrix, #894 of 2087 🔗

There is a link to an email address (lockdownsceptics@gmail.com), but it’s (slightly strangely) now hidden in the ‘shameless begging bit’

170397 ▶▶▶ Gladiatrix, replying to matt, #895 of 2087 🔗

Thank you

170249 ▶▶ Nsklent, replying to Gladiatrix, #896 of 2087 🔗

I did send it to him a couple of days ago and I think him and Delingpole were discussing it on London Calling, so they seem to know about it.

170719 ▶▶ Nigel Sherratt, replying to Gladiatrix, #897 of 2087 🔗

A great number of people pushing this on this site. Most of these actions in US end up enriching the lawyers and a few pet ‘charities’.

170075 mjr, replying to mjr, 10, #898 of 2087 🔗

just done the weekly shop. Aldi as easy as usual. not busy. most masked but one lady unmasked. round shopping centre, a few unmasked. chatted to couple of people … all pissed off with it all

170141 ▶▶ Victoria, replying to mjr, 4, #899 of 2087 🔗

I see many more elderly with masks in the street. They are instrumental in drastically reducing their own immunities

170078 chaos, replying to chaos, 16, #900 of 2087 🔗

Q: Who first used ‘build back better’?

Joe Biden or Boris Kemal Johnson?

Answer: Neither .

Building Back Better – The Great Davos Reset

With Boris’ announcement that covid is the perfect opportunity to scale up windfarm energy production – how much longer can Young and Delingpole et al ignore the writing on the red wall?

170131 ▶▶ kh1485, replying to chaos, 5, #901 of 2087 🔗

I used to do quite a bit of sailing in my youth. It absolutely breaks my heart to see what they are doing to the seascape with these monstrous wind turbines. Not to mention the damage they are probably doing to marine life.

170154 ▶▶▶ chaos, replying to kh1485, 2, #902 of 2087 🔗

I actually think wind turbines are quite beautiful. I just see Boris’ promise for what it is: another soundbyte like building 40 hospitals. More nonsense from a man that will not be PM in six month’s time. As for damging marine life – I think the risks are limited. Even the much repeated claim they harm birds is misleading. All buildings harm birds. Birds fly into buildings and they don’t fly into wind turbines any more than any other building of the same size. Birds also go into the intakes of aircraft. Cats kill far more birds than all of these.

170159 ▶▶▶▶ kh1485, replying to chaos, 3, #903 of 2087 🔗

Well that told me, didn’t it! I think, as someone who loves the sea, that they are ugly and I’m guessing that when they come to the end of their ‘useful’ life, they are not that environmentally friendly to dispose of.

I’m guessing that you don’t live near to one of the land-based wind farms …

Agree on the Boris thing though.

170682 ▶▶▶▶ charleyfarley, replying to chaos, #904 of 2087 🔗

Windmills at sea are one thing – though personally I hate to see them anywhere. But windmills on land are an aescetic, environmental and health disaster IMHO. Was recently in Southern Scotland which in my view has been ruined by these monstrosities.

170190 ▶▶▶ RickH, replying to kh1485, 1, #905 of 2087 🔗

Absolutely nothing compared with over-fishing, scallop scraping by trawlers, general pollution, escaped mink and other man-made harms.

I’ve watched it happen. Just as one sample : last year (before the world turned totally stupid) I sat looking out over a Scottish island west coast land/seascape (no wind farms in sight), and was really saddened by the paucity of visible bird life compared with 20-40 years ago. The recent decline has been massive – and reflects a decline in marine and insect life as well (crane flies – once abundant, now sparse).

All this is an inter-connected web, and the relative harm caused by wind farms are a pin-prick.And, truth told – wind farms in the landscape are far less visually intrusive than the electricity poles and pylons (speaking as a photographer).

We can argue about precise causes and the role of climate – but you’d have to be blind not to notice it, and it’s happening quickly.

170215 ▶▶▶▶ mjr, replying to RickH, 2, #906 of 2087 🔗

agree with your first two paragraphs. one would hope that we have some control over the overfishing from next year. and the general wildlife decline due to industrial farming and some strange EEC directives.
Wind farms have been identified as being damaging to wildlife (birds and insects) especially on land. I dont mind them so much off shore from an aesthetic view point , but i am against them from an economic view point.
And climate – yes it changes. we are currently in a warm period since 1970s but sunspot cycles indicate another cooling period to come. However the effect of man and increased CO2 is yet to be proven
unfortunately Johnson seems now to be following the BBC science

170225 ▶▶▶▶ kh1485, replying to RickH, 1, #907 of 2087 🔗

I just said I think the things are monstrously ugly and I do wonder just how effective they are at generating energy. Plus, I wouldn’t want to live anywhere near one of the damned things.

170983 ▶▶▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to kh1485, 1, #908 of 2087 🔗

Waves and the tide are where the big power is. The lack of development/progress on these areas speaks volumes.

Wavereaper looked promising, but I think someone might have been ‘persuaded’ to stop it …

170499 ▶▶▶ Basics, replying to kh1485, 1, #909 of 2087 🔗

Ships are known to confuse whales. I wonder about the frequencies of these turbines.

60,000 jobs isnt going to go far as a green recovery.

170085 Fingerache Philip., 15, #910 of 2087 🔗

I wonder if those lockdown fanatics/Collaborators realise how us sceptics laugh at and ridicule them day in/day out?
We pretend to use hand sanitizer,pretend to scan the collaborator app, give false information to “track and trace” shop staff( no blame to them,they have to carry out these stupid rules), but what really cheered me up was that only 20 something % of people who are contacted by the “track and trace” Gestapo take any notice, the other 70 something % rightly ignore them (Last Sunday’s “Sunday times.”)
Suddenly there’s a extra “spring” in this 71 year old’s step.

170093 Tom Blackburn, replying to Tom Blackburn, 12, #911 of 2087 🔗

Simon Dolan’s case to be heard a week on Thursday:


170135 ▶▶ Victoria, replying to Tom Blackburn, 1, #912 of 2087 🔗

Great news

170180 ▶▶ Tyneside Tigress, replying to Tom Blackburn, 5, #913 of 2087 🔗

Three things on Thursday 15 October – deadline for a Brexit deal, Tom Bower’s book published on Boris and his private life and the Dolan case. Friday 16 October is the anniversary of the 1987 ‘it could never happen here’ hurricane. Then of course, that was followed by Black Monday (19 October’s stock market crash). Do I need to order extra portions of popcorn?

170239 ▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to Tyneside Tigress, 2, #914 of 2087 🔗

Brexit = No Deal
Dolan = case dismissed
Biography = no one gives a fuck

171169 ▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to Richard O, #915 of 2087 🔗

Your optimism is truly inspiring.

170977 ▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to Tyneside Tigress, #916 of 2087 🔗

Nope – roof tiles and half-sovereigns. 🙂

170107 John P, replying to John P, 2, #917 of 2087 🔗

Posting this. It might be a bit long. Feel free to disagree with my assertions if you think my
logic is flawed! I put it here to stimulate thought, and possible discussion.

Can you really have an asymptomatic viral infection?

I’ve been thinking about this and the whole ludicrous testing regime over the past few days. Now, while I regard the government as criminally dishonest, I don’t think there is a sinister motive behind their actions. Their actions are motivated primarily by populism and stupidity.

So, I ask again:

Can you really have an asymptomatic viral infection?

This is a textbook definition of a “live” virus:

“Viruses are submicroscopic, obligate intracellular parasites” (Cann)

(“Obligate” – I had to look it up – essentially just means “necessarily”.)

Viruses are cellular parasites. They cannot be anything else.

There are basically three stages of a viral infection:

1) A pre-symptomatic stage of a few days – perhaps up to a week – when you don’t know you have an infection. In this stage the virus is alive.

2) A symptomatic stage. You certainly know about that.

This is the phase when the immune system is fighting the infection. Generally, with most viruses, the immune system wins this battle. But the immune response to serious infection is physically exhausting. Inpeople with compromised immune systems, or in people who are already weakened by great age or serious illness, the outcome of the battle is less certain.

3) A post-symptomatic stage. In this stage the virus is dead, but fragments of the dead virus remain in the body for up to three months. Some viruses in this stage are still alive, but dormant.

So, I ask again.

Can you have an asymptomatic viral infection?

Let us suppose that you could. Well, so what? I might, as I write, have the flu. I have no symptoms of the flu, but who knows? Maybe if I had a flu test it might come back positive. But again, so what? If I’m not ill then does it matter?

The only relevance an asymptomatic viral infection can have is if your infection can spread to others, and ultimately to vulnerable others, for whom a viral infection might be a serious threat to health.

But can you actually have an asymptomatic viral infection?

Of course you can, you say! The chickenpox virus (varicella zoster) never leaves you once you’ve had it. It lurks in your body for life, in some individuals re-emerging as shingles later on. Both I and my young niece have (apparently) had mild shingles. As did my late grandfather who had it on his face. (For a while he made Joseph Merrick look handsome. It was that bad.)

But an infection with varicella zoster is not “asymptomatic”! There are ALWAYS symptoms. And while the virus lives on in the nerves of your body after symptoms of chickenpox fade, it is most of the time dormant. It is no longer infectious.

To the extent that varicella zoster lives on in the body after initial infection and the onset of symptoms to their eventual disappearance, the infection is, for the vast majority, utterly trivial.

So with some viruses a post-symptomatic dormant stage follows the end of the symptomatic stage. The virus is not dead, but is suppressed by the immune system.

But this stage does not present in coronaviruses.

You cannot have a viral infection that is asymptomatic. Not if it means anything!

The SARS-CoV-2 virus cannot circulate round your body and do nothing! If it is alive it will infect cells and propagate. That’s what it does. And this will require the eventual intervention of the immune defence mechanism to stop it. And that will cause symptoms to present.

With a SARS-CoV-2 infection you can be pre-symptomatic, perhaps for about a week and post-symptomatic, perhaps for up to three months, but you cannot be entirely asymptomatic.

If you are immune then you cannot become infected. The body’s trained molecular bouncers, the antibodies, will prevent entry of the virus, and if it does get in, it will be instantly ejected.

Assuming that the PCR test results are correct to the extent that they are detecting viral particles, those who are not displaying symptoms must be either pre-symptomatic or post-symptomatic. But the pre-symptomatic stage only lasts maybe about a week. The post-symptomatic stage is much longer, and lasts up to three months according to Carl Heneghan.

If we were to estimate that the pre-symptomatic stage is a week, the symptomatic stage is two weeks and the post-symptomatic (dead virus) stage is nine weeks; and also assume that death occurs in a statistically trivial less than 1% of cases, then we might be able to assess how many of those tests are “false” positives.

Ignoring the symptomatics, the non-symptomatic categories are in the ratio 1 to 9, in other words about 10% are “true”, pre-symptomatic positives and around 90% of them are “false”, post symptomatic (trivial) positives.

170111 ▶▶ RickH, replying to John P, 6, #918 of 2087 🔗

Can you really have an asymptomatic viral infection?”

One problem is that language has become entirely and hopelessly corrupted in terms of basics such as ‘Covid’, ‘cases’ and ‘infection’

The truthful answer to your question is actually ‘no’.

170133 ▶▶ Victoria, replying to John P, 4, #919 of 2087 🔗

Can you really have an asymptomatic viral infection?

No, it is called a false positive test

170197 ▶▶ Nobody2020, replying to John P, #920 of 2087 🔗

If your initial assumptions are assumed to be correct then you have to keep coming up with ever more unlikely conclusions to make the data fit those assumptions.

170270 ▶▶ assoc, replying to John P, -1, #921 of 2087 🔗

Never attribute to malice that which can readily explained by sheer stupidity.

170975 ▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to assoc, #922 of 2087 🔗

Every time I see this quote, I become more certain it was penned by a malicious one.

170115 Tommo, replying to Tommo, 5, #923 of 2087 🔗

Question on face masks and exemptions – I work in a sports centre, which has been trying very hard to keep things normal. But the powers that be have decided that masks must be worn inside the building (unless exercising). I still want to avoid wearing a mask, but feel guilty if other staff members have to do so. However, I just remembered that I had a bad bout of pneumonia a few years ago – rushed to hospital in the back of an ambulance and a few days in hospital. Do you think I can reasonably claim an exception based upon this illness, even if it was a few years ago? It’s possible that I could have suffered long term lung damage – although I feel OK now – therefore it’s important for me to have access to oxygen and not cover my mouth? Is this a legit exemption or am I pushing it a bit?

170128 ▶▶ RickH, replying to Tommo, 10, #924 of 2087 🔗

You can simply claim exemption on ‘health grounds’ – no question, no lies. And that’s disregarding your pneumonia.

The potential harms of mask wearing are much more firmly established than any benefits – thus you are rationally making a statement based on the facts.

170134 ▶▶ The Filthy Engineer, replying to Tommo, 6, #925 of 2087 🔗

It doesn’t have to be a physical thing either. You can claim mental distress too.

170167 ▶▶▶ RickH, replying to The Filthy Engineer, 1, #926 of 2087 🔗

… which is also a patently obvious harm.

When I last went into hospital for a routine procedure, my blood pressure was way up on my normal levels – and that was, I’m sure, directly related to the wearing of a mask and also seeing others forced to do so.

170185 ▶▶▶ mjr, replying to The Filthy Engineer, #927 of 2087 🔗

“the putting on or wearing of a mask causes you distress” is one of the valid exemption reasons

170196 ▶▶▶▶ stefarm, replying to mjr, 2, #928 of 2087 🔗

Everyone has a valid exemption

170228 ▶▶▶▶▶ The Filthy Engineer, replying to stefarm, #929 of 2087 🔗


170248 ▶▶▶▶ Thinkaboutit, replying to mjr, 1, #930 of 2087 🔗

Exactly.Having had pneumonia, the very thought of masking and being unable to breathe will cause you distress. Not worth risking it, getting woozy, falling over, knocking yourself out on a gym bike or falling into the pool.

170142 ▶▶ stefarm, replying to Tommo, 6, #931 of 2087 🔗

Can you and your colleagues all decide it’s bollocks and come to a unified decision to all claim exemption.

I’m assuming you are all fit and able and knowledgeable in fitness and the need for clean air and oxygen so why wear a mask that does the opposite?

P.s. I’m not patronising you, just a valid question

170145 ▶▶ Ozzie, replying to Tommo, 5, #932 of 2087 🔗

You don’t need to provide any explanation – just state that you are exempt. You are covered by the Equality Act 2010.

I am the only teacher at my school that does not wear a face mask or visor and sometimes I have the feeling of standing out. Occassionally I am asked and merely state that I am exempt. That is all that is required. Most of the time no-one seems to notice that I am not wearing a face covering.

See nomasks.info or laworfiction.com for more details

170969 ▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to Ozzie, #933 of 2087 🔗

You don’t need to provide any explanation – just state that you are exempt.


170148 ▶▶ JulieR, replying to Tommo, 3, #934 of 2087 🔗

I think you should not feel guilty.
It is their choice to follow stupid rules.
What happens if staff don’t wear masks? They cannot be fired.

170202 ▶▶ Winston Smith, replying to Tommo, 1, #935 of 2087 🔗

You’re exempt if you say you are


Follow the link to the toolkit 👍🏻

170264 ▶▶▶ assoc, replying to Winston Smith, #936 of 2087 🔗

As the law stands you are exempt if you say you are and you can only be challenged by a police officer, PCSO or a person specifically authorised by the Secretary of State for Health. I’d suggest investing £3 or so in a sunflower lanyard ‘hidden disabilities’ – Public transport officials, shop guards, pub security etc etc all know what it is and in my experience you won’t be challenged

170207 ▶▶ Two-Six, replying to Tommo, 2, #937 of 2087 🔗

Yes just don’t wear one, you are exempt, so are all you fellow workers. Stand up all of you and fight back.

170342 ▶▶▶ stefarm, replying to Two-Six, #938 of 2087 🔗


170117 Fingerache Philip., replying to Fingerache Philip., 14, #939 of 2087 🔗

Oh Joy apon joy,have just seen on a news website that Bojo has said that “Social distancing” will be over by October 2021!!
The only ones we want to be social distanced from is him and the rest of his excuse of a government along with the “advisers” and “experts”

170124 ▶▶ Achilles, replying to Fingerache Philip., 7, #940 of 2087 🔗

(sigh)…and want science is that based on today?

170132 ▶▶▶ chaos, replying to Achilles, 6, #941 of 2087 🔗

Elite Davos Bilderberg science. Like man-made climate change and the freefall collapse (into their own footprint) of three steel framed skyscapers due to fire. It’s the best science. Anything is possible! After all, the world only has some twelfty years..

170155 ▶▶▶▶ Thomas_E, replying to chaos, 2, #942 of 2087 🔗

Agenda 2020 and the Great Reset science. The only science that counts nowadays.

170655 ▶▶▶▶ charleyfarley, replying to chaos, 1, #943 of 2087 🔗

Very well said. Disappointed I can only give you one uptick!

170152 ▶▶ Thomas_E, replying to Fingerache Philip., 6, #944 of 2087 🔗

What only a year to wait so I can hug my grandmother!!!What great News!! Well , that if she sis till alive then ,but thank you, thank you oh Great Leader! And to the people who say we live in N Korea I say…ohh.wait…ohhh 🙁

170166 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to Fingerache Philip., 4, #945 of 2087 🔗

How generous of Our Dear Leader. Extending the regulations this far into the future is as good as saying they are permanent. Which we knew already.

170170 ▶▶ anon, replying to Fingerache Philip., 2, #946 of 2087 🔗

are we all going to be dead by then?

170235 ▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to anon, #947 of 2087 🔗

He knows that the vaccine will be deployed by then, so yes.

170226 ▶▶ DRW, replying to Fingerache Philip., 3, #948 of 2087 🔗

They never want this nightmare to end, yet the majority are just fine with it.

170234 ▶▶ Carrie, replying to Fingerache Philip., #949 of 2087 🔗

So that’s the timescale for mass vaccination then?

And is that when we can start travelling again, if we have had the vaccine?

170242 ▶▶▶ DRW, replying to Carrie, #950 of 2087 🔗

There was a recent royal society document advocating an age-phased 9-12 month rollout. And of course that’s funded by the usual suspects.

170251 ▶▶▶▶ Carrie, replying to DRW, #951 of 2087 🔗


170257 ▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Fingerache Philip., #952 of 2087 🔗

Bojo has said that “Social distancing” will be over by October 2021!!”

That means it’s going to get stricter. Social distancing even within households. We will not be allowed out of our separated bedrooms. CCTV fitted in all rooms to ensure 100% compliance.

170268 ▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to Mr Dee, 2, #953 of 2087 🔗

Breaking up the family, and particularly removing children from their parents, is a key goal of the social engineers. This is when we get to find out that the zombies have completely lost their humanity as they gleefully hand over their own flesh and blood to the care of the state.

170282 ▶▶▶ chaos, replying to Mr Dee, 1, #954 of 2087 🔗

He will not be PM in six months.

170347 ▶▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to chaos, #955 of 2087 🔗

I’ve a sneaky feeling you’re right.

170665 ▶▶▶▶ charleyfarley, replying to chaos, #956 of 2087 🔗

But who among that snivelling shower of non-entities, criminals and psychopaths can lead us?

It would require some new party, a complete reverse ferret by Labour, or a group of truly sceptical Tories to take out the leadership including the current cabinet. Can’t see it happening.

170371 ▶▶ Silke David, replying to Fingerache Philip., #957 of 2087 🔗

There will be no theatres or concert venues able to resume operations by then.
We cannot just put them to sleep for a year and then try to fund the process of recruitment and employment, unless the venues get loads of gov cash thrown at them or they get themselves into debt for decades. And who will give them credit?

170139 Country Mumkin, replying to Country Mumkin, 8, #958 of 2087 🔗

Idea for action


·      Personally, I feel I have looked at and understood data and graphs, thanks to the many dedicated numbers of clever people out there.    I recognise the patterns generally speaking and will of course keep up to date with what’s happening as time goes on.
·      That said, I want to do something practical to stop the government being so dictatorial.  The actions they’ve taken (closing education, creating obstacles to proper education, limiting access to dentists, hospital consultations and surgery, closing and curfewing businesses, putting people’s livelihoods at risk, damaging people mentally and emotionally) have not shown to have helped any ‘suppression’ of the virus and have caused (and continue to cause) significant damage
·      I have been taking small daily actions, including pushing back to my local MP, not wearing a mask, pushing back to the headmistress of my daughters old and new primary school, talking with and listening to friends.
·      Whilst my mini actions are useful, I am looking for a way to do more.  I want to help halt this ideological (or whatever it is!) juggernaut before it tramples all over us.


·      As I see it, as of today, I feel the NHS are the key people in this situation.    They are the people who need to stand up now.  They hold the power to change this situation, as it is in fact turning into a type of medical martial law.
·      They have been frightened to speak out.  They have been told not to speak with journalists or social media.    However, they do have a solemn duty to ‘do no harm’ , yet there is plenty of harm being done as a result of these restrictions.  We now know that and thankfully  these shining examples from doctors also reflect this
o  Dr Ellie’s letter https://twitter.com/dr_ellie/status/1312380456147595264
o  Sunetra Gupta’s https://gbdeclaration.org (as outlined in today’s post)
o  Heiko Schoning and friends https://acu2020.org/english-versions/

Action idea

Here’s one idea….

Each of us writes to their local GP surgery and hospital (we can draft a letter amongst us here) to ask them to do the following

·      sign Sunetra Gupta’s GB Declaration
·      to explicitly state they are open for business and they will see patients at surgery, if patient wants that
·      to find a way [we should probably make some suggestions for how] to openly talk about the harms of the restrictive measures and how they do not support those harms


In my mind, if doctors do not find a way to speak out, there is a real risk for them, of being complicit, liable and losing all credibility.  That will of course create a potential job loss in future anyway.       Do you feel this is a fair reflection?   Please add thoughts and additions in the comments below.

170158 ▶▶ nocheesegromit, replying to Country Mumkin, #959 of 2087 🔗

This sounds like a great idea.

170173 ▶▶▶ Country Mumkin, replying to nocheesegromit, 1, #960 of 2087 🔗

Thank you. I’ll see what other comments I get and will draft a letter / email tomorrow for comments.

Also, another idea… we ask each surgery to put a notice in their window that says “3 out of 5 signed the GB Declaration”. We can say that we plan to put them all in an ‘collage’ to demonstrate solidarity and will post online.

What do you think?


170227 ▶▶▶▶ nocheesegromit, replying to Country Mumkin, 2, #961 of 2087 🔗

I’m not sure they’d agree to put notices in their windows – the Stasi/covid marshalls would probably pay a visit for wrongthink – but it’s worth a shot!

170201 ▶▶ Ruth Sharpe, replying to Country Mumkin, 4, #962 of 2087 🔗

My Mum has been a regular visitor to the local doctors throughout lockdown – is known by her first name & has been told explicitly not to wear a mask, after nearly passing out in the surgery, when they did make her wear one! (My Mum is always one to make a point!)

Anyway, on my Mum complaining that things are getting worse, not better, as the months roll on, the GP agreed & said that my Mum is not the only one telling her this.

So, contacting GPs may well be a good plan & let’s face it, we need to do all we can, in whatever way we can.

170604 ▶▶ AidanR, replying to Country Mumkin, 1, #963 of 2087 🔗

Honestly I hate to sound defeatist, but I wouldn’t bother with GPs – unless you count private ones.

In the last 20 years, almost every GP I’ve had contact with has been a menopausally challenged hag whose only concern has telling me to cut down or give up all the nice things.

These are the same people who have repeatedly dropped the ball on serious health issues (I won’t bore you with the details).

IMO they are the epitome of the callous bureaucratic state run for its own benefit and not ours.

Your ink would be wasted.

Change my mind.

170144 chaos, replying to chaos, 4, #964 of 2087 🔗

Bworis we need more gween stuff.. people should be widing wicycles not dwiving in bad tewible cars and fwying in aeropwanes. Thwink of little Wilf darling.
Yes dear.. just keep tugging.. near the head blubba blibba that’s it. Give it a shake.. Rub your tit on it..
Green.. yes dear. blubba blubba flubba flubba WWIIIF WAAAAF I came.

170153 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to chaos, 2, #965 of 2087 🔗

As Herr Johnson’s speechwriter, have you considered keeping a compendium of all these wondrous contributions to our rich political discourse?

170162 ▶▶▶ chaos, replying to Richard O, 1, #966 of 2087 🔗

In chapter two she sticks a finger up his butt and everyone gets a Halford’s Carrera and a tea towel made of hemp.

170157 nocheesegromit, replying to nocheesegromit, 14, #967 of 2087 🔗

Absolutely thrilled to see a member of staff from my university sign the Great Barrington Declaration.

170599 ▶▶ ajb97b, replying to nocheesegromit, #968 of 2087 🔗

Which University?

170165 Mayo, replying to Mayo, -11, #969 of 2087 🔗

Tim Bidie, mhcp and all others who responded to an earlier comment of mine.

Let’s simplify my point.

You all seem to support the critics of testing and many of you think that we don’t have a clue how many cases of coronavirus infection we have had in the UK. While there is a fair bit of uncertainty, I think we can estimate a reasonable ball park figure but let’s assume that you are all correct, SO …..

How can we have a reasonable estimate of the IFR ?

You’re all convinced that the IFR is around 0.1%. If that’s true, then the number of cases must be high. BUT, you’re all equally convinced that the PCR test is simply picking up False Positives, so the number of TRUE cases must be low, i.e.

Lots of Cases = Low IFR
Not many Cases = High IFR

So which is it?

170174 ▶▶ calchas, replying to Mayo, 4, #970 of 2087 🔗

Not many cases.


Not many (real) deaths from Covid


0.1% IFR tops

170236 ▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to calchas, -4, #971 of 2087 🔗

There are certainly at least 25k UK deaths. The same in France, Spain, Italy …….

We know 13 people (~2% IFR) on the Diamond Princess cruise ship died and, while they were getting on a bit, they were fit enough to go on a cruise so presumably had no expectation of dying in the immediate short term.

0.1% IFR tops

So 25 million infections?

170246 ▶▶▶▶ calchas, replying to Mayo, #972 of 2087 🔗

Not infections but exposure to a pathogen – with relatively very few infections – see below.

170283 ▶▶▶▶▶ OKUK, replying to calchas, #973 of 2087 🔗

I agree we should distinguish between exposure and infection as usually defined.

170247 ▶▶▶▶ Recusant, replying to Mayo, 1, #974 of 2087 🔗

What was the average age on the Diamond Princess? Why would you extrapolate the IFR on a cruise ship full of retired people to the general population?

170309 ▶▶▶▶▶ jrsm, replying to Recusant, #975 of 2087 🔗

Actually, a few months back there was someone who extrapolated from the age structure of the Diamond Princess crew and passengers . He predicted that the corresponding IFR in the US population would be somewhere between 0.10 and 0.20%. (because the cruise ship has many more older people).

170276 ▶▶▶▶ OKUK, replying to Mayo, #976 of 2087 🔗

Cruise ships are not a good basis for extrapolating to the general community. We see how sometimes a gastric pathogen can affect nearly 100% on board…that would never happen on land.

170298 ▶▶▶▶ RickH, replying to Mayo, 2, #977 of 2087 🔗

There are certainly at least 25k UK deaths”

We don’t even know that, since the figures are so raddled with errors and inaccuracies..

One thing we do know, looking at death rates for non-infective disease is that they suddenly miraculously decreased – probably due to the mis-attribution to ‘Covid’.

Then we have the deaths from shutting down health services (much still to come) – leaving ‘Covid’ with a much-diminished role.

170328 ▶▶▶▶ Kevin 2, replying to Mayo, #978 of 2087 🔗

Yes, at least 50%exposure. Probably a lot more.

170352 ▶▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Mayo, #979 of 2087 🔗

so is IFR the same as CFR?

170394 ▶▶▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Major Panic, #980 of 2087 🔗

If 1000 people are infected with a virus and 100 of these have medium/bad symptoms and go to the doc and get diagnosed with the virus, becoming a case (the other 900 maybe fighting off disease with natural immunity (Tcells n stuff)) – and one of those cases dies then would I be correct in saying;

IFR is 0.1%
CFR is 1%

170570 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Major Panic, #981 of 2087 🔗

great – thank you

170376 ▶▶▶▶ steve_w, replying to Mayo, #982 of 2087 🔗

25k deaths ‘with’ covid. I expect the number of young and healthy people’s lives ‘tragically cut short’ by this terrible disease is about zero. Covid is a complicating factor in deaths of the elderly and terminally ill. Nothing more than a cold

170175 ▶▶ Recusant, replying to Mayo, 1, #983 of 2087 🔗

The IFR is fundamentally unknowable. Given that, is it really so important that we calculate it? If it is 0.1% or 0.5%, does it really change how we behave? I get the impression that it really matters to some people that we compare the IFR to flu so they can say “told you that it was no worse than flu” or “told you that it was worse than flu.”

Who cares? It’s not nothing, it’s not ebola. Let’s just live with it.

170203 ▶▶▶ leggy, replying to Recusant, #984 of 2087 🔗

We can’t even know the CFR, how are we supposed to know the IFR?

170206 ▶▶▶▶ Cicatriz, replying to leggy, 1, #985 of 2087 🔗

Well, considering positive PCR test results are cases, I think I know who wants to have their cake and eat it.

170219 ▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Recusant, -13, #986 of 2087 🔗

Who cares? It’s not nothing, it’s not ebola. Let’s just live with it.

How do you know it’s “not ebola”? You don’t know how many people have contracted the virus.

170229 ▶▶▶▶ Winston Smith, replying to Mayo, 3, #987 of 2087 🔗

🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 do you even know what Ebola is? 🤔

170326 ▶▶▶▶▶ stefarm, replying to Winston Smith, 3, #988 of 2087 🔗

Doe he play for arsenal?

170241 ▶▶▶▶ Recusant, replying to Mayo, 2, #989 of 2087 🔗

Oh Lordy, that was a stupid comment. Ebola is orders of magnitude more deadly than covid. Even ballpark numbers tell you that. In the outbreak last decade in Liberia the CFR was nearly 50%. Whatever it is for Covid, it ain’t that.

170250 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Recusant, -6, #990 of 2087 🔗

You’ve told me you don’t how many Covid cases there has been.

How do you know how lethal it is?

170258 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Recusant, replying to Mayo, 2, #991 of 2087 🔗

I don’t really care how lethal it is. It’s somewhere between “not at all lethal” and “dangerously lethal.” Orders of magnitude are enough for this kind of thing.

170343 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Recusant, -2, #992 of 2087 🔗

Big difference between 0.1% and 1%.

170440 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Recusant, replying to Mayo, #993 of 2087 🔗

Yes, that’s an order of magnitude. But nobody is seriously arguing that the IFR of Covid is 1%. Even Ferguson assumed 0.9% for his psychopathic inputs. In the UK the arguments are about whether it is 0.2% or 0.3% or 0.5%. Who cares? People will behave the same at either of those numbers. Not great, not terrible.

170484 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Mayo, #994 of 2087 🔗

Is there not usually a big difference between the IFR and the CFR?

170278 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Winston Smith, replying to Mayo, #995 of 2087 🔗

SARS-CoV-2 vs hemorrhagic fever.

1% vs 85% fatality rate.

Sorry if this is a bit technical for you.

170335 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Winston Smith, -3, #996 of 2087 🔗

How do you know fatality rate for SARS-CoV-2 is 1%?

You told me it was “a made up number” in an earlier comment

Ooh look – here it is

Winston Smith

31 minutes ago

Reply to Mayo

What the fuck! The IFR is a made up number you fucking twat!

170431 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Winston Smith, replying to Mayo, #997 of 2087 🔗

So, do you know what Ebola is………..?

170284 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ RickH, replying to Mayo, #998 of 2087 🔗

Doh! If it was extraordinarily lethal and also widespread, it would show up in the all-cause mortality figures.

It hasn’t (and no, I’m not forgetting the high age-related mortality in April, which killed survivors from the low infection season a year previously)

170325 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to RickH, -2, #999 of 2087 🔗

Doh! If it was extraordinarily lethal and also widespread, it would show up in the all-cause mortality figures.

Not necessarily. It might be lethal but not very infectious. The original SARS reportedly killed 10% of those infected. Fortunately not many people caught it.

Professor Sunetra Gupta reckons the IFR for Covid is 0.1%. Do you agree with her?

I’m not forgetting the high age-related mortality in April, which killed survivors from the low infection season a year previously

That might explain the UK’s high mortality rate compared to other countries. It can’t explain the 50k plus excess.

170387 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ steve_w, replying to Mayo, 1, #1000 of 2087 🔗

I expect its very infectious but not very lethal. The excess mortality were some old age deaths bought forward plus stress of lockdown and closing of the health service

170447 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Jonathan Palmer, replying to Mayo, #1001 of 2087 🔗

Withdrawal of care from the elderly and the reluctance of many people to attend hospital during the lockdown would account for a lot of the excess deaths.
Whatever the IFR the fact is it doesn’t justify the lockdown and the extreme measures taken since,which are resulting in the destruction of the economy and needless deaths.

170381 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ steve_w, replying to Mayo, #1002 of 2087 🔗

most people in Sweden were exposed – they reached herd immunity which is why the graph went down without a lockdown

170252 ▶▶▶▶ Ewan Duffy, replying to Mayo, #1003 of 2087 🔗

” You don’t know how many people have contracted the virus.”

Neither do your pals in the State and therein lies the problem. That you either fail to understand that or refuse to is your problem (although it is also a problem for the rest of us).

170330 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Ewan Duffy, -1, #1004 of 2087 🔗

So do we have low case numbers or high case numbers and is the IFR 0.1% or 3%.

170337 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Mayo, #1005 of 2087 🔗

whats the difference between CFR and IFR?

170272 ▶▶▶▶ RickH, replying to Mayo, #1006 of 2087 🔗

Well – if the fairy stories have got to permitting a diagnosis of ebola – we know that they belong where the sun don’t shine 🙂

You don’t know how many people have contracted the virus”

Precisely – except that all indications (ignoring PCR identification of random bits of RNA) are that it’s not that many, if we stick to proper definitions of ‘virus’ and ‘infection’.

170317 ▶▶▶▶ T. Prince, replying to Mayo, 1, #1007 of 2087 🔗

Jesus. Dumb or what?!

170955 ▶▶▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to T. Prince, #1008 of 2087 🔗

‘what’ – it’s an (overfed) troll.

170176 ▶▶ Winston Smith, replying to Mayo, 1, #1009 of 2087 🔗

What the fuck! The IFR is a made up number you fucking twat! Fuck off and take your bollocks with you!

170223 ▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Winston Smith, -5, #1010 of 2087 🔗

The IFR is determined by dividing one number by another.

Sorry if this is a bit technical for you.

170245 ▶▶▶▶ Winston Smith, replying to Mayo, 2, #1011 of 2087 🔗

🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 Have you heard the phrase, ‘Rubbish in, rubbish out Mayo?

Anybody can count, what matters is the insights you gain and what you do this the information.

170261 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Winston Smith, -2, #1012 of 2087 🔗

Professor Gupta says the IFR for Covid is 0.1%

Many LS readers agree with her.

How does she and they know what the IFR is?

170360 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ DavidC, replying to Mayo, #1013 of 2087 🔗

What points are you trying to make here?


170451 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to DavidC, #1014 of 2087 🔗

It ‘s not difficult.

I’m trying to get readers to tell me if we have high case numbers or low case numbers – and what does that imply for IFR.

It’s just that this blog appears to be arguing that there are not many cases but also a low IFR.

To put it Even more simply

High Case Numbers = Low IFR
Low Case Numbers = High IFR

which is it?

170466 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Basics, replying to Mayo, #1015 of 2087 🔗

You make me grin. You are a classic of your kind. Unaware.

170418 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to Mayo, 2, #1016 of 2087 🔗

WHO estimate 750 million infections worldwide. Around 1 million deaths worldwide, ergo around 0.1% ifr.

And, by the way, that’s exactly what, back in March, very experienced and sensible experts such as Wittkowski, Giesecke and others were predicting would quite likely be where ifr would end up, based on their experience of such viruses and the course of past epidemics. So it’s nothing particularly extraordinary if it does turn out to be the case.

170709 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Chris John, replying to Mark, #1017 of 2087 🔗

And even then I wouldn’t trust their estimates either

170181 ▶▶ calchas, replying to Mayo, 1, #1018 of 2087 🔗


You are assuming that that phenomenon which produces a positive PCR result is the same phenomenon as that phenomenon, which is responsible for those real covid deaths.

170224 ▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to calchas, -3, #1019 of 2087 🔗

So the spike in hospitalisation and deaths in March was just a coincidence?

170238 ▶▶▶▶ calchas, replying to Mayo, #1020 of 2087 🔗

No, I do think that there was an infection, but with lockdown causing most excess deaths. As explained below, I find the exposure of 20 million people to a particular pathogen in the – say – six weeks to two months leading up to April to be plausible.

170267 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to calchas, -1, #1021 of 2087 🔗

The deaths were occurring BEFORE the lockdown and peaked just 2 weeks after lockdown started. The curve then followed the path of an epidemic.

The lockdown could not have caused most of the deaths.

170338 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Kevin 2, replying to Mayo, #1022 of 2087 🔗

Lockdowns have little or no effect on Covid mortality. They just increase all-cause mortality.

170464 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Kevin 2, -1, #1023 of 2087 🔗

That’s not really the argument here so I don’t want to get into it.

I am simply trying ascertain whether LS readers believe we have a low IFR and therefore a high number of cases or vice versa.

Note: We can’t have Low case numbers AND low IFR,

170477 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Mayo, #1024 of 2087 🔗

do you mean low CFR?

170715 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Chris John, replying to Mayo, #1025 of 2087 🔗

But when oaps are kicked out of hospital to make space and they’re forced into care homes you’d know you’re wrong

170728 ▶▶▶▶ Steve, replying to Mayo, #1026 of 2087 🔗

Look at the graphs. Theres been similar spikes in deaths during the spring in previous years. It certainly isn’t unusual.

170186 ▶▶ mark3, replying to Mayo, 1, #1027 of 2087 🔗

That’s a false dilemma. If X% of cases are false positives, then X% of deaths are also likely being wrongly attributed to COVID (since a COVID death is just a death following a positive test result). So the IFR (deaths/cases) calculation remains unchanged because false positives result in both cases and deaths being overcounted.

170280 ▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to mark3, -1, #1028 of 2087 🔗

Remember most of the deaths were symptomatic. Read Medical reports from UK, US, Italy, …..

For your hypothesis to be true, we would have to assume that some unknown pathogen (not Covid) just happened to cause pneumonia-like (but dissimilar) symptoms in March, April, May …

170189 ▶▶ Nobody2020, replying to Mayo, 1, #1029 of 2087 🔗

Not sure I follow your logic here. Currently the number of deaths is very low. From a pure mathematical perspective then the number of cases would be expected to be relatively low.

I can see a possible line of reasoning for the past when deaths were high but not many positives were being found. This does not automatically mean they didn’t exist given that they weren’t testing people unless they had symptoms.

Without knowing any of the actual numbers you have to explain how a supposedly highly infectious disease managed to cover most of the world, in the UK alone it was in virtually every county and region, but hardly anybody got infected.

170210 ▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Nobody2020, -4, #1030 of 2087 🔗

Not sure I follow your logic here

It’s quite simple

I don’t accept that deaths are very low. All cause mortality spiked sharply in March & April – well before any lockdown effects could have kicked in. There is no other explanation.

Even if we halve the death numbers to 20k, that still means 20 million infections for an IFR of 0.1%.

170218 ▶▶▶▶ Nobody2020, replying to Mayo, 1, #1031 of 2087 🔗

You do realise that life doesn’t follow equations don’t you?

Are you saying it’s impossible for a disease to have a low IFR just because at some point in time the data didn’t show it?

170233 ▶▶▶▶▶ Winston Smith, replying to Nobody2020, 4, #1032 of 2087 🔗

Nobody2020, you’ve unmasked Mayo! It’s Professor Ferguson!!

170314 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Victoria, replying to Winston Smith, #1033 of 2087 🔗

I was just thinking the same – definitely Prof Pantsdown

170296 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Nobody2020, -1, #1034 of 2087 🔗

What? What are you banging on about?

Professor Sunetra Gupta says IFR is around 0.1%.

How do you think she estimated this figure?

170348 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Nobody2020, replying to Mayo, #1035 of 2087 🔗

What? What are you banging on about?

Why are you doing a copy and paste argument for no apparent reason?

170475 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Nobody2020, #1036 of 2087 🔗

Tell me where Gupta gets her IFR estimate from?

170630 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Nobody2020, replying to Mayo, #1037 of 2087 🔗

I’ve not seen her working but it’s not hard to estimate using available data.

The WHO have just recently estimated 750M people worldwide have been infected. With roughly 1M official deaths so far this would give an estimated IFR of 0.13% so not too far off 0.1%.

How would you estimate an IFR?

170232 ▶▶▶▶ calchas, replying to Mayo, 1, #1038 of 2087 🔗

Even accepting your argument and your numbers:

Those 20 million exposed to the cause of death for the 20k would have been exposed between January amd March before testing really got going to detect them.

Cross immunity from other coronaviruses as indicated by the Tübingen study would mean that many of those contacts would in any case show little or no trace of that contact.

Even taking your argument and numbers as given, I find it quite plausible that 20 million people in the UK were exposed leading up to April 2020.

170306 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to calchas, -2, #1039 of 2087 🔗

I find it quite plausible that 20 million people in the UK were exposed leading up to April 2020.

The timing of deaths suggests cases increased most rapidly in March. I don’t rule out a few January infections.

170254 ▶▶▶▶ Henry, replying to Mayo, 2, #1040 of 2087 🔗

I think you’re forgetting this was primarily a nosocomial disease in March/April. This would undoubtedly equal a high IFR as those who succumbed, >50%, had a care home origin. As the infection progresses (as it will during respiratory infection season) in the community, the IFR will decrease, primarily because it’s not as dangerous to the majority of the population as those that are vulnerable (and some still are).

170288 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Henry, -3, #1041 of 2087 🔗

Some truth in what you write but deaths are deaths. These are mostly deaths that would not happened without Covid.

170406 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ steve_w, replying to Mayo, #1042 of 2087 🔗

just deaths of old age brought forward a few months

170515 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Chicot, replying to steve_w, #1043 of 2087 🔗

Exactly. Even Ferguson admitted that anywhere from half to two thirds of those who die from Covid would probably have died in a few months even without it.

170255 ▶▶▶▶ RickH, replying to Mayo, 3, #1044 of 2087 🔗


I don’t accept that deaths are very low.”

= “I deny the facts” – as one has to in order to support the official narrative, which is, as we know, a concatenation of fairy stories.

Now. Here is the news:

  • Deaths – probably influenced by SARS-CoV-2 spiked sharply in April for a short period, and then quickly fell away, following a gomperz curve
  • Even with the sharp April spike, the 2019/20 infection season produced deaths only at the 75th centile for the last quarter of a century (population adjusted)
  • Since the end of the spike, mortality has been bumping along at the bottom of that quarter-century range, even with the expected seasonal ripple in September.

So, in summary : 2019/20 Winter/Spring was not a season of ‘very low’ mortality. It was a season of moderately high mortality – the 8th in 27 years.

From summer onwards, mortality has been low by comparison with the whole of the period.

Lesson : There is absolutely no evidence to support insanely restrictive measures that have never been recommended, let alone employed, for a patently un -extraordinary situation with multiple precedents.

170310 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to RickH, -3, #1045 of 2087 🔗

Lesson : There is absolutely no evidence …

A separate argument which is completely irrelevant to the IFR/CAse issue.

170361 ▶▶▶▶ Kevin 2, replying to Mayo, #1046 of 2087 🔗

What is difficult to understand? The virus has always been highly transmissible. At the outset it was also highly virulent, and that caused the initial large death toll.
Now it isn’t virulent.
The 10-20 recorded daily deaths with a PCR positive (not even cases) will be largely comprised of those over 70 with co-morbidities. And nearly all those deaths will have a different primary cause of death.
Deaths from a primary cause of Covid are probably 0-3 a day.
That’s why they just did the death certificate scam. And no post-mortem.

170471 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Kevin 2, #1047 of 2087 🔗

Now it isn’t virulent.

Prove it. If anything’s changed it’s more likely to be our immune systems which are boosted by sunshine during the summer. Viral load also diluted outdoors.

171107 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ RickH, replying to Mayo, #1048 of 2087 🔗

Back to Farr. It was never that serious. Full Stop.

170213 ▶▶ RickH, replying to Mayo, 5, #1049 of 2087 🔗

False reasoning. There is absolutely no way of knowing the relationship of PCR positives with real Covid – just as there is no way of knowing the incidence of real Covid. The data in both cases is irremediably screwed.

With Covid, the mess is caused by guesswork death registrations and the old confusion of ‘with’ and ‘of’

… which links seamlessly to a whole train of error sources, from sampling to Ct numbers in the PCR testing process.

What we do have is all-cause mortality (Farr’s one factor which isn’t ‘assumption’) which shows no exceptional mortality by any reliable historical criterion. It’s currently bumping along at the bottom of the quarter-century range, and following seasonal norms.

So two obvious things :

  1. SARS-CoV-2 is far from abnormally ‘serious’
  2. The PCR testing results are so screwed they are best ignored – as was always suggested. They are picking up so much statistical noise of irrelevant RNA that they have no utility.
170222 ▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to RickH, 3, #1050 of 2087 🔗

I agree. There’s really nothing more to be said against the casedemic. Pillar 2 RT-PCR is just utterly worthless.

170485 ▶▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to Mabel Cow, #1051 of 2087 🔗

Pillar 2 RT-PCR is just utterly worthless.

So does that mean we don’t have a clue how lethal this virus is to anyone who catches it?

170900 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to Mayo, #1052 of 2087 🔗

I guess not.

Perhaps if we actually did post mortems and investigated what had killed these poor people, we might know a little more.

Simply labelling as a COVID-19 death any corpse that might have tripped over a fragment of SARS-CoV-2 RNA is grossly misleading.

Considering the economic and social cost of this exercise, one might think that collecting facts would be a better approach.

170479 ▶▶▶ Mayo, replying to RickH, #1053 of 2087 🔗
  1. SARS-CoV-2 is far from abnormally ‘serious’

So what ‘s the IFR?

171110 ▶▶▶▶ RickH, replying to Mayo, #1054 of 2087 🔗

Who gives a toss? The effects are what counts – not the masturbatory concerns of modellers.

170240 ▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Mayo, 1, #1055 of 2087 🔗

If many of the c19 deaths actually passed due to comorbidities then not many infections still equals low IFR – how many of the claimed c19 deaths actually died from c19. I suspect not many/any of them were healthy folk

170256 ▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Mayo, 1, #1056 of 2087 🔗

You also said earlier (I think) that many of white house staff testing positive suggests limited natural immunity – but then you agreed that people with natural immunity could test positive when dealing with the virus – which is it – you can’t have it both ways

170263 ▶▶ OKUK, replying to Mayo, 1, #1057 of 2087 🔗

Saying PCR testing is riddled with errors and probably overestimating true positives is not the same as saying it is not highly infectious and widely spread. Not sure why you think these are contradictory positions. They’re not.

Covid could be widely spread in the community but involving for the vast majority trivial or no symptoms.

The vast majority of people will have been infected in the spring when there was hardly any testing taking place.

People presenting for tests are likely to include a high proportion of “worried well”. That may actually be distorting the testing figures.

The fatality rate is definitely going down at the moment as we having 20000 additional “cases” added to the data but no associated increase in Covid-certified deaths.

170293 ▶▶ PoshPanic, replying to Mayo, 1, #1058 of 2087 🔗

No. Are you really that desperate to defend the shit model? Jesus, I’m an idiot, but even I can see how simple this is. The virus has been widespread, over a large part of the year. Many people were infected, but not that many died in comparison ie Lots of cases=Low IFR. The extreme testing now is just picking up the ripples from those not infected earlier and the disease is relatively low lying ie Not many cases and still ( surprisingly! ) Low IFR.

170364 ▶▶ Mark, replying to Mayo, #1059 of 2087 🔗

I don’t really see where you think you are going with this, Mayo. The deaths were almost all back in April, with a three week plus lead time. Any “cases” now won’t be producing deaths for more than three weeks from now.

Below you say at least 25k deaths, with 0.1% ifr would suggest 25 million cases (nearly 40% of the population). Well, that would be nicely in the range where herd immunity would be expected to have kicked in under modern assumptions for pre-existing resistance and non-homogenous susceptibility and spreading. And that would also fit with the current observed slow increase in cases as the season changes, raising the herd immunity threshold as usual for seasonal colds (along with presumably finishing the job of any pockets that escaped in the earlier epidemic.

That’s not necessarily what we are seeing, but it’s a perfectly plausible scenario.

170382 ▶▶ Jakehadlee, replying to Mayo, #1060 of 2087 🔗

That didn’t really simplify it – it was pretty simple originally. And by simple, I mean in old fashioned sense.

As my mum used to say “have a think about you’re trying to say and see why it might be wrong”

170439 ▶▶ James Marker, replying to Mayo, #1061 of 2087 🔗

I would turn the argument around. If a significant proportion of those who have tested positive are infection-free and the prevalence of the disease is low, then this virus is no where near as contagious as the statists suggest – so Van-tam’s comment that the virus has an R value of 3 is bollocks.  Alternatively, far more people have been exposed to the virus (and even the WHO is now suggesting that 10% of the world’s population may have been infected), in which case the overall IFR is very low and the disease is no where near as deadly as the statists suggest. Personally, I think the latter is more likely, but either way it makes the case for scepticism.

170660 ▶▶ Tim Bidie, replying to Mayo, #1062 of 2087 🔗

No-one can answer that question because the data is junk. So whatever point you are trying to make using that data lacks any validity

The testing regime is unreliable:

‘1.There is considerable diversity of molecular platforms, reagents, kits and assay performance conditions in PHE and NHS laboratories providing SARS-CoV-2 molecular detection
2. There is evidence of quality assurance difficulties for key reagents due to global supply chain issues
3. Shortages of swabs and transport medium have led to local variations in sampling practice which may impact on assay performance through the introduction of inhibitors into biochemical reactions
4. There is no evidence of viral genetic drift as a basis for altered sensitivity of assay
5. Enzyme performance from external suppliers has degraded compared with original validation performance.’


And, even if it was reliable, it does not test for infections so IFR numbers, CFR numbers are junk:

A PCR test might find the virus it was looking for. This results in a PCR positive, but a crucial question remains: is this virus active, i.e. infectious, or virulent? The PCR alone cannot answer this question.’

This means that PCR Positives might or might not lead to concluding that a subject testing positive by PCR is infectious. Why? Because PCR positives have not been correlated to the growth of the virus in culture.’

‘Unfortunately relating PCR POSITIVE to infectivity is not easy if we consider the whole population. This would need 1) a model (correlation) that maps PCR POSITIVES and/or symptoms to infectivity as tested by viral culture or 2) viral culture for every individual case.’


All anyone can say, with confidence, is that a spike in overall all causes mortality occurred after tens of thousands of elderly and infirm patients were discharged from hospital at 24 hours notice in March.

Since that period, overall all causes mortality has been plumb normal.

170960 ▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to Tim Bidie, #1063 of 2087 🔗


You’ve all probably earned mayo a bonus. Instead of focussing on our situation and what we can do about it.

170193 Sir Patrick Vaccine, replying to Sir Patrick Vaccine, 12, #1064 of 2087 🔗

This is the Country Boris Johnson has created. <
Comforting a grieving widow by her two sons is banned at a funeral.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wchPE4ujaZI youtube com/watch?v=wchPE4ujaZI

STOP!” National Disgrace – Unedited 🎤 📺 It’s Come To This…

170217 ▶▶ Thomas_E, replying to Sir Patrick Vaccine, 13, #1065 of 2087 🔗

If that was me in that funeral I would be in jail now as the man would not be walking back..he would be crawling, although it’s hard when your legs are broken.

170271 ▶▶▶ chaos, replying to Thomas_E, #1066 of 2087 🔗

I’d have taken the fight to a conservative party building.

170262 ▶▶ AngloWelshDragon, replying to Sir Patrick Vaccine, 5, #1067 of 2087 🔗

This was one of the most upsetting things I have seen in connection with lockdown – and it is not exactly a low bar!

170266 ▶▶ stefarm, replying to Sir Patrick Vaccine, 5, #1068 of 2087 🔗

I’d have the goon by his tie and drag him out and chuck him down the nearest hole. Usual shit no doubt ‘i was just following orders’, makes me want to puke

170950 ▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to stefarm, #1069 of 2087 🔗

Careful, goons often wear clip-on ties, Stefarm.

170462 ▶▶ AidanR, replying to Sir Patrick Vaccine, 1, #1070 of 2087 🔗

The old fella should be turning in his grave that his sons didn’t have the backbone to tell that usher to either fuck off or start choosing his own chipboard overcoat.

170952 ▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to AidanR, #1071 of 2087 🔗

As I commented yesterday, they had handy chairs in their hands too !

170198 Cheezilla, replying to Cheezilla, 6, #1072 of 2087 🔗


A few hours ago, I wrote a comment to Leo McKinstry’s article in the DT. I pressed submit and it completely disappeared.
It had the link to the official covid dashboard, so I thought maybe it was being modulated. I’ve just gone back to see if there was any progress.

While it was clear that the trolls were out in force when I was there earlier, apparently there have been no more comments at all. The ones still at the top have somehow been posted two hourse later than when I saw them there before.

No sign of my comment by the way!

170220 ▶▶ OKUK, replying to Cheezilla, 4, #1073 of 2087 🔗

I gave up posting at Mail Online when they started using similar tricks to alter the perceived state of reader opinion.

170200 Dan Clarke, replying to Dan Clarke, 5, #1074 of 2087 🔗

As most people have been forced to wear masks and the hysteria and ‘cases’ have either risen or have not helped, we now need to give herd immunity a chance to develop. How will we know if we carry on with muzzles. Although it does appear that muzzle wearing is a signal and the objective to all, including the government of compliance

170211 ▶▶ OKUK, replying to Dan Clarke, 12, #1075 of 2087 🔗

There is no way masks are slowing the spread. Possibly speeding up and increasing the seriousness of infections but not slowing the spread. If masks were having any slowing effect we would have seen it by now,

170269 ▶▶▶ Dan Clarke, replying to OKUK, 1, #1076 of 2087 🔗


170302 ▶▶▶ sceptickat, replying to OKUK, 3, #1077 of 2087 🔗

Especially as most of the mask lovers wear the even more useless flowery cloth ones.

170327 ▶▶▶▶ wendyk, replying to sceptickat, 4, #1078 of 2087 🔗

The advice here in Sturgeon land is that ‘face coverings’ will do,so-scarves, pulled up collars,niqabs, designer fabric maskettes,black bank robber masks-increasingly popular here, towels,anything goes..

None of it is of the slightest use, but is deemed essential by those in the know.

This to me,shows that this is propaganda and not an irrefutably established and valid protection measure.

How can a scarf etc possibly achieve anything other than disguising the wearer’s expression and ease of communication?

No wonder society’s norms are under threat.

170368 ▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to OKUK, 3, #1079 of 2087 🔗

This has probably been posted before, but here’s a paper published in the May 2020 edition of the CDC Emerging Infections Diseases journal.

The paper concludes that masks have no appreciable effect on the spread of influenza.

Paper: Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza in Nonhealthcare Settings — Personal Protective and Environmental Measures
By: Jingyi Xiao, Eunice Y. C. Shiu, Huizhi Gao, Jessica Y. Wong, Min W. Fong, Sukhyun Ryu, Benjamin J. Cowling
First published: 2020-02-06
Accessed from: https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article

“Although mechanistic studies support the potential effect of hand hygiene or face masks, evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”

“We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility.”

I saw the above paper mentioned in Ivor Cummins’ Viral Issue Crucial Update Sept 18th video, at 16m30s.

171159 ▶▶ annie, replying to Dan Clarke, #1080 of 2087 🔗

Muzzles will have no effect one way or the other.

170209 calchas, replying to calchas, 3, #1081 of 2087 🔗

“We would like however to report on the strange pneumonia epidemic that occurred in and around Brescia in Lombardy (Italy) between September and November 2018. As you may know, that is also the first epicenter of the current “Covid” epidemic in Europe. Only this one happened slightly more than a year before. It was extremely peculiar, and was extensively covered by the local press. Here were its main characteristics (references will be found below).

Local hospitals were overwhelmed: over 850 people were admitted in a short time span, among which at least 10 died. Astonishingly, the patients affected were 70% male. They were furthermore predominantly elderly, or with diseases that involve immunosuppression and/or other risk factors such as smoking. Children were barely affected . The patients that presented the most serious conditions suffered from respiratory distress and had to be put on ventilators.

Furthermore, health authorities at the time said this episode was unlike anything they had ever seen.”


170221 ▶▶ RickH, replying to calchas, 1, #1082 of 2087 🔗

Well, well, well – SARS-CoV-2 isn’t unique at all!

170253 ▶▶ PoshPanic, replying to calchas, 2, #1083 of 2087 🔗

The Swiss Doctor page highlighted this back in late March. That part of Italy has terrible air quality during certain months. Not unlike Madrid, or New York, or London etc.

170277 ▶▶ Nessimmersion, replying to calchas, 3, #1084 of 2087 🔗

Unlikely to be Covid 19 then as smoking has a protective effect to that variant.
More than likeley another Coronavirus / flu combined with poor air quality.

170216 zacaway, replying to zacaway, 20, #1085 of 2087 🔗

There is an update on Simon Dolan’s latest application to Court for an injunction against the Government’s restrictions.

Here’s a cracking opening quote from the Statement of Facts:

The power to confine law-abiding individuals to their homes, commandeer their businesses, forbid private gatherings… and dictate their personal behavior cannot, in any imaginable universe, be considered a “detail.” This comprehensive claim to control virtually every aspect of a person’s life is something we normally associate with a prison, not a free society governed by the rule of law.

Full text where that appears is here if you have time to kill this afternoon:

All the new papers filed are link at the bottom of the case page:

170260 ▶▶ Carrie, replying to zacaway, 3, #1086 of 2087 🔗

Also on his Twitter feed: https://twitter.com/NickyBenedetti/status/1313443822978859008

Live music at lunchtime today, interestingly they are playing Holst’s ‘Mars – The Bringer of War’…. prophetic?

170275 ▶▶▶ zacaway, replying to Carrie, 5, #1087 of 2087 🔗

Bring it on! Hope the judges are as happy to stick it to Boris et al as they were last year.

170295 ▶▶▶▶ 6097 Smith W, replying to zacaway, 1, #1088 of 2087 🔗

They won’t be they are on the side of the globalists

170537 ▶▶▶ p02099003, replying to Carrie, #1089 of 2087 🔗

Perhaps they’ll play Jupiter (The joy bringer) at the end.

170939 ▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to Carrie, #1090 of 2087 🔗

Mars will be unusually close tonight at 38.6 million miles away, the closest it will get to us for the next 15 years.

170356 ▶▶ Basics, replying to zacaway, 2, #1091 of 2087 🔗

Thank you to all concerned including those sharing this. It is a mark of how strong responsible caring, thoughtful and above all reasonable humans can be. Light in the darkness. The core Dolan group who are doing a first class job under huge pressure, the support that everyone is lending to their effort is really something to see.

170386 ▶▶ DocRC, replying to zacaway, 5, #1092 of 2087 🔗

I think this may well succeed. Lord Sumption has said that he thinks they have incorrectly used provisions under the Public Health (control of disease) Act 1984 to issue statutory instruments mandating face masks, the rule of 6, the 10pm curfew etc. He believes this was deliberately done to avoid regular parliamentary scrutiny which would have occurred had they more correctly used The Civil Contingencies Act 2004. Of course if The Government lose, they may well enact the same legislation under the latter act but would be bound to bring each piece of legislation before Parliament!

170411 ▶▶▶ zacaway, replying to DocRC, #1093 of 2087 🔗

Yes, I think a reasonable outcome to hope for is that the court rules their use of the 1984 Act is unlawful, therefore they will have to switch to using the Civil Contingencies Act, which at least requires some scrutiny. The Government can’t really complain of judicial overreach in this case, as they can still do everything they want – just with Parliament’s approval – as it should be.

They might still stiff us anyway, but at least we can see who voted for it.

170474 ▶▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to zacaway, 1, #1094 of 2087 🔗

What troubles me about that outcome is that at least currently I can scream and shout (for all the good it does me) about how the government is acting undemocratically.

But the minute parliament is involved in the “decision” process, my argument goes out of the window. “Look Mrs Cow, your democratically-elected representatives are now democratically representing you!”

But of course they won’t be representing me, any more than they were when they washed their hands of the whole thing and handed the reins over to Doris and his merry band of bell-ends.

The idea that we have anything remotely approaching a democracy in this country is laughable. So every four years I have the opportunity to vote for some dickhead who has no requirement to do anything I ask of them once they’ve benefitted from my vote? Super. I really feel democratically involved.

The only democracy we have in this country is the ability to decide where we spend our money, to whatever extent we can even do that.

Ugh. By the end of each news cycle, I feel as though my adrenal gland has been used as an accordion. I need to lie down.

170500 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to Mabel Cow, #1095 of 2087 🔗

In fairness, that’s how representative democracy works -you vote for a representative, and he or she represents you. He’s not a delegate bound to follow all your views.

The simple reality is that 67 million individuals can’t all have point by point control of government, and nor is it practicable (or desirable, probably) to have in effect a vote on every decision. But if there were a vote, it’s likely our fellow constituents would outvote us both on how our MPs should vote in the House, on the coronapanic, sadly.

The system is as good as any other, in theory, in an imperfect world. The problems we have are more to do with systemic issues such as culture, society and party structures etc, imo.

170553 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to Mark, #1096 of 2087 🔗

I absolutely agree with you. My frustration is that I feel that for matters that affect the entire country, representative democracy doesn’t cut it.

Putting aside the technical issues, to what extent would you be in favour of a digital referendum system, one where every person (16 or over) had the opportunity to vote on matters that affect everyone?

To my mind, that would at least allow everyone’s vote to count equally.

Currently, if I want to unseat my MP, I basically need to move to another electoral district because my MP polled more than twice their nearest competitor. It’s no surprise that my letters to that MP had no effect: they have no chance of ever losing their seat.

That’s what I mean about not living in a democracy.

171138 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to Mabel Cow, #1097 of 2087 🔗

Democracy is inherently an illusion, though it’s certainly arguable that it is “the worst form of government apart from all the others”.

I don’t much like referendums or direct democracy in practice. I think it fosters the illusion of control. In principle, it’s better to sit back and accept that things happen that you can’t control.

Unfortunately every so often the bastards do something that you can’t just accept, like this coronapanic catastrophe.

In theory direct democracy would act as a control on elected representatives, and it can be argued that it works that way in Switzerland for instance, but in practice most of the things my government does that I hate have widespread support and would probably win in a referendum, such as the coronapanic, or allowing officials to”take the knee” to nasty stuff like BLM, or allowing laws that infringe basic freedoms such as “hate speech” nonsense.

Because in practice people are heavily propagandised on these issues, to the extent that in many cases they don’t even realise they have been indoctrinated.

It’s really not much comfort when your government is doing something like the Iraq crime and blunder, or the coronapanic, to know that more than half of your fellow citizens have voted for it, so what real use is a referendum, digital or otherwise?

170617 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ charleyfarley, replying to Mark, #1098 of 2087 🔗

And external influence including bribery.

170944 ▶▶▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to Mabel Cow, #1099 of 2087 🔗

And not to watch/listen to ‘news cycles’, MC. 🙂

170430 ▶▶▶ leggy, replying to DocRC, 1, #1100 of 2087 🔗

Civil Contingencies Act needs to be renewed in Parliament every 7 days I believe.

170438 ▶▶▶▶ DocRC, replying to leggy, 1, #1101 of 2087 🔗

Yes, you can see how inconvenient that would be for Halfcock and Co.!

170476 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to DocRC, 2, #1102 of 2087 🔗

If course, that kind of inconvenience is exactly what is required for such enabling measures, to ensure they are only used when absolutely necessary. Which is why they were written into the Act.

You would think (if you’d never met an actual MP) that understanding that basic concept would be well within the capability of an elected representative. Then again, more fool us, collectively, for voting for these functional morons.

170497 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ DocRC, replying to Mark, #1103 of 2087 🔗

Indeed. Despite Hancock’s statement the other day that they would allow Parliament a vote on measures affecting the whole of England or The UK, I see they have pulled tomorrow’s vote on the 10pm curfew as it looked like they might lose it!!

170512 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to DocRC, #1104 of 2087 🔗

Pretty transparent. In normal times, of course, the shameless manipulation in that would be pilloried in the media, but it’s likely many of the key parts will soft pedal the point, “for the greater good”. I think we can rely now on the Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph and Spectator to put the boot in a bit, perhaps a polite tickle from the Times. The rest? Forget about the BBC, obviously.

170259 chaos, replying to chaos, -8, #1105 of 2087 🔗

Cheer up everyone! Good news!

Carrie has just allowed Boris to do her up the responsibly sourced cocoa highway. It means free Converse All Stars for everyone and the opportunity to train as a tofu baker.

170285 ▶▶ mattghg, replying to chaos, 1, #1106 of 2087 🔗

I did not need to read that.

170311 ▶▶▶ chaos, replying to mattghg, #1107 of 2087 🔗

go on. imagine it. bojo. carrie. I’ll huff and I’ll puff and I’ll smash your door down!

170679 ▶▶▶▶ Nigel Sherratt, replying to chaos, #1108 of 2087 🔗

One of Christopher Hitchens’ list of over-rated things. Quite a good list although I like champagne.

170420 ▶▶ stefarm, replying to chaos, #1109 of 2087 🔗

Other way round surely

170265 chaos, replying to chaos, -2, #1110 of 2087 🔗

In other news.. the Queen is graduatlly being sidelined, by the covid ruse and age…

The spider memo great greta reset king wants to be the kind of king that existed prior to Cromwell… one that controls, dictates, chooses direction.

170287 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to chaos, 2, #1111 of 2087 🔗

Does anyone know if the Queen is still alive?

170760 ▶▶▶ Carrie, replying to Richard O, 1, #1112 of 2087 🔗

Good question…

170307 ▶▶ zacaway, replying to chaos, #1113 of 2087 🔗

She has been quite, did Charlie quietly bump her off when no one was looking?

170274 T. Prince, replying to T. Prince, 3, #1114 of 2087 🔗

This in Spectator update: Buffoon Johnson resorts to the direct approach of just taking the p*ss out of us all…..

“The speech was a deliberate attempt to be very upbeat. He began by promising the conference that by next year’s gathering, there would be no restrictions on the size of events and no social distancing, even indoors. This is of a piece with Johnson’s view that there will be a gamechanger by March, either a vaccine or instant spit testing. But if he is wrong, and there are still restrictions in place this time next year, the mood in the Tory party will be very bleak indeed.”

170281 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to T. Prince, 13, #1115 of 2087 🔗

There will not be a Tory Party this time next year. Or a Parliament. Or a legal system. Just a board of technocrats overseeing the military/police/medical suppression orders.

170291 ▶▶▶ chaos, replying to Richard O, 9, #1116 of 2087 🔗

The polls will soon change. The 1922 committee is already concerned. Boris is increasingly mocked and despised. Unless the great reset davos crew have been incredibly clever, we could see the end of Boris after brino brexit. He’s begun to smell much faster than May did. What happens then…

170349 ▶▶▶▶ RickH, replying to chaos, 2, #1117 of 2087 🔗

Actually – thinking like a Tory (a strange experience) – I think I’d want Alex the Turk over a cliff in pretty short order.

170351 ▶▶▶▶▶ T. Prince, replying to RickH, #1118 of 2087 🔗

By Christmas?

170398 ▶▶▶▶▶ Tyneside Tigress, replying to RickH, 2, #1119 of 2087 🔗

He is already on borrowed time, Rick. I want him alive though, because I want him brought to justice in full public view so this never happens again.

170389 ▶▶▶▶ Tyneside Tigress, replying to chaos, #1120 of 2087 🔗

Agree with all of that. November is the ‘reset’, only need to figure out who will be steering for the next 9 months or so. Having watched Dishy Rishi – or is it the other way round? – being interviewed by Niall Patterson on Sky this morning, he is NOT PM material in my view.

170465 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to Tyneside Tigress, 1, #1121 of 2087 🔗

The problem is, as always with our current political class, who is?

170297 ▶▶ Bugle, replying to T. Prince, 1, #1122 of 2087 🔗

Johnson is worried about being outflanked by Sunak.

170320 ▶▶▶ DavidC, replying to Bugle, 2, #1123 of 2087 🔗

Well he’s doing a very good job of enabling it with his idiocy and bufoonery.


170290 Dan Clarke, 19, #1124 of 2087 🔗

Hancock denying treatment to people with serious diseases until his pet project covid is ‘under control’, surely that is under Crimes to Humanity.

170308 ▶▶ Victoria, replying to Tom Blackburn, #1126 of 2087 🔗

Johnson said the problem with the UK justice system is that it has been captured by ‘leftie human rights lawyers and other do-gooders’.

170334 ▶▶▶ RickH, replying to Victoria, #1127 of 2087 🔗

You know you’ve got a problem case when a narcissistic git of a joke prime minister in a democratic country starts on this tack. Translation :

“Mummy, Mummy, somebody wants to stop me being a prick and doing what I like. I’m King of the World, Mummy. ‘Snot fair.”

Mr Toad is so overwhelmed by that psychotic narcissism that his actions may be down to stupidity – but he’s a dangerous freak in any case. What I can’t work out is why anyone would have thought otherwise.

Johnson and Trump – the decline of the ‘anglosphere’

170299 Victoria, replying to Victoria, 3, #1128 of 2087 🔗

Dental Health news from the US re the health danger of mercury fillings (aka amalgam fillings/silver fillings)

  • September 24, 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration released its long-overdue safety communication on amalgam
  • The FDA warns mercury fillings may adversely affect people in certain high-risk groups and should be avoided
  • Groups identified as being at increased risk for harmful effects from dental mercury fillings include pregnant women and their developing fetuses, nursing women, women who are planning to become pregnant, infants and children under the age of 6, people with neurological diseases, impaired kidney function or heightened sensitivity to mercury or other amalgam components
  • After years of pressure from Consumers for Dental Choice and its allies, the FDA finally agreed to reopen the amalgam issue, and now admits dental amalgam releases mercury vapor that can cause health problems in some individuals
  • The FDA also advised against use of the misleading term “silver fillings,” and urges patients to discuss all dental filling options with their dentist


170315 ▶▶ DavidC, replying to Victoria, 2, #1129 of 2087 🔗

One of my friends is a (now retired) dentist. we had a discussion some time ago about fillings and the modern materials used. He maintains that mercury fillings have various advantages over modern materials in terms of durability, longevity and stability and if he had a choice he would always choose mercury amalgam, the risks are/were minimal if any.

Newer does not always mean better. Unfortunately (driven as much by profits where consumers have to keep consuming) most people have bought into ‘It’s new, so it’s better, so I’ve got to have it’.


170391 ▶▶▶ Anne Sceptic, replying to DavidC, 1, #1130 of 2087 🔗

The trouble is dentists are not necessarily expert on the effect of mercury on the rest of the body. Take fluoride for example. You are advised to go to hospital if you ingest too much as it is a poison. Yet every day millions brush our teeth and it enters our bloodstream as it passes through the thin skin of our mouth.
Take a look at Robert Kennedy jr website childrenshealthdefense.org for information on the effect on children. Fluoride was used in the gulags to pacify the inmates, being done to entire population here. Fluoride calcifies the pineal gland (your third eye) your bullsh*t detector. Also soft tissues. It adversely affects the hypothalamus gland which affect metabolism. After 10 years of trying to diet I gave up fluoride, aluminium (from deodorant) and chlorine (tap water) I lost 3 stone in 6 months without trying. This might be what is causing the obesity epidemic.

170402 ▶▶▶▶ DavidC, replying to Anne Sceptic, 1, #1131 of 2087 🔗

I take your point Anne, but flouride and mercury are not the same thing. Also, it’s an amalgam, not pure mercury – I for one would not want a pure mercury filling (even if it were possible).

Not all dentists are proponents of flouride.


171157 ▶▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to DavidC, #1132 of 2087 🔗

My gob is stuffed full of amalgam fillings. So is that of virtually any person aged 60 or over.

170303 Anne Sceptic, replying to Anne Sceptic, 1, #1133 of 2087 🔗

Hi everyone, not sure if this has been mentioned. Please take a look at the earth United website. This needs to be widely shared. This is a lawful route out of this tyranny.
Essentially after your birth and without full disclosure to you or your parents, when your birth certificate is issued you are declared to be a dead corporation, lost at sea. This corporation a legal person is then legislated for in Parliament. The Parliamentary statutes apply to this legal fiction. You as a man or woman are only bound by those laws (and as this was by fraud you are not bound) if you consent. They try to trick you into accepting their legal rules and regulations by the use of words that do not mean what you think they mean. Your name with all capital letters on your driving licence does not follow the rules of English. It attaches you to the legal fiction. Similarly adding Mr or Mrs etc.
It is a minefield. Take a look at Earth United where a Canadian and South African start to explain it. Also Common Law Court there is a recent explanation on the Charlie Ward YouTube site. Also look at Annavonreitz.com an American judge for her take. Please look read up on it and share urgently

170333 ▶▶ Two-Six, replying to Anne Sceptic, 2, #1134 of 2087 🔗

This is an interesting thing indeed. Registering your “birth” under British Admiralty law as an asset of a corporation, a vessel at sea.

170362 ▶▶▶ Anne Sceptic, replying to Two-Six, #1135 of 2087 🔗

Yes still not sure of the best way out of it. A Notice to the government is a potential minefield with all the word trickery. I have signed up for Earth United and registered my birth certificate and claimed the legal fiction on the Common Law Court. They have practical information as to how to fight back. Anna Von Reitz has lots of detailed legal arguments and copies of notices she has sent to Congress the Vatican etc. Her article on the Cestui Que Vie act is the best I have seen. No coincidence it was enacted in 1666, the same year as the plague and the Great Fire of London.

170377 ▶▶ Gladiatrix, replying to Anne Sceptic, 1, #1136 of 2087 🔗

This is Freemen of the Land propaganda and has no legal basis.

170399 ▶▶▶ Anne Sceptic, replying to Gladiatrix, 1, #1137 of 2087 🔗

It has a lawful basis

170304 mattghg, replying to mattghg, 1, #1138 of 2087 🔗


Seems like a good idea. Any suggestions?

170373 ▶▶ leggy, replying to mattghg, #1139 of 2087 🔗

Not wearing a mask works for me.

170305 zacaway, replying to zacaway, 4, #1140 of 2087 🔗

James Forsyth reports on Our Dear Leader’s promise that we’ve only got another year of social distancing and related bollocks to put up with, then we’ll be saved by either his “moonshot” daily testing or we’ll all get jabbed with his super-duper vaccine:


Plus a windmill for everyone.

170403 ▶▶ A. Contrarian, replying to zacaway, 2, #1141 of 2087 🔗

It was only 6 months the other day….

170506 ▶▶▶ Julian, replying to A. Contrarian, 1, #1142 of 2087 🔗

Good one for the waverers – ask them how long, and have they noticed they are being gaslighted?

170879 ▶▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to Julian, #1143 of 2087 🔗

This is good advice – thanks Julian, I shall be asking people.

170664 ▶▶ Bella, replying to zacaway, #1144 of 2087 🔗

I haven’t noticed anyone in my neck of the woods ant-social distancing for a long time.

170316 TJN, replying to TJN, 5, #1145 of 2087 🔗

Just been out in the car on an errand. Another car wanted to turn right, out of a petrol station, in front of me. Let them go. Driver behind them was wearing a muzzle. Didn’t stop for them.

170346 ▶▶ Two-Six, replying to TJN, 1, #1146 of 2087 🔗

Be careful with that. Honestly, I have tried it, “Revenge Driving” it’s a really bad idea.

170353 ▶▶▶ TJN, replying to Two-Six, 1, #1147 of 2087 🔗

Well I’d done my bit letting one out, so was under no further moral obligation. Sight of the muzzle always puts me off.

170490 ▶▶▶▶ Nessimmersion, replying to TJN, 2, #1148 of 2087 🔗

Remember in the event of a RTA, all you have to do is a” Officer I saw the other driver slump momentarily behind the wheel, he was wearing a mask”
Driving whilst impaired, could have suffered Hypoxia.

170318 Richard O, replying to Richard O, 4, #1149 of 2087 🔗

Apologies if this is a repeat post:


Assuming that the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill is passed, the state can now legally murder you, certify your death and cremate your body.

170367 ▶▶ leggy, replying to Richard O, 2, #1150 of 2087 🔗


170744 ▶▶ Carrie, replying to Richard O, 1, #1151 of 2087 🔗

Can we get Simon Dolan to tweet that out? I see that the numbers of people following him are growing!

170322 Victoria, replying to Victoria, 6, #1152 of 2087 🔗

So our amazing leader (NOT!!) is now revealing 95% fixed rate mortgages so everyone can own their home – DM headline

Is he on mind altering drugs? If you don’t have a job, you cant buy a home even if it is a 100% mortgage

170340 ▶▶ T. Prince, replying to Victoria, 4, #1153 of 2087 🔗

I thought you said

“If you don’t have a jab ….”!!!

170395 ▶▶▶ Sam Vimes, replying to T. Prince, 1, #1154 of 2087 🔗

Nice one, “Government promises millions of new jabs…”

170358 ▶▶ Ozzie, replying to Victoria, 5, #1155 of 2087 🔗

Haven’t we been here before? The financial crisis of 2008 was in part caused by lots of money lent to people who didn’t have the means to service their mortgages.

Just what we need – another economic crisis!

170366 ▶▶▶ leggy, replying to Ozzie, 3, #1156 of 2087 🔗

I think we’ve got one already to be honest.

170380 ▶▶▶ RickH, replying to Ozzie, 1, #1157 of 2087 🔗


170324 Basics, 1, #1158 of 2087 🔗

A sign of the times. The local rag has a clickbait headline –

Nicola Sturgeon: ‘What the Scottish Government is NOT proposing to do.’

Isn’t that just wonderful. Top classy raggery.

170329 Victoria, replying to Victoria, 20, #1159 of 2087 🔗

Matt Hancock warns cancer patients will only be treated if Covid-19 stays ‘under control’ – as he is savaged for ‘having no idea how many infected people are walking around’ after testing shameless saw 16,000 cases missed – DM headline

What? International Criminal Court in the Hague for him!!!!!

170345 ▶▶ DavidC, replying to Victoria, 4, #1160 of 2087 🔗

‘The NHS is open for busness’. R-i-g-h-t…


170357 ▶▶ RickH, replying to Victoria, 3, #1161 of 2087 🔗

Amazing on several fronts.

This generation of Cupid Stunts need to be brought back under control. I’m surprised that the Tory string-pullers in their clubs,with their aprons and rolled-up trousers – and wallets – have allowed it to get this far down Ridicule Road.

170400 ▶▶ A. Contrarian, replying to Victoria, 5, #1162 of 2087 🔗

He is absolutely psychopathic.

170742 ▶▶ Carrie, replying to Victoria, 3, #1163 of 2087 🔗

Is Bill G telling him to kill as many as possible?

170336 DavidC, replying to DavidC, 13, #1164 of 2087 🔗

“If like me you’ve argued that the recent increase in daily cases is because we’re testing more people each day…”

Toby, PLEASE stop referring to ‘cases’. They are NOT cases! They are POSITIVE TEST RESULTS! In medical terms, a case is a symptomatic individual who may need hospitalisaion.


170350 ▶▶ TJN, replying to DavidC, 4, #1165 of 2087 🔗

An important point. I wish Toby would get this right.

170339 CGL, replying to CGL, 2, #1166 of 2087 🔗

A single reply from my MP to (all) my emails over the last fortnight – Awkward Git are you out there somewhere?

“Thank you for your emails.

I would first of all like to say that I am very sympathetic towards the points you have raised in your correspondence. Like my colleagues on the backbenches, I absolutely recognise that MPs must play a crucial role in scrutinising the response to ensure that the measures introduced are proportionate to the situation as it stands. I do believe that the Government’s response has so far been proportionate – because a lockdown was imperative in the first instance, and now the focus is on limited restrictions to protect personal safety but still allow us to work, attend school and socialise in a way that puts us on as strong as possible footing as we enter the winter months. However, there is a limit to what the public and the economy can withstand. And of course, there are many other consequences from restricting personal freedom which are of critical concern to me.

You may be aware that no amendments were selected, but the Government was receptive to the concerns raised by MPs from across the House. Over the last fortnight, Ministers met with MPs to find a sensible middle ground between ensuring Parliamentary scrutiny and the Government’s ability to act swiftly wherever necessary. Matt Hancock recently confirmed that where an introduction of measures will affect England or the whole of the UK, Parliament will be consulted – with a preceding vote wherever necessary.

This virus has seen the introduction of some uncomfortable measures in order to support our public health and it is only right that MPs have the ability to scrutinise Ministers on these on behalf of constituents who raise valid concerns.

Please rest assured I will be doing all I can to support my constituents to get the balance right and I am fully aware of the competing arguments on this issue.”

170374 ▶▶ RickH, replying to CGL, 2, #1167 of 2087 🔗

Well –

I’ve had nothing but automated replies from my MP since my first e-mail of 13th September.

I have always corresponded politely and concisely, and have never expected a detailed reply to every addendum that I have communicated regarding the facts surrounding parliamentary votes.

But I have had nothing except the usual knee-jerk ‘Covid makes it all difficult’ shit.

‘Waste of space’?

Too polite.

170601 ▶▶ Awkward Git, replying to CGL, 2, #1168 of 2087 🔗

I’ve just finished dinner and feeling stuffed even if it was vegetarian.

Sent an e-mail to MP Deshi today just for the hell of it:

“I am not a constituent of yours but after seeing the petulant and childish behaviour of our Secretary of State for Health at the end of his reply to your question I thought I would send a message of support to you and I hope that you annoy him like this everytime you question him as it shows truly what sort of pathetic person he is and how he is not fit to hold public office.

I have written to him about various important facts he must answer to both the House of Commons and the people of this country but he has not even acknowledged the correspondence let alone attempted to answer them in any forum.

Add in here about the FOI from DHSC saying PCR test results mean nothing and included Whitty’s comments on 21 July about everything was under control before incarceration started etc”


“Feel free to use anything in the above in your role of Member of Parlaimeet and holding the Government to account over their wilful destruction of this country.

I have the FOI answers and other information available especially with regard to the way the legislation about coronavirus was introduced starting on 30th January 2020 and nor March 26th 2020 as is commonly believed to be the start of it all if you require it.”

171006 ▶▶▶ CGL, replying to Awkward Git, #1169 of 2087 🔗

Very eloquent as ever – thank you. Glad you enjoyed your tea!

170359 Mathew Bennell, replying to Mathew Bennell, 1, #1170 of 2087 🔗

At the moment too many sheeple think that the mask is the saviour of the human race, how could that be changed?

To wear a mask safely it should be 1 use & then throw away. They’re nice & cheap so what if people did just that, you wouldn’t have to wear them just put them EVERYWHERE!

Throw them on the floor, hang them from trees, railings, benches, road signs, if you’ve got a few £ do an airdrop, you get the picture.

They’re basically toxic waste & as appealing as poobags littering the pavement so could we change the image of them so the sheeple subconsciously think of them as the dirty germ infested rags they are as they step over them & see them piled high all over the place?

Maybe have a catchy slogan like “#DumptheMask” or something like that to give a cause to the protest?

They’re already littered all over the place now so if we really tried we could drown the county in them, anyone think this could work or am I barking? If nothing else it would give people a feeling of being able to at least DO something to show their anger?

170413 ▶▶ Dan Clarke, replying to Mathew Bennell, 2, #1171 of 2087 🔗

Dr Hilary Jones now an anti masker on GMTV yesterday

170455 ▶▶ Smelly Melly, replying to Mathew Bennell, 3, #1172 of 2087 🔗

What a great idea. Hang a few on railings, just like dog poo bags and see how long they stay there.

170872 ▶▶ JohnB, replying to Mathew Bennell, #1173 of 2087 🔗


170375 Sam Vimes, replying to Sam Vimes, 5, #1174 of 2087 🔗

Bunter and his pals have a message for any of you who have relatives in a care home, or anyone who knows someone with cancer: “Say goodbye”.

170390 ▶▶ DavidC, replying to Sam Vimes, #1175 of 2087 🔗



170379 Basics, replying to Basics, 1, #1176 of 2087 🔗

Ha! Another one gone. A friend. Reached that pithy “you’re not into conspiracy theories are you?” I had been relating me good news about Dr Reiner Fuellmich looking towards starting a class action and had unintentionally trigger said friend. I then added the words “10 times as many people are dying of flu”, and a friend turns and walks away.

Further on my way I met another friend whom I have not seen throughout. Really nice to cinversationally tumble through the layers of perceptions to get to the base that essentially something’s up and a finger points to the politicians.

Not appropriate to say more about politicians motivations – it’s very difficult sometimes to be happy with an incomplete status. Keeping a friend is worth it.

170409 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to Basics, 11, #1177 of 2087 🔗

To be honest I couldn’t care less if my few remaining family and friends who still talk to me disowned me completely. I’m done with the facade of social acceptance.

170432 ▶▶▶ Basics, replying to Richard O, #1178 of 2087 🔗

Each to their own Richard. There is no point in alienating people. Or more correctly we each have limits of how much compromise we make before alienating people. I think that’s part of being human. I value a friend who has a really nice warm open mind over one who is just really nice.

A judgement might be made that by talking to such a level and sticking is more effective than talking about the fact that Kobe Bryants grave is at Corona del Mar* or whatever.

It is and what are the chances, really.

170502 ▶▶▶▶ Julian, replying to Basics, 6, #1179 of 2087 🔗

I think it depends on the friend. I had some that are enthusiastically complicit in the wickedness, who have refused to engage sincerely with my arguments. They are in my view beyond help and hope and bad for me and I will not have further contact with them.

Some have just started blanking me since I expressed scepticism. Again, they have been dropped – at least do me the courtesy of saying why you’re dropping me. It’s like I am some mad uncle spouting genocide – they are embarrassed.

Some have compared me to Hitler. They are also off the list.

Others I have kept, despite them not being especially sceptical, because they are decent human beings who are prepared to listen and argue, or who are simply innocently deluded and don’t have what it takes to educate themselves.

170686 ▶▶▶▶▶ Basics, replying to Julian, 1, #1180 of 2087 🔗

Strangely Julian you come across as one of the most level headed thinking people anyone could ever wish to meet.

I lost a friend by them literally turning and walking without and strong words or any confrontation simply what I recorded above.

It’s part of life I suppose and the wiser one becomes the easier to see the difficulty isn’t a reflection on the person.

170616 ▶▶▶ Kath Andrews, replying to Richard O, 2, #1181 of 2087 🔗

I’ve broken contact with my family and 2 friends. Other friendships have significantly strengthened and I’ve made several new friends that I would not have made if it wasn’t for this plandemic… Hey ho.

170740 ▶▶ Carrie, replying to Basics, 1, #1182 of 2087 🔗

I think Ivor Cummins video ‘Why are they doing this?’ is a good one to share…

170393 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to PoshPanic, 12, #1184 of 2087 🔗

Dishi Rishi indeed. Another prick on board with the complete destruction humanity. Fuck off.

170407 ▶▶▶ PoshPanic, replying to Richard O, 3, #1185 of 2087 🔗

Hancock is now prioritising Covid over over Cancer, whilst the Blonde Blob is promoting gadgets. WTAF!?

170737 ▶▶▶ Carrie, replying to Richard O, 1, #1186 of 2087 🔗

An ex banker… Goldman Sachs no less. I trust him not one iota!

170401 ▶▶ RickH, replying to PoshPanic, 8, #1187 of 2087 🔗

I thought Toby Young’s enthusiasm for Rich Goldman-Sunak was a bit delusional and premature.

The performing arts is one of the UK’s actual productive strengths, FFS – unlike funny-money banking that has bolloxed the economy.

What a massive turd of a cupid stunt.

170408 ▶▶▶ DavidC, replying to RickH, 1, #1188 of 2087 🔗

Spot on about the performing arts Rick.


170415 ▶▶▶ PoshPanic, replying to RickH, 1, #1189 of 2087 🔗

We obviously don’t need the tax from the £100 billion a year the creative industries bring into this country?

170448 ▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to PoshPanic, 1, #1190 of 2087 🔗

Why would we need that, when we can just carry on getting all the money we need just by shaking the money trees in the magic money forest?

170736 ▶▶▶ Carrie, replying to RickH, #1191 of 2087 🔗

Wonder what Andrew Lloyd Webber will make of this? He was participating in a Covid vaccine trial…

170444 ▶▶ PhilipF, replying to PoshPanic, 10, #1192 of 2087 🔗

What a dismal country we are creating. No music, theatres, gigs, comedy, nightclubs, sport, exhibitions, cinema, protests…
Well, “if it saves just one life…:

170501 ▶▶ PoshPanic, replying to PoshPanic, #1193 of 2087 🔗

Okay, so ITV tweeted this and are now back tracking, possibly after instruction?


170733 ▶▶ Carrie, replying to PoshPanic, 1, #1194 of 2087 🔗

So are the likes of Emma Thompson going to re-train as Covid wombles????

170385 Ceriain, 3, #1195 of 2087 🔗

Parts of Johnson’s speech clearly written before all this crap started.

He’s talking, in parts, as if this has never happened.

170732 ▶▶ Carrie, replying to Dan Clarke, #1197 of 2087 🔗

Posted this a few days ago but no one replied so I think it got missed!

170412 Sir Patrick Vaccine, replying to Sir Patrick Vaccine, 9, #1198 of 2087 🔗

When killing people is Government policy

By Peter Lloyd Conservative Woman October 6, 2020

NO Conservative Prime Minister can survive if he or she is taking decisions that are contrary to the interests of most people in the country. The Covid-19 measures which Boris Johnson is forcing on the public are clearly against those interests, and worse is being planned.

The health, education, employment, finances and social and mental wellbeing of the population is being destroyed for the illusory goal of stopping the spread of a coronavirus that is essentially harmless to 99 per cent of the population, and lethal almost exclusively to the elderly with serious underlying medical conditions, as are many strains of seasonal flu. Much of the damage being wreaked is disguised by the Chancellor’s furlough scheme and other taxpayer-funded handouts, but revealed through an explosion of government debt which will have severe negative consequences for all of us, particularly future generations.

The ramping-up of virus tests with the dubious PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) methodology is inevitably showing more ‘cases’ which in reality may be just harmless fragments of the Covid-19 (or other) coronavirus RNA that can’t be transmitted to others. These are not infections and certainly not illnesses. The bar on proof of infection is too low. The government refuses to acknowledge that this increase in cases is largely due to the increased testing, and allows the message to embed in the surrounding narrative that a positive test – which may also be a false positive – is equivalent to being ill when the overwhelming majority of those who are Covid-19 positive don’t become ill, let alone die.

It is in the business of exaggeration and fearmongering along with most of the mainstream media. The most important measure of what is happening medically is surely the number of deaths that can be attributed, to a greater or lesser extent, to Covid-19. The graph below from the Office for National Statistics (taken from the ‘Lockdown Sceptics’ latest newsletter) gives the up-to-date figures, showing that Covid-19 attributed deaths since June are running well below those of flu/pneumonia, and that the total weekly UK death numbers from these lung-related infections are running in line with the five-year average.

As fast as the numbers of those seriously ill, and the daily death toll from the virus, are declining, the risk of other undiagnosed and untreated serious illnesses and deaths is rising because of the lockdown mentality still affecting the NHS and other public services, encouraged by government. On Saturday 66 GPs wrote to the Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, urging him to treat non-Covid deaths as equal to those from Covid. The doctors know that this is not happening at present. For reasons of projecting an image of action and having illusory control over the path of the virus, only Covid deaths matter to the government.

The doctors’ letter reports that there have been more than 30,000 excess deaths in private homes since March, but fewer than one in ten are caused by Covid-19. They are also concerned that ‘the pandemic has resulted in an inflation of acute cardiovascular deaths, most of which did not relate to Covid-19’. They also point to a report suggesting that child suicide rates increased during lockdown and, for these doctors, harm should be measured as more than Covid deaths.

There is so little pressure from the Conservative Party, MPs and the media for the government to act rationally and in the interest of the country as a whole that the government doesn’t feel it has to explain why non-Covid-19 deaths and serious untreated illnesses don’t matter. It has a monomaniacal obsession with Covid-19 which demonstrates how unaccountable the government is to the overall public interest. There is no rigour left in our system of parliamentary and public accountability, which needs a major overhaul. Far more people are dying because of the government’s measures than are being saved by them. The wholesale destruction of society is taking place for no significant gain in health or mortality and it is government policy.

170419 ▶▶ Dan Clarke, replying to Sir Patrick Vaccine, 1, #1199 of 2087 🔗

And they will still say that it could have been worse, no words for any of them and the whole of our rogue Parliament

170414 Sir Patrick Vaccine, replying to Sir Patrick Vaccine, 1, #1200 of 2087 🔗

The Government has been accused of “running scared” after a vote on the 10pm ‘coronavirus curfew’ for pubs and restaurants tomorrow night was quietly dropped.
Dozens of Tory rebels had been threatening to vote against the order that all pubs, bars and restaurants in England must close amid claims that it is not grounded in scientific evidence

170424 ▶▶ PhilipF, replying to Sir Patrick Vaccine, 1, #1201 of 2087 🔗

So it must lapse?

170442 ▶▶ Dan Clarke, replying to Sir Patrick Vaccine, 1, #1202 of 2087 🔗

The Scientific Evidence : The Virus is only around after 10pm

170416 Ceriain, replying to Ceriain, 3, #1203 of 2087 🔗

Ministers ‘running scared’ as curfew vote pulled amid looming Tory rebellion


Edit: You just beat me to it, Sir Patrick 🙂

170425 ▶▶ RickH, replying to Ceriain, #1204 of 2087 🔗

Remember – the DTs is behind a paywall for most of us.

What’s the story?

170426 ▶▶▶ Ceriain, replying to RickH, 1, #1205 of 2087 🔗

Sorry, Rick.

The Government has been accused
of “running scared” after a vote on the 10pm ‘coronavirus curfew’ for
pubs and restaurants tomorrow night was quietly dropped.

Dozens of Tory rebels had been threatening to vote against the order
that all pubs, bars and restaurants in England must close amid claims
that it is not grounded in scientific evidence.

It emerged today that the 10pm curfew will not be put to MPs tomorrow
night and will be held at a later date, possibly next month. Instead
MPs will vote on whether to approve lockdown restrictions in the north
of England.

A vote on the rule of six – which a handful of Tory MPs are expected to rebel against – will go ahead as planned tonight.

Ministers have to ask MPs to approve coronavirus lockdown measures in
simple unamendable ‘yes/no’ votes in the House of Commons within 28
sitting days of them coming into force.

The climbdown surprised some critics as it was likely that only
English MPs could vote on the measure due to the English Votes for
English Laws rule introduced in 2015. The Tories have a 156 majority
when only English MPs can vote.

Labour had not said if it would vote for the measure, and had instead
asked for ministers to publish the scientific evidence underlying it.

Sir Christopher Chope, one of the rebels, told The Telegraph that the Government was running scared.

He said: “Although they talk the talk because they want to have
Parliament deciding these issues – if it looks as though Parliament is
going to decide them in a way they don’t like they deny Parliament the

Tory MP Steve Baker, the unofficial rebels’ whip, added: “It is not
clear what the evidence is to support the 10pm curfew or that it is

“With Hospitality UK describing the combined impact of the measures as ‘devastating’, the Government should think again.”

The rebel Conservatives MPs, who had been due to meet at lunchtime
today to plot their next steps, were emboldened by comments from Rishi
Sunak questioning the wisdom of the measure yesterday.

This morning the Chancellor said the curfew was “better than having places closed.”

170458 ▶▶▶▶ RickH, replying to Ceriain, 3, #1206 of 2087 🔗

Many thanks, Ceriain. Much appreciated.

It was that detail of the mechanism that I didn’t have my head around.

I think we see here the power of the executive to stuff parliament – one of the main issues in the constitutional reform debate – and we’ve also seen Mr Toad trying to undermine the Rule of Law.

All very sinister – and, essentially, fascist.

I think my scepticism about the minor concession made last Wednesday is well founded – as is the scepticism about MPs actually having the balls to carry through rightful checks and balances.

I include the opposition in my skepticism – at least chocolate fireguards can stave off hunger. But Starmer’s Labour just becomes more and more irrelevant every day. Bleating about ‘scientific evidence’ at this stage is like swearing at the porter because you turned up for your train 5 hours late.

170472 ▶▶▶▶▶ Julian, replying to RickH, 5, #1207 of 2087 🔗

The executive is playing dirty to bypass parliament, but parliament was and is compliant. They had their chance – if they wanted to assert their authority they could have voted against the renewal of the act.

171097 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ RickH, replying to Julian, #1208 of 2087 🔗


171105 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to Julian, #1209 of 2087 🔗

Indeed. Like I said at the time, Parliament and MPs deserve all the disrespect they get from the government, since they excluded themselves from relevance by their own vote.

170528 ▶▶▶ Sarigan, replying to RickH, 1, #1210 of 2087 🔗

You can ‘escape’ the paywall, even better if you ‘escape’ it twice while loading.

170675 ▶▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Sarigan, #1211 of 2087 🔗

shhhh…. don’t want them fixing that

170467 ▶▶ PoshPanic, replying to Ceriain, 3, #1212 of 2087 🔗

They are in a complete mess

170577 ▶▶ Awkward Git, replying to Ceriain, #1213 of 2087 🔗

Same as they threatened to vote against last week.

Total bullshit, they will all chicken out when threatened.

170417 Gman, replying to Gman, 19, #1214 of 2087 🔗

Having just spent the morning in a central London hospital followed by lunch in a hotel restaurant I can say that although on entry to both there was a polite request to put on a mask (on 3 separate occasions in the hospital as we went through to different departments) all were very apologetic when i said that I was exempt – in fact on all occasions they started to apologise as soon as i started speaking before even saying the word exempt.

It almost felt like some fellow lockdown sceptics had gone before me and given them a lesson in the guidance and equality laws 🙂

I know it can be daunting but to anyone who goes mask free you are doing a huge service to the countless thousands of people who don’t quite have the courage yet (which was me until today) – so thank you to all those who went before me as without you I wouldn’t have had the courage either.

170470 ▶▶ jhfreedom, replying to Gman, 6, #1215 of 2087 🔗

This is good.

I chickened out and wore a mask in Tesco on Monday morning. Shouldn’t have done it, I regret it.

I just don’t fancy getting my head stamped on by a fat ignorant zealot wearing a tracksuit if you know what I mean…

170594 ▶▶▶ Sophie123, replying to jhfreedom, #1216 of 2087 🔗

I am about to brave Dukes hotel sans mask. Wish me luck.

I’m having no problem on the district line without one. I’m fully socially distanced but that’s because many tube passengers in my experience don’t appear to have heard of soap, rather than any fear of the virus.

170596 ▶▶▶ arfurmo, replying to jhfreedom, 1, #1217 of 2087 🔗

Next time don’t take a muzzle with you!

171000 ▶▶▶ CGL, replying to jhfreedom, #1218 of 2087 🔗

You may find a better dressed zealot in Waitrose

170421 swedenborg, 7, #1219 of 2087 🔗


CDC finally published the paper stating airborne transmission possible but rare. They say that it is rare and most transmission is droplet spread. They go into arguments that C-19 unlikely to be mostly airborne spread due to the pandemic’s rather slow development. But they don’t deny it completely. A bit surprising is the final paragraph which show a bit more humility incl. doubts about masks perhaps

  • How effective are mitigation efforts to prevent SARS-CoV-2 spread, especially ventilation and masking?
  • What proportion of SARS-CoV-2 infections are acquired through airborne transmission?
  • What are the conditions that facilitate airborne transmission?
  • What is the infectious dose for SARS-CoV-2 (how many virions are required for infection to occur)?
  • Do inoculum size and route of inoculation affect risk of infection and disease severity?

Interesting that it was published the same day when the following letter was also published.


This states that airborne transmission is the main spread

“Individuals with C-19 many of whom have no symptoms release thousands of virus-lade aerosols and far fewer droplets when breathing and talking. Thus one is far more likely to inhale aerosols than be sprayed by droplet”

We all know that masks do not stop at all small particles with virus passing through the mask. They might stop droplet but not small particles.

Perhaps can explain the paradox that with facemasks and at the same time stopping the distance separation, which seems to have happened in Spain and France, could lead to more infections. The people with face nappies are standing too close and  airborne transmission takes place going freely through the mask.

170422 Richard O, replying to Richard O, 2, #1220 of 2087 🔗


Telling and prescient quote from one of the Jonestown survivors at the end of this superb documentary:

There are many lessons to be learned from Jonestown. I look at the world today, I look at the environment that we’re in, and I see this parallel. And I look at how People’s Temple began. It began in a time where there was a socio-political change, but it was also based on fear. We are in the same type of environment, if not worse, that could generate something much, much more dangerous than Jonestown. It could happen again.

170441 ▶▶ Liam, replying to Richard O, 1, #1221 of 2087 🔗

Cult City is a great book on Jones and his relationship with the San Francisco Democrat establishment including Pelosi, Willie Brown and the ghastly Harvey Milk.

170443 ▶▶▶ Tyneside Tigress, replying to Liam, 1, #1222 of 2087 🔗

Would that be the same Willie Brown who is linked directly to Kamala Harris?

170463 ▶▶▶▶ Liam, replying to Tyneside Tigress, 1, #1223 of 2087 🔗

“Willie Brown, longtime speaker of the California state assembly, a mayor of San Francisco, and the mentor of Senator Kamala Harris, was especially lavish in his praise of Jones, calling him “a combination of Martin Luther King, Jr., Angela Davis, Albert Einstein, and Chairman Mao.””


170511 ▶▶▶▶▶ Tyneside Tigress, replying to Liam, 2, #1224 of 2087 🔗

‘Mentor’ is a very expansive word in this case!

170446 ▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to Liam, 1, #1225 of 2087 🔗

Appreciate the recommendation.

170658 ▶▶▶ Nigel Sherratt, replying to Liam, #1226 of 2087 🔗

And Jerry Brown (ex Govenor)

170858 ▶▶ JohnB, replying to Richard O, #1227 of 2087 🔗

Jonestown was CIA.

Disappointed, but not surprised, that this is not more commonly known.

170427 NorthumbrianNomad, replying to NorthumbrianNomad, 3, #1228 of 2087 🔗

Just made the mistake of looking at a Liverpool Echo article about the gerontocracies of Liverpool, Manchester and Newcastle writing to Hancock begging for money to compensate them for the lockdown they were demanding last week. And then reading the comments underneath. “How many deaths do you lefties think there’d be without these restrictions?” “Shut the bloody schools!”
People have lost their minds. It’s not a left-right thing. It’s a crazed/lucid thing. People are cowering in their houses shouting online as if this was pneumonic plague. (100% mortality, kills in hours, by the way. Antibiotic-resistant strains are now emerging in Madagascar. Shortly to be imported to China through the “Chinese medicine” trade (an oxymoron if ever there was one).
I need to go and buy rice wine. (Beer bloats and the actual wine here is foul.)

170481 ▶▶ mattghg, replying to NorthumbrianNomad, 5, #1229 of 2087 🔗

100% agree it’s not a left-right thing. This issue makes every other political issue I’ve ever argued about seem completely trivial in comparison.

170428 Victoria, replying to Victoria, 9, #1230 of 2087 🔗

Health Passports for Ireland, Who’s Next?

The validity of your test will expire and you will need to redo the test to go to green again
Your vaccine status will be kept


  • Ireland began a national trial of their new Health Passport Ireland initiative, which uses an app to track and display results of COVID-19 testing, plus COVID-19 vaccination status, when one becomes available
  • It’s being touted as a measure that increases freedom, but one day, when you head out the door, you may not be able to simply walk into a shop, restaurant or even a doctor’s office or your place of work like you used to, unless you can prove you don’t have COVID-19 and have been vaccinated via your “green” health passport app
  • Expansion plans are underway, and the system will likely soon be rolled out globally, in countries such as Canada, the U.S., the U.K., Germany, France, Italy and Kenya, with other locations following
  • Apps that started out to track your COVID-19 test results and vaccination status could turn into tools of control and power, making it impossible for you to attend school, work or travel unless you have the right color or results


170433 ▶▶ The Filthy Engineer, replying to Victoria, 20, #1231 of 2087 🔗

They need to fuck right off. And then they need to fuck off some more.

Tagged and tracked like cattle.

I have to ask: Why stop at covid? Why not norovirus in case you give someone the shits because you didn’t wash your hands? Why not influenza? And a whole host of other “nasties”

170453 ▶▶▶ Bobblybob, replying to The Filthy Engineer, 24, #1232 of 2087 🔗

and then fuck off over there. And when they get there fuck off even more. And keep fucking off until they get back here. And then they can fuck off again.

170480 ▶▶▶▶ The Filthy Engineer, replying to Bobblybob, 5, #1233 of 2087 🔗

It’s a shame I can only upvote you once.

170518 ▶▶▶▶▶ Sarigan, replying to The Filthy Engineer, 2, #1234 of 2087 🔗

Just added one on your behalf.

170632 ▶▶▶▶▶ Chris John, replying to The Filthy Engineer, #1235 of 2087 🔗

Added one each for both of you. Apt and succinct

170449 ▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Victoria, 11, #1236 of 2087 🔗

And there we have it. The Endgame. Well done population of the world – you got what you deserved.

Time for me to start planning on how to survive as a member of the Underclass…

170456 ▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to Mr Dee, 8, #1237 of 2087 🔗

Yes I accepted months ago that I would never be boarding a plane again, but that looks like the least of my worries now.

170522 ▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to Mr Dee, #1238 of 2087 🔗

Killing, and if needs be eating, the Overclass ? 🙂

170457 ▶▶ zacaway, replying to Victoria, 7, #1239 of 2087 🔗

There is a legal challenge to try to head off Health Passports in the UK here:


We are launching a legal challenge against the UK government regarding
the proposed introduction of the health/immunity passport system and
their related technologies.

Not as much publicity as Dolan’s case, but might help.

170488 ▶▶▶ The Filthy Engineer, replying to zacaway, 3, #1240 of 2087 🔗

Your only hope is that it will end up like most UK IT projects – over budget, under delivered, non-functional that it gets quietly dropped. This sort of thing needs opposing just like the ID card because ultimately it is ID cards by another route

170498 ▶▶▶▶ zacaway, replying to The Filthy Engineer, 2, #1241 of 2087 🔗

Yes, I’m hoping they’ll balls it up like they do with every other Government IT project. I’d be concerned if they outsourced it to a company that does actually know the difference between MySQL and Excel.

This thing seems to have been developed by the ROQU Group. Never heard of them, anyone know anything about them?

170635 ▶▶▶▶▶ Chris John, replying to zacaway, #1242 of 2087 🔗

It’ll no doubt be run off window 95 and excel

170808 ▶▶▶▶ Victoria, replying to The Filthy Engineer, #1243 of 2087 🔗

That is why the Track & Trace bill is £10BN

170575 ▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to zacaway, #1244 of 2087 🔗

Thanks. Donated. And passed on.

170460 ▶▶ Awkward Git, replying to Victoria, 8, #1245 of 2087 🔗

Right on schedule, right on plan, as stated etc but us sceptics are all nutters.

Now I know what David Icke et al really feel like and are up against.

170478 ▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Victoria, 9, #1246 of 2087 🔗

“Your Covid-19 test will be performed by highly accurate seriological or swab tests…”


170482 ▶▶▶ Ceriain, replying to Mr Dee, 2, #1247 of 2087 🔗

Your test will be performed by a medical professional.

Just ignore that hi-vis jacket with Serco written on it..

170486 ▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Mr Dee, 1, #1248 of 2087 🔗

“After your test, an authorised healthcare administrator creates your health passport…”

And creates a thriving blackmarket for hackers.

170491 ▶▶▶▶ Ceriain, replying to Mr Dee, #1249 of 2087 🔗

Are we sitting here watching this together, Mr Dee; certainly looks like. 🙂

170495 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Ceriain, #1250 of 2087 🔗

Yep. I love the colourful cartoony vibe of it. Makes me feel like I’m three years old.

170492 ▶▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Mr Dee, 2, #1251 of 2087 🔗

“If you’re in the same masonic lodge as your GP, a positive test will be disregarded with a swift handshake.”

170508 ▶▶▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Mr Dee, 1, #1252 of 2087 🔗

“Your log-in details will be e-mailed to you immediately, with a link to download your health passport mobile app.. if you have no Internet access or only own one of those old pathetic Nokias, one of our Health Passport Representatives will be despatched to escort you to your new home in one of our prestige Nightingale Hotels.”

170525 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Mr Dee, 5, #1253 of 2087 🔗

“We can all use the Health Passport in many ways: Travel, Hospitality, Education, Health Care, Construction, Offices, Entertainment, Visits.”

At least we’ve now been told what we’ll be denied if we don’t behave.

170544 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Mr Dee, 1, #1254 of 2087 🔗

“Naturally, the validity of your Covid-19 test will expire over time, so you have to pay again and again and again and again for the privilege to be retested. No money, no problem – you’ll be sent to one of our many recreational facilities where you can be tested again and again at no expense, until your funds become available.”

170557 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Mr Dee, 2, #1255 of 2087 🔗

“Your status will move to amber when your test period has expired, as you’ll be presumed to be an infectious sack of putrescent filth until we say otherwise.”

170855 ▶▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to Mr Dee, #1256 of 2087 🔗

.., . forgers. organised crime, etc.

170517 ▶▶ PoshPanic, replying to Victoria, 2, #1257 of 2087 🔗

There will be one inevitable outcome from health passports and that is a heavily segregated society. Anyone condoning it, is living in cuckoo land.

170520 ▶▶▶ The Filthy Engineer, replying to PoshPanic, 2, #1258 of 2087 🔗

I know that George Orewll’s 1984 is oft referred to here but I see this as turning out to be more like “Brave New World” where the genetically modified humans (via vaccine in this instance) are separated from the “savages” on the reservation.

170534 ▶▶▶▶ Sarigan, replying to The Filthy Engineer, #1259 of 2087 🔗

Which conveniently is currently on Sky.

170536 ▶▶▶▶ Sarigan, replying to The Filthy Engineer, #1260 of 2087 🔗

We will be the Epsilons.

170663 ▶▶ Basics, replying to Victoria, 2, #1261 of 2087 🔗

I ve been dismissed in the past for suggesting such a thing. Look at what is happening in Ireland. Dismiss that.

170722 ▶▶▶ Carrie, replying to Basics, 2, #1262 of 2087 🔗

I also posted this link here ages ago and was roundly told that it was nothing..

170429 Dan Clarke, replying to Dan Clarke, 4, #1263 of 2087 🔗

While people are arguing about the smokescreen that is testing, this government are doing much worse!

170445 ▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Dan Clarke, 6, #1264 of 2087 🔗

PCR testing IS the pandemic

170513 ▶▶▶ DRW, replying to Major Panic, 2, #1265 of 2087 🔗

The ultimate excuse for everything they’re getting away with. Hence why they don’t like talking about it.

170434 Major Panic, replying to Major Panic, 2, #1266 of 2087 🔗

Question for Mayo…

Is Infection Fatality Rate the same as Case Fatality Rate?

you asked ”So do we have low or high case numbers and is the IFR 0.1% or 3%”

170452 ▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Major Panic, 1, #1267 of 2087 🔗

I think it was Ivor Cummings who spotted that maybe there was confusion at Imperial between the two

170473 ▶▶▶ DocRC, replying to Major Panic, 4, #1268 of 2087 🔗

The CFR is the proportion of people diagnosed with a disease that die from it. The IFR is the proportion of people exposed to the infection who die. Obviously the latter is more difficult to determine, especially for a disease like SARS-CoV-2 as so many don’t show symptoms and don’t know they’ve been exposed to it.

170496 ▶▶▶▶ mhcp, replying to DocRC, #1269 of 2087 🔗

Yes and it’s a bit confusing. When we compare it to the flu we are really saying do comparible numbers of people die if we assume it infects the population in the same type of way.

Which is what the modellers also use – an influenza model

170504 ▶▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to DocRC, #1270 of 2087 🔗

Sorry – my fault – I understand that – the Q was for Mayo who earlier talked about ‘cases’ and relating them to ‘IFR’

170551 ▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Major Panic, #1271 of 2087 🔗
170487 ▶▶ RickH, replying to Major Panic, #1272 of 2087 🔗

No – see below

170454 Awkward Git, 9, #1273 of 2087 🔗

Quick answer back from one borough council in response to today’s FOI request”

“Dear Sir

In response to your request for information, I write to advise you that XXXXX Borough Council does not hold the requested information and as such you will need to re-direct your enquiry to XXXX County Council”

Which I have already done.

So it says “not us, big boys made us do it”.

170459 Steeve, replying to Steeve, #1274 of 2087 🔗
  • From monthly mortality analysis
  • Looking at deaths that have occurred so far in 2020 and were registered by 5 September, 365 ,889 deaths occurred in England (33,003 more than the five-year average for January to August) and 23,416 in Wales (1,061 more than the five-year average) .

OK I just looked at todays weekly update

Looking at the year-to-date (using the most up-to-date data we have available), the number of deaths up to 25 September 2020 was 453,771, which is 53,888 more than the five-year average. Of the deaths registered by 25 September, 52,856 mentioned COVID-19 on the death certificate, 11.6% of all deaths in England and Wales.

I will have another look at this later The figures for September (running total ) are below the 5 year average.

Yet all cause mortality above 5 year average as jumped to 53,888(Sept 25th) from 34064 (August)

Confused – please correct me if I am wrong!



170483 ▶▶ RickH, replying to Steeve, 5, #1275 of 2087 🔗

I think you’re making this far too complicated, Steeve.

Bottom line : current all cause mortality is running at the norm for the past five years, and at the minimum for a 27 year period.

In short – there is nothing exceptional happening.

Just graph it, and it becomes clear – particularly if you correct for population.

170507 ▶▶▶ Steeve, replying to RickH, #1276 of 2087 🔗

Just my little pet project – the government figures seem to be out by 20,000

170509 ▶▶▶ calchas, replying to RickH, 2, #1277 of 2087 🔗

I would expect all-cause mortality to rise in the coming months due to untreated or unrecognized cancers, heart problems etc.

170489 Dan Clarke, replying to Dan Clarke, 26, #1278 of 2087 🔗

After watching that funeral and listening to Hancock today, my covid acceptance days are over, stuff them, this is a rogue government hope they burn in hell.

170494 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to Dan Clarke, 6, #1279 of 2087 🔗

So can all their supporters.

170622 ▶▶ Cruella, replying to Dan Clarke, 1, #1280 of 2087 🔗

Which funeral?

170718 ▶▶▶ Carrie, replying to Cruella, #1281 of 2087 🔗
170493 calchas, replying to calchas, 14, #1282 of 2087 🔗

“Let me introduce you to Donald A. Henderson (1928-2016). He was the twentieth-century’s most acclaimed disease eradicator. In particular, he is credited with ridding the world of smallpox. He was born in Lakewood, Ohio, son of a nurse and an engineer. He went to Oberlin College for undergraduate and graduated in medicine from the University of Rochester. He trained two more years at the Epidemic Intelligence Service of the Communicable Disease Center, and moved to Geneva to head the World Health Organization’s division focussed on smallpox.”


“At the age of 78, Dr. Henderson swung into action and composed a masterful response to the new fashion for quarantines and lockdowns. The result was Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza. Henderson, though listed last, was the primary author along with co-authors Thomas V.Inglesby , epidemiologist Jennifer B. Nuzzo , and physician Tara O’Toole.
Here is the riveting conclusion:

Experience has shown that communities faced with epidemics or other adverse events respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is least disrupted . Strong political and public health leadership to provide reassurance and to ensure that needed medical care services are provided are critical elements. If either is seen to be less than optimal, a manageable epidemic could move toward catastrophe.

Below we provide a full version of the article. It should help us all to better manage epidemics in the future.”


170503 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to calchas, 7, #1283 of 2087 🔗

[add sound of urine trickling down leg] “ But, but, but, but….masks science masks science hands face space flatten the curve break the circuit masks masks masks vaccine.

170716 ▶▶ Carrie, replying to calchas, #1284 of 2087 🔗

Ooh, that would be something good for our sceptics with Twitter to tweet out!

171447 ▶▶ Jamie, replying to calchas, #1285 of 2087 🔗

That UPMC biosecurity article is one of the best arguments for our cause.

170505 Ceriain, replying to Ceriain, 4, #1286 of 2087 🔗

Today’s bullshit is out: reported deaths – 76; “cases” – 14,542.

170514 ▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Ceriain, 3, #1287 of 2087 🔗

were any of the victims healthy or under 80?

170529 ▶▶▶ Ceriain, replying to Major Panic, 2, #1288 of 2087 🔗

What do you think?

England hospital deaths.

Date             0-19     20-39     40-59     60-79     80+

01/10/2020 0         0           2           20         18

02/10/2020 0         0           5           14         17
03/10/2020 0         0           1           16         12

04/10/2020 0         0           0           7           11

05/10/2020 0         0           0           3           4

170558 ▶▶▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Ceriain, 1, #1289 of 2087 🔗

So how many of these went to hospital seriously ill (heart probs, car accident, cancer, etc) and were tested positive entering hospital?

170571 ▶▶▶▶▶ Ceriain, replying to Major Panic, 4, #1290 of 2087 🔗


Some of the infected patients who died at the 500-bed Tameside General

Hospital had been admitted for other illnesses before catching the

coronavirus during their hospital stay, sources have claimed.

It comes after Weston General Hospital in Somerset apologised last week
after an investigation found 18 people may have died there after
contracting the infection while getting treatment there in May.

170516 ▶▶ Julian, replying to Ceriain, 3, #1291 of 2087 🔗

Has anyone done an up to date graph of positive tests as a % of tests done? They are ramping up testing numbers, so whenever people talk about an increase in “cases” we need to put it into context for them

170527 ▶▶▶ RickH, replying to Julian, 2, #1292 of 2087 🔗

Always stick to Farr’s edict :

The death rate is a fact; anything beyond this is an inference.”

Tests are just one big and inaccurate assumption.

170538 ▶▶▶▶ Julian, replying to RickH, 1, #1293 of 2087 🔗

Yes, quite agree. I think tests are largely irrelevant, but they are used against us. So one counter argument is to point out that the raw numbers are misleading. But maybe you’re right – best to avoid the whole subject by declaring it irrelevant. It’s a hard argument to sell to deluded people though – they are now obsessed with cases.

170565 ▶▶▶▶ Cruella, replying to RickH, 4, #1294 of 2087 🔗

This is a Covid screening programme, namely the testing of asymptomatic individuals. When have we ever screened for a coronavirus? Then the numbers are being used to maintain lockdown measures that should only be justifiable for an epidemic of a virulent, contagious killer virus. It’s an insane and un reversible situation. It’s always going to be out there until we stop testing people that aren’t ill and don’t require treatment.

171142 ▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to RickH, #1295 of 2087 🔗

But the death rate isn’t a fact if they are lying about the real cause of death.

170541 ▶▶▶ Ceriain, replying to Julian, #1296 of 2087 🔗

Problem is, Julian, they give us tests completed numbers, not people tested numbers. Then we get ‘case’ numbers, i.e. individuals.

170521 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to Ceriain, 6, #1297 of 2087 🔗

How many of these actually occurred yesterday? Does it really matter any more? They will give us whatever figures they need to justify extending the restrictions.

170533 ▶▶ DRW, replying to Ceriain, 1, #1298 of 2087 🔗

The testdemic will explode even more once every university gets a test centre.

170568 ▶▶ Achilles, replying to Ceriain, #1299 of 2087 🔗

1,300 deaths per day in the UK…move along…nothing to see.

171390 ▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to Achilles, #1300 of 2087 🔗

Isn’t it 1600/1700 ?

170519 Country Mumkin, replying to Country Mumkin, 29, #1301 of 2087 🔗

“Cancer patients will only be treated if Covid 19 under control” https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8810281/Labour-savages-Matt-Hancock-having-NO-idea-contacts-need-traced.html?ito=social-twitter_dailymailUK&__twitter_impression=true&__twitter_impression=true

Matt Hancock is sick. That is the most criminal admission so far.

170539 ▶▶ RickH, replying to Country Mumkin, 13, #1302 of 2087 🔗

The twat needs to be put out of his delusional misery. Nobody deserves to be as stupid as this. Especially if they impact on the rest of us.

Anybody got a spare straight jacket?

Seriously – I’ve disagreed with a few politicians over time. But I’ve never come up against any as irremediably – or perversely – stupid as this lot of hand-jobs.

Just a thought – I’m currently watching most/manypeople’s favourite programme : ‘The Repair Shop’. This bunch of politicians are the symbolic opposite : give them something to work on and they will reduce it to a pile of matchwood and other debris.

170576 ▶▶ The Filthy Engineer, replying to Country Mumkin, 4, #1303 of 2087 🔗

Indeed he is sick. Because the whole premise of his statement is based on the fact increases in hospital admissions for covid are implicit in the increase in “cases”. Still two weeks after the Beavis and Butthead show hospital admissions are not tracking “cases” like they were in April. In fact Hancock is being disingenuous and mendacious in the extreme given that covid isn’t even in the top 10 of deaths anymore.

170593 ▶▶▶ Julian, replying to The Filthy Engineer, 3, #1304 of 2087 🔗

If they are now routinely testing everyone admitted to hospital, then we will always have positive hospital admissions and the numbers will track the number of overall admissions and the % of the general population that are positive. It’s a meaningless stat, assuming that is what they are doing. They are not hospitalisations due to covid.

170620 ▶▶▶▶ The Filthy Engineer, replying to Julian, 1, #1305 of 2087 🔗


171389 ▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to The Filthy Engineer, 1, #1306 of 2087 🔗

… two weeks after the Beavis and Butthead show

Thanks TFE – I knew it reminded me of something, and you’ve just provided the answer !

170621 ▶▶ Basics, replying to Country Mumkin, #1307 of 2087 🔗

Not disagreeing whatsoever but.

NHS, macmillan, cancer reseatch, politicians – even the bbc crawl all over the giant emontive big C cancer but where are they now calling him out?

170702 ▶▶ Laura Suckling, replying to Country Mumkin, #1308 of 2087 🔗

You would have to be a psychopath to utter that sentence, and there we have it folks.

What does he mean “under control” ? Presumably, no positive tests in the UK, which will never happen.

170708 ▶▶ Carrie, replying to Country Mumkin, 2, #1309 of 2087 🔗

Oh good…another useful quote that Simon Dolan can use in his court case!

170523 p02099003, replying to p02099003, 8, #1310 of 2087 🔗

First child with mask induced impetigo.

170531 ▶▶ CGL, replying to p02099003, 1, #1311 of 2087 🔗

Link? Want to send to the school. They WILL rue the day . . .

170827 ▶▶▶ p02099003, replying to CGL, 3, #1312 of 2087 🔗

I saw the child face to face today in clinic.

170986 ▶▶▶▶ CGL, replying to p02099003, #1313 of 2087 🔗

Oh I see – sorry- thought you’d seen a report. Thank you though.

171136 ▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to p02099003, #1314 of 2087 🔗

What dud you say to the parent(s)?

170526 Bugle, replying to Bugle, 5, #1315 of 2087 🔗

Strange that there’s always an upsurge when a parliamentary vote is anticipated.

170548 ▶▶ DRW, replying to Bugle, 5, #1316 of 2087 🔗

I’m convinced a backlog is now being saved so it can be stuffed when required.

170609 ▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to DRW, #1317 of 2087 🔗

Don’t ever doubt it!

170704 ▶▶▶ Carrie, replying to DRW, #1318 of 2087 🔗

I think we can take that as a given!

170530 chaos, 12, #1319 of 2087 🔗

More good news. Carrie has promised Boris Kemal a threesome with her friend Pippa who is a pretty tree hugger with dreadlocks who went to LSE. She’s white but identifies as black. As a consequence of Bojo’s willy happiness every Briton will recieve a free pair of vegan doctor martins and a david attenborough DVD and a pass to hug a dying relative through a plastic sheet during lockdown.

170535 Cheezilla, replying to Cheezilla, 2, #1320 of 2087 🔗

NHS asking for yet more money!!

Boris Johnson has been warned he must give the NHS more money and not pursue a “have our cake and eat it” policy of thinking it can deliver Covid care within existing budgets.


170540 ▶▶ Julian, replying to Cheezilla, 8, #1321 of 2087 🔗

What fucking covid care?

170560 ▶▶▶ DRW, replying to Julian, 3, #1322 of 2087 🔗

The mythical second wave only ever 2-6 weeks around the corner.

170569 ▶▶▶▶ RickH, replying to DRW, 1, #1323 of 2087 🔗

… and counting 🙂

170574 ▶▶▶▶▶ Achilles, replying to RickH, 1, #1324 of 2087 🔗

…the lag!….the lag!!!

170546 ▶▶ Cicatriz, replying to Cheezilla, 6, #1325 of 2087 🔗

It’s practically shutdown. NHS Doing Less for More since March 2020.

170555 ▶▶ DRW, replying to Cheezilla, 1, #1326 of 2087 🔗

They’ve already had millions per patient on the Nightingales.

170543 John Galt, replying to John Galt, #1327 of 2087 🔗

Apologies if this has been posted before, but check this out:


170556 ▶▶ The Filthy Engineer, replying to John Galt, 1, #1328 of 2087 🔗

The only thing this passport nonsense will help is the bedwetters

170667 ▶▶▶▶ The Filthy Engineer, replying to Cheezilla, 2, #1330 of 2087 🔗

Thanks for posting the link. I wasn’t aware that things were at such an advanced state. Fuck!

170782 ▶▶▶▶ Victoria, replying to Cheezilla, 1, #1331 of 2087 🔗

Thanks for the link. That is why the Track & Trace cost a massive £10BN, its the health passport. Already implemented in Ireland (see my post below). Be afraid, be very afraid.

170564 ▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to John Galt, 1, #1332 of 2087 🔗

Scary stuff!

170573 ▶▶ Sarigan, replying to John Galt, 3, #1333 of 2087 🔗

205 thumbs up, 10K thumbs down. Fair indication of what people think of that shit?

170588 ▶▶▶ John Galt, replying to Sarigan, 1, #1334 of 2087 🔗

Definitely, it’s good to see. The old classic “Comments are turned off” as well.

170545 tonyspurs, replying to tonyspurs, 2, #1335 of 2087 🔗

Not content with answering the MP from Slough when challenged about track and trace with “I will not have divisive questions I will not have it”
now he’s answering with one word answers complete cretin


170552 ▶▶ calchas, replying to tonyspurs, 3, #1336 of 2087 🔗

“I will not have it”

Does he think he is not accountable to the people through parliament.

He is our employee and will answer our questions.

170566 ▶▶▶ Cicatriz, replying to calchas, 3, #1337 of 2087 🔗

Could ask him if he’s a moron. That wouldn’t divide much opinion.

170580 ▶▶▶ tonyspurs, replying to calchas, 2, #1338 of 2087 🔗

Just in case you haven’t seen the I will not have it about 2.13 in


170563 ▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to tonyspurs, 3, #1339 of 2087 🔗

Wow! The arrogant sh*t!!

170595 ▶▶ RickH, replying to tonyspurs, 1, #1340 of 2087 🔗

So the little turd thinks he’s unaccountable???

170626 ▶▶▶ tonyspurs, replying to RickH, #1341 of 2087 🔗

He’s got a god complex little twat that he is

171132 ▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to tonyspurs, #1342 of 2087 🔗

And it’s all on record. To be played back at his trial.

170547 nocheesegromit, replying to nocheesegromit, 5, #1343 of 2087 🔗

Hi all,
I’m currently drafting a poster featuring facts about the positivePCRtestdemic to display around my university’s campus. Would people mind linking me to some hard-hitting facts about these issues, please? I need them to be short and snappy for easy reading comprehension:

  • Median age of death with/from Covid vs. life expectancy (tried Googling but couldn’t find correct link)
  • Why no. of cases are flawed
  • The impact on the economy


170562 ▶▶ Country Mumkin, replying to nocheesegromit, 1, #1344 of 2087 🔗

Hi no cheese

What a great idea.

I’d say if you follow Alistair Haimes on Twitter and ask him this, he’d probably point you in the right direction. Although I’m sure others have the answers here too.


170614 ▶▶▶ nocheesegromit, replying to Country Mumkin, #1345 of 2087 🔗

Cheers CM, sadly I don’t use Twitter. I’ll try going through this site’s archives to see what I can find.

170624 ▶▶ mattghg, replying to nocheesegromit, 1, #1346 of 2087 🔗


Although it might be worth holding off until the end of furlough for this, when redundancies will probably skyrocket.

170670 ▶▶▶ nocheesegromit, replying to mattghg, 1, #1347 of 2087 🔗

Perfect, thank you!

170690 ▶▶▶▶ mattghg, replying to nocheesegromit, 1, #1348 of 2087 🔗

You’re welcome! More power to your elbow.

170697 ▶▶ Carrie, replying to nocheesegromit, 2, #1349 of 2087 🔗

Might it be worth sharing the graph and stats from US universities showing that of 70.000 positive cases there, only 3 people were hospitalised and none died?

170789 ▶▶ Victoria, replying to nocheesegromit, #1350 of 2087 🔗

Start with explaining Cases = Positive PCR tests = 1) majority are false positives that include the so called asymptomatic 2) many with mild symptoms and will be better soon 3) small number of hospitalisations 4) small number of deaths – mostly those with core morbidities

171226 ▶▶▶ nocheesegromit, replying to Victoria, #1351 of 2087 🔗

Do you have a source for the positive PCR tests? Not disagreeing with it at all, just struggling to find an article that lays the issue out clearly and in simple terms.

171295 ▶▶▶▶ Doctor Y, replying to nocheesegromit, 1, #1352 of 2087 🔗

Suggest Ivor Cummins on YouTube for info on the casedemic and some of the pointless pcr test nonsense

171445 ▶▶ Jamie, replying to nocheesegromit, #1353 of 2087 🔗

These links might help for finding arguments for the student audience demographic:
Keep Universities Open (@KeepUnisOpen) / Twitter

Young People Against Lockdown (@YoungPALD) / Twitter

Beyond that, just make sure to cite the sources on the corner of thsoe flyers, students are taught to look out for citations and will find the poster more persuasive if you add in hyperscripted little wikipedia style ^[numbered references] beside your facts and small text att the bottom giving well known web sources (direct ONS data, good, major media sources, good (so long as not the few which many students are brainwashed into thinking of as right wing propaganda, even though they’ve had some of the best anti-lockdown articles), anti-lockdown articles in journals and academic papers, very good(some of the arxiv ones are good, there was a nice paper a while back about “vets wouldn’t hande covid like this”, also good )

170550 Cheezilla, replying to Cheezilla, 3, #1354 of 2087 🔗

Labour MPs finally grow some teeth? unfortunately, not about covid!

A total of 20 Labour MPs rebelled against the party leadership at the second reading of a bill confirming MI5’s right to let informants commit crimes in pursuit of intelligence material.
Keir Starmer wanted his party to abstain on the security bill but the Socialist Campaign Group, led by the party’s former leader Jeremy Corbyn, defied the whip and voted against it on Monday night – the second rebellion in less than a fortnight.


170572 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to Cheezilla, 4, #1355 of 2087 🔗

It’s an important vote actually, the authorisation of individuals to commit crimes on behalf of the state is proposed to be extended to multiple state agencies, including (of course) the Department of Health and Social Care.


170583 ▶▶▶ Jo, replying to Richard O, 2, #1356 of 2087 🔗

And it seems hardly a coincidence about the timing of this change

170689 ▶▶▶ Carrie, replying to Richard O, #1357 of 2087 🔗

Hancock running scared? Does the bill pre-date the Crimes against Humanity video?

170602 ▶▶ RickH, replying to Cheezilla, 3, #1358 of 2087 🔗

You think it’s Corbyn who was the danger to civilization?

Think again.

170636 ▶▶▶ fran, replying to RickH, 1, #1359 of 2087 🔗

Yes he is … just because he and Labour aren’t in government – just imagine if they had been elected and had started on their programs to nationalise various businesses – water supply, railways, Royal Mail, which would involve borrowing huge sums of money … then the pandemic hits and they do the same thing as the Conservatives, which means borrowing even more huge sums of money.

Then there are ‘stinkshon Rebellion’ ‘BLM’ etc also a danger to society and I just heard yesterday that the Lib Dumbs have decided to support the Universal Basic Income proposal.

171093 ▶▶▶▶ Mark, replying to fran, 1, #1360 of 2087 🔗

I actually prefer Corbyn to Starmer, because at least Corbyn believes in something even if I disagree with almost all of it. Starmer is another dead-eyed Blair scumbag.

The reality is that if we had had a Labour government this year, whether Corbynite or Blairite we would have got all the same coronapanic bullshit, plus lots of the kind of bollocks you describe.

No matter how bad things are, they can actually always be worse, in practice.

170685 ▶▶ Carrie, replying to Cheezilla, #1361 of 2087 🔗

What was the result of the vote?

170559 muzzle, replying to muzzle, 13, #1362 of 2087 🔗

Interesting anecdotal. A company I’ve signed up for some casual work for sent out an email earlier saying that it was compulsory for staff to QR scan for track and trace at events. I didn’t respond but it seems that many other people did and they have backed down. There’s perhaps more opposition out there than I thought.

171443 ▶▶ Jamie, replying to muzzle, #1363 of 2087 🔗

Would be very interested in forcing my employer to sign a “we will not pass your details to track and traitors even if your colleagues get it and are foolish enough to get tested” agreement. Getting this sort of thing widespread could have the makings of a good campaign, especially when business can be educated to realsie the harm that track and traitors can do to them.

170561 Fingerache Philip., replying to Fingerache Philip., 22, #1364 of 2087 🔗

A news report says the European people are “fatigued” by lockdown but have been told by their respective governments that they must revive efforts to combat the virus.
What people all over the world need to do is ignore this ever increasing insanity and take to the streets if that’s what it takes.

170579 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to Fingerache Philip., 11, #1365 of 2087 🔗

Every country on the planet is fatigued by this shit, not just Europeans.

170597 ▶▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to Richard O, #1366 of 2087 🔗

Of course,except the Swedes and a few other RATIONAL countries.

171442 ▶▶▶▶ Jamie, replying to Fingerache Philip., #1367 of 2087 🔗

They’re fatigued of having the rest of the world act so stupidly, and of all the problems this causes for any cross-border business. Plenty of Swedish companies will be furious at foreign governments who’s lockdowns have stopped their (foreign) suppliers sending them stock and/or their (foregin) buyers being able to receive it. This, by the way, is why Sweden, despite a perfect policy on the pandemic, has still suffered some level of economic harm.

170605 ▶▶▶ Dan Clarke, replying to Richard O, #1368 of 2087 🔗

NZ seems ok. A friend is just annoyed that travel abroad is restricted

170582 ▶▶ Julian, replying to Fingerache Philip., 7, #1369 of 2087 🔗

FFS: “combat”. It’s the most pernicious idea – that a virus can be combatted.

170589 ▶▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to Julian, #1370 of 2087 🔗

What have the sceptics been saying all along?

170662 ▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Julian, #1371 of 2087 🔗

Just like drugs and terrorism can be combatted. Different record, same tune.

170691 ▶▶ JulieR, replying to Fingerache Philip., 3, #1372 of 2087 🔗

People do take to the street. They just don’t show it on mainstream media. They don’t want people to know what’s going on in other countries.

170567 Elenesse, 15, #1373 of 2087 🔗

I tried to book a doctors appointment to have my coil removed. They actually said I need a telephone consultation for that! Obviously I have to attend an appointment in person to get that physically removed so the phone consultation is a ridiculous waste of time. They better not be phoning me to tell me they can’t do it due to covid. Wouldn’t surprise me if they were to deprive me of my choice to reproduce, the government have taken everything else from us.

170578 Julian, replying to Julian, 24, #1374 of 2087 🔗

Another day in Stockholm.

Various people have gone out about the Swedes being more distant. I haven’t found that at all. I have found them warm and friendly and not afraid to get close to strangers. Of course, the sample is not representative as the more distant ones would tend to be out and about less.

I got a haircut today – lady that did it offered me her hand to shake, unprompted.

Lots of shops and public transport visited today – tiny numbers in masks – maybe 20 or 30 out of thousands.

Talking at more length to people in shops, hotels, hair salons, bars, cafes – some are very sceptical, others less so, but all seemed happy with the measures being taken in Sweden. Have been telling them how bad things are in the UK so they are ready to push back if the government starts to increase restrictions.

The people I have spoken all seemed well educated and intelligent. Some were worried at the start but now realise it’s not such a big deal. They may have pushed back had the government gone more in another direction, they may not. I suspect many would have gone along with it. It shows how important leadership is, in my view.

Simon Dolan tweeted something along the lines of “if you could transport people to Sweden, they would soon change their tune” and I was thinking the same thing. I think all but the most zealous would throw away the masks, and break the rule of six.

170659 ▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Julian, 4, #1375 of 2087 🔗


170692 ▶▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to Mr Dee, #1376 of 2087 🔗


170700 ▶▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to Mr Dee, 2, #1377 of 2087 🔗

My wife’s DNA test showed that she is 34% Scandinavian, do you think that would cut any ice with the Swedes?

170678 ▶▶ DRW, replying to Julian, 1, #1378 of 2087 🔗

These stories of Swedish normality are simulataneously encouraging and depressing.

170875 ▶▶▶ Julian, replying to DRW, #1379 of 2087 🔗


Same for me

170581 calchas, replying to calchas, 11, #1380 of 2087 🔗

This whole Covid episode has revealed so much about our society and what it really is, as well as about those with whom we live.

Admittedly not pleasant – but still strangely liberating.

170586 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to calchas, 22, #1381 of 2087 🔗

This is one of the few positives I can salvage from this horror show. The truth has been brutally revealed. My two principle takeaways are:

  1. Most people are fucking worthless idiots barely qualifying as human beings.
  2. Every single institution in our society is evil, corrupt and rotten to the core.
170613 ▶▶▶ Cruella, replying to Richard O, 1, #1382 of 2087 🔗

Neither of those statements are true Richard.

170695 ▶▶▶▶ Julian, replying to Cruella, #1383 of 2087 🔗

I agree, but equally see what calchas and Richard O are getting at.

The whole business has clarified a few important things that should have been clear to me years ago. It’s never too late to learn.

170898 ▶▶▶▶ helen, replying to Cruella, #1384 of 2087 🔗

I disagree No. 2 is unquestionably true because the proof of the pudding
is in the eating. And it makes me want to vomit everyday!

171441 ▶▶▶▶▶ Jamie, replying to helen, #1385 of 2087 🔗

2 is true if you add “Almost” beforehand, I can’t think of any specific institutions of society which haven’t rotted to the core amid this panicdemic, but I’m sure there will be a few. Words like “all” make a statement easier to prove false.

170590 ▶▶ Recusant, replying to calchas, 3, #1386 of 2087 🔗

It is an apocalypse in the true sense of the word – an unveiling. Turns out that the cost people are prepared to bear in order to pass our civilisation on to generations to come is approximately zero.

But you’re right – depressing and liberating.

170600 ▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to calchas, 1, #1387 of 2087 🔗

I agree.

170610 ▶▶ Cruella, replying to calchas, #1388 of 2087 🔗

Really? How do you find it liberating?

170619 ▶▶▶ calchas, replying to Cruella, #1389 of 2087 🔗

Truth revealed by extreme circumstances.

170631 ▶▶▶▶ Cruella, replying to calchas, 2, #1390 of 2087 🔗

I see. It’s not fun being ‘awake’ when most of the population are determined to remain mentally and physically enslaved though.

170637 ▶▶▶▶▶ calchas, replying to Cruella, #1391 of 2087 🔗


… but one cannot unlearn.

170657 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to calchas, 1, #1392 of 2087 🔗

There’s always lobotomy. That’ll be on the NHS soon.

171126 ▶▶▶▶▶▶▶ annie, replying to Mr Dee, #1393 of 2087 🔗

Most of the sheeple were evidently lobotomised at birth. No further intervention is necessary.

170649 ▶▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to Cruella, #1394 of 2087 🔗

I refer you to the reply I gave to Calchas.

170627 ▶▶ AidanR, replying to calchas, 1, #1395 of 2087 🔗

Indeed it is.

170643 ▶▶ Fingerache Philip., replying to calchas, 3, #1396 of 2087 🔗

It’s like when you lose your job and you don’t have to care any more.
We’ve all been there, haven’t we?

170666 ▶▶ DRW, replying to calchas, #1397 of 2087 🔗

In a way, I’m glad I was red-pilled about my former employer. Some otherwise intelligent people are so deep in the governmental matrix it’s crazy.

170584 nocheesegromit, replying to nocheesegromit, 14, #1398 of 2087 🔗

Just noticed that in the GB Declaration video, none of the professors are distanced nor wearing masks. A small point but made me happy nonetheless.

171082 ▶▶ Mark, replying to nocheesegromit, #1399 of 2087 🔗

Also noticeable that the declaration itself makes no reference to masks. Great stuff!

170585 Sarigan, replying to Sarigan, 2, #1400 of 2087 🔗

Prof Gupta on Talk Radio now:


170661 ▶▶ Major Panic, replying to Sarigan, #1401 of 2087 🔗

just after 5pm UK

170751 ▶▶ anon, replying to Sarigan, #1402 of 2087 🔗

who’s this nadhim zahawi? ffs

170592 Suitejb, replying to Suitejb, 9, #1403 of 2087 🔗

So the vote to throw out the 10pm curfew has been dropped! What then was the Brady deal all about? It seems that if the Government think they’re going to lose a vote they simply don’t have one!

170608 ▶▶ Cruella, replying to Suitejb, 6, #1404 of 2087 🔗

Really? They did that!? What? What the hell. This government has put parliamentary process on hold. It’s so wrong.

170625 ▶▶▶ Suitejb, replying to Cruella, #1405 of 2087 🔗

‘Quietly dropped’ the report in the Telegraph said!

170651 ▶▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to Suitejb, #1406 of 2087 🔗

The Government has been accused of running scared after a vote on the 10pm curfew for pubs and restaurants widely expected tomorrow night was quietly delayed.
Dozens of Tory rebels had been threatening to vote against the order that all pubs, bars and restaurants in England must close amid claims that it is not grounded in scientific evidence.
But the 10pm curfew vote, which MPs on all sides of the House had expected tomorrow evening, will now held at a later date.Instead MPs will vote on whether to approve lockdown restrictions in the north of England.
A vote on the rule of six – which a handful of Tory MPs are expected to rebel against – will go ahead as planned tonight.
Ministers have to ask MPs to approve coronavirus lockdown measures in simple unamendable ‘yes/no’ votes in the House of Commons within 28 sitting days of them coming into force.
Labour, who were also expecting the curfew vote tomorrow evening, had not said if it would vote for the measure, instead calling for ministers to publish the scientific evidence underlying it.
Sir Christopher Chope, one of the rebels, told The Telegraph that the Government was running scared.
He said: “Although they talk the talk because they want to have Parliament deciding these issues, if it looks as though Parliament is going to decide them in a way they don’t like they deny Parliament the chance.”
Tory MP Steve Baker, the unofficial rebels’ whip, added: “It is not clear what the evidence is to support the 10pm curfew or that it is effective. With Hospitality UK describing the combined impact of the measures as ‘devastating’, the Government should think again.”
The rebel Conservatives MPs, who had been due to meet at lunchtime today to plot their next steps, were emboldened by comments from Rishi Sunak questioning the wisdom of the measure yesterday. This morning the Chancellor said the curfew was “better than having places closed.”
Government sources insisted a vote on the curfew had never been planned for Wednesday.


170676 ▶▶▶▶▶ Carrie, replying to Cheezilla, #1407 of 2087 🔗

Is there a link there to Simon’s case? That by holding it then Simon might have an advantage next week?

170611 ▶▶ AidanR, replying to Suitejb, 9, #1408 of 2087 🔗

Shocked. Shocked I tell you.

I pity the poor fools who thought last week that Brady and Baker had won some sort of concession.

170653 ▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to AidanR, 3, #1409 of 2087 🔗

“Vote quietly dropped” doesn’t sound like democracy in aciton to me!

170669 ▶▶ DRW, replying to Suitejb, 1, #1410 of 2087 🔗

Just like the court cases, any chance of proper scrutiny is blocked.

170672 ▶▶ Carrie, replying to Suitejb, #1411 of 2087 🔗

Did they not hold a vote then?

170603 Dan Clarke, replying to Dan Clarke, 5, #1412 of 2087 🔗

Just listened to the question to Hancock yesterday about Track and trace, a detailed question which was answered with NO. Unbelievable.

170606 ▶▶ John Galt, replying to Dan Clarke, 4, #1413 of 2087 🔗

He knows everything he’s saying is nonsense so he’s retreated into the petulant child act.

170618 ▶▶▶ RickH, replying to John Galt, 6, #1414 of 2087 🔗

The problem is the lack of proper journalism – which would have quickly shown him to be the wanker that he is.

170652 ▶▶▶▶ Dan Clarke, replying to RickH, 4, #1415 of 2087 🔗

Richard Madeley, always been proud of his journalist training is getting a lot of traction now, speaks a lot of sense.

171384 ▶▶▶▶ JohnB, replying to RickH, #1416 of 2087 🔗

To be fair, he has been shown to be wanker more than once.

170640 ▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to John Galt, 2, #1417 of 2087 🔗

He was playing to the Tory gallery. They were as bad!

170804 ▶▶ Carrie, replying to Dan Clarke, 1, #1418 of 2087 🔗

I just saw that Stella Creasy asked him another question that he did not answer, replying that she was not being “sensible” asking why he failed to put any penalty clauses for poor performance in the contracts with private companies to run test and trace.’

The arrogance of the man – grrrr!

170607 Mabel Cow, replying to Mabel Cow, 13, #1419 of 2087 🔗

Would anyone be interested in a fast and easily-searchable archive of all of the comments sections from each day on LS?

I love the site, but my aging laptop finds it hard to keep up with amount of posts, and finding things you know you’ve seen before but have then lost again is a bit time-consuming. And then of course with each new day, our posts are archived away when the latest news comes in.

Assuming that I’m not being a ninny and such a thing doesn’t already exist, I could certainly look into creating such a facility. I propose it be called the “Panscepticon”.

170615 ▶▶ AidanR, replying to Mabel Cow, 2, #1420 of 2087 🔗

It’s a very good idea 🙂

There are lots of useful nuggets here each day that get lost in the breeze.

(BTW it’s not your laptop – mine is brand new and cost more than a car, but it doesn’t make working through the BTL any easier.)

170703 ▶▶▶ DavidC, replying to AidanR, #1421 of 2087 🔗


170750 ▶▶▶▶ Ajb, replying to DavidC, 1, #1422 of 2087 🔗

Below the line, I.e. comments – managed to work that out eventually!!

170940 ▶▶▶▶▶ DavidC, replying to Ajb, #1423 of 2087 🔗


170634 ▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to Mabel Cow, #1424 of 2087 🔗

You can file them in the forum.

170688 ▶▶ RickH, replying to Mabel Cow, 1, #1425 of 2087 🔗

I agree that it’s a good idea. But how to implement?

I think a depository of all the latest factual information and analysis would be useful – perhaps along with the lat.st egregious meanderings from government

170729 ▶▶▶ Basics, replying to RickH, #1426 of 2087 🔗

Can I volunteer my services to the what is factual panel comittee please?

170863 ▶▶▶ Mabel Cow, replying to RickH, 3, #1427 of 2087 🔗

To implement Panscepticon, I would do this:

  1. Create a scraper that uses the WordPress API to query for comments.
  2. Copy the comments into an offline database.
  3. Create a publishing script that would query the database and spit out static, searchable HTML pages.
  4. Create an upload job that would publish the pages somewhere.

In the absence of a ready alternative, I’d be happy to use baffledcow.com (at least until I got my first AWS data transfer bill :-D).

I’d have to play around with update frequency: too often and I’ll hurt the main site, too infrequent and people would lose interest.

In the first instance, I would suggest just updating immediately after the latest-news page rolls over each day. That way, the latest-news page on LS would be live, and Panscepticon would contain the history, starting from the day before.

I’d also have to work out some way of back-filling the history, but I could do that in the dead of night when only Annie is on the site. 🙂

171043 ▶▶▶▶ Basics, replying to Mabel Cow, #1428 of 2087 🔗

Thinking allowed might it be fun and introduce huge levels of complexity to establish some way of recording the censorship – dead/broken links become a quantifiable amount of book burning.

Your idea sounds epic and much needed as the war enters winter.

171440 ▶▶▶▶▶ Jamie, replying to Basics, #1429 of 2087 🔗

Possibly some sort of script running on a PC which takes copies of all links in the comment database (any string starting with http or https or including the phrase .org, .com , .net or .co.).

When a new such string gets found in a new comment, or visited the first time among the archive of older commentd during initial setup, take a copy of the html of the webpage (warning this could get file space hungry VERY fast), don’t bother to save images and other media on the pages unless the link is directly to an image file. Just save copeis of human readable text on the pages, cutting out any formatting tags or links on those pages to adverts, iframes, “red top” style header bar links and other things which naturally change regularly and don’t have much relevance to the meaning of the pages.

Then take a hash (sha256 or something) of the readable text saved for each link.

On a regular basis the PC should automatically revisit such links in its database. It should check the page it finds by following the link, if the hash no longer matches it can recognise that censorship of some kind has occured (the text has gone from the page, or been changed) even if the page itself still exists and does not give a 404.

This will give some false positives, hashes will no longer match if a page’s author corrects a typo or changes paragraph spacing even though meaning would be preserved. It shouldn’t give false negatives, there would be no way to change the content of a page, or remove the page, which would not be detected next time the PC polled that page and found a mismatched hash. If you have space to store it then keeping original text would make it censorship proof, your script could upload the original text of any changed or missing article to a website you could host, with a note saying which original lockdown sceptics comments the link had been found in.

170713 ▶▶ anon, replying to Mabel Cow, 1, #1430 of 2087 🔗

yes please

(interested as to how you’d go about this)

170783 ▶▶ Carrie, replying to Mabel Cow, 1, #1431 of 2087 🔗

Yes please!

One section that would be good to have is people’s letters to various MPs and authorities.

Awkward Git will need a section of his own though 🙂 !

171383 ▶▶ JohnB, replying to Mabel Cow, #1432 of 2087 🔗

Good idea. And you get first dibs on the book, when all the bollocks has been consigned to history. I’ll buy it anyway. 🙂

170612 wendyk, replying to wendyk, 9, #1433 of 2087 🔗


For fellow sceptics under the yoke in Sturgeon land.

Read this and store it away.

170656 ▶▶ Dan Clarke, replying to wendyk, #1434 of 2087 🔗


170694 ▶▶ Nick Rose, replying to wendyk, #1435 of 2087 🔗

One wonders what they might get up to next week…

170706 ▶▶ stefarm, replying to wendyk, 1, #1436 of 2087 🔗

Told ya, covid is the massive fart hiding this stench

170711 ▶▶ Basics, replying to wendyk, #1437 of 2087 🔗

Thank you. That is why she looks more and more haggard everyday. Haunted souless people you can see it in their eyes.

170790 ▶▶ Cruella, replying to wendyk, #1439 of 2087 🔗

Is it news that politicians are self serving charlatans?

170932 ▶▶ Jane in France, replying to wendyk, #1440 of 2087 🔗

Alex Salmond is pretty much a victim of the present woke bunch at the head of the SNP. He was found not guilty on all charges because he had done nothing wrong. Craig Murray, himself up for contempt of court, reported the entire trial. Whether you are in favour of independence or not, the efforts the Scottish government made to ruin Alex Salmond are shocking. Not that this has anything to do with covid and I notice that Sturgeon has ruled out another lockdown so maybe some daylight is getting through to the silly woman.

171035 ▶▶▶ Basics, replying to Jane in France, #1441 of 2087 🔗

She will steam and screech into a vampyric nothing if daylight does get through.

170623 Frank Garrett, replying to Frank Garrett, 5, #1442 of 2087 🔗

The mainstream media is pushing conspiracy theories now. Claiming Trump is out of breath, his doctors are lying or he lied about his illness.

170646 ▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Frank Garrett, 1, #1443 of 2087 🔗

But it’s not fake news, right.

170647 ▶▶ DRW, replying to Frank Garrett, 2, #1444 of 2087 🔗

Yet Bozo definitely had it bad and rose on easter sunday…

170720 ▶▶▶ Cruella, replying to DRW, #1445 of 2087 🔗


170629 TT, replying to TT, 9, #1446 of 2087 🔗

What I’ve been wondering about for a very long time now and haven’t yet seen discussed at length anywhere (apologies in advance if I missed anything on here), is the fact that ‘classic’ (in)flu(enza) is still claiming just as many victims as ever, but is never even mentioned. I mean, how on earth are they justifying the C-word monomania when it is now blatantly obvious that there isn’t any major difference between this and the regular flu?

In Belgium for example, the news has touted 8 to 10 C-related deaths/day for the last period, always a ‘doubling’ or ‘exponential increase’ compared to whatever fanciful previous average they bandied about (that number is about equivalent to fatal household accidents by the way, i.e. fumbling around with power tools in a bad way…). About 190 C-patients in all are now supposedly hospitalized in IC units, due to which one of the major hospitals in Brussels has been panic-mongering over the last days due to their C-unit being ‘almost filled to capacity’ (while I read a month ago that max capacity for the Winter had been enlarged by 2.000 EXTRA beds overall, so why less than 200 patients is any issue is beyond me…), other surgeries are having to be delayed etc. etc. The news then shows some ‘Head Dr.’ twat communicating with the hospital’s C-Unit personnel via computer interface (as it’s of course way too dangerous to just go over and talk to these people directly…), the screen showing astronauts in space suits with muzzles and goggles as if they were doing a rerun of Alien, talking disastrous doom and gloom as if nothing comparable ever occurred in the last century or so. The exact numbers are often published with some delay, but I know for a fact that for much of the period June-September for example, mortality statistics included a steady rate of deaths due to influenza as well, often in excess of the low rate of COVID fatalities. I assume that these people also risk pneumonia or similar complications, and flu is also supposed to be highly contagious… the first arguments I ever heard as to why COVID was supposedly so much worse was that it was ‘more contagious’ and ‘more fatal’, yet both statements have been amply refuted in the meantime. Hell, I personally know one woman whose husband had been ill for over a week and suddenly tested C-positive. Although they share the same bed and have two children, none of the other family members tested positive or had any symptoms: HIGHLY contagious, obviously… The guy recovered after 10 more days of mild illness, his verdict being: “it felt somewhat like the flu, but less bad”… the few other examples I know of personally are entirely comparable.

What I’m mainly wondering about now is if flu patients are even kept apart from other patients, or whether they are totally ignored in the ongoing C-craze? I haven’t seen a single influenza death being commented upon or even mentioned in the MSM throughout the whole supposed ‘pandemic’; if I had lost a loved one or family member to flu during this time, or had been in critical condition myself, I would be pretty p****d to say the least! I mean, surely it would help influence public opinion if we could drive home the point that influenza is still killing people too, and even at a comparable rate (even if the amount of obscure diagnosed ‘cases’ of COVID is significantly higher)? And that these deaths seemingly don’t count, as nobody even bothers to mention them. Also, if entire wards are now reserved for C-cases in the hospitals, what happens to people who end up hospitalized with flu complications? Are they free to infect others in the hospital or at home, while only C-cases are being isolated and confined? I haven’t as yet been able to find a clear answer to these questions: Someone on this site even posted a link a while ago to that BBC article on the very high no. of influenza victims in 2018 – I assume these people weren’t even isolated from the rest of the populace back then? In any event, death rates are now completely in the same ballpark, so is there any medical professional who can justify why contagiousness of flu and related hospitalisations/fatalities are seemingly of negligible concern, whereas ‘even one C-death is too much’ and they keep on ruining entire continents over COVID? Is there any person who had a serious bout of ‘classic’ flu who can comment on what treatment they received, after being diagnosed with influenza and confirmed negative for COVID? Surely these people must feel sorely neglected…?

170687 ▶▶ Julian, replying to TT, #1447 of 2087 🔗

Indeed it’s yet another powerful argument and demonstration of how mad the world has gone

170739 ▶▶ Basics, replying to TT, #1448 of 2087 🔗

The australian flu & covid numbers ‘fit’ its been a low flu year but a high covid year in nearly exactly equal measure.

Based on Vernon Colmans own research of oz official data.

170741 ▶▶ Proudtobeapeasant, replying to TT, 1, #1449 of 2087 🔗

Very well said. I keep having thoughts like this too. My daughter’s friend has “long” Covid, but I suspect people get “long” flu too. And as for the contagion aspect, I don’t believe all the hype about that either. A friend whose husband clearly had it at Christmas didn’t get it herself, and didn’t pass it on to the family group she met with on Boxing Day. Regarding flu, I had it in 2018 but my husband didn’t get it. I’ve just a cold but he didn’t get that either. I wonder if you ever get a household where ALL the members get it?

170638 Paul Mendelsohn, replying to Paul Mendelsohn, 38, #1450 of 2087 🔗

Managed to covert a mask fanatic – on the road to De- maskus?

170642 ▶▶ Mr Dee, replying to Paul Mendelsohn, 2, #1451 of 2087 🔗

Gold star.

170644 ▶▶ Country Mumkin, replying to Paul Mendelsohn, 2, #1452 of 2087 🔗

Very brilliant 💗

170648 ▶▶ stefarm, replying to Paul Mendelsohn, 5, #1453 of 2087 🔗

What is the answer? thumb screws, lit matches under the finger nails, waterboarding???

170650 ▶▶ DRW, replying to Paul Mendelsohn, 4, #1454 of 2087 🔗

Excellent news, how did you manage it?

170696 ▶▶ watashi, replying to Paul Mendelsohn, #1455 of 2087 🔗

Please enlighten me. How can I do this? I have tried, with no success..

171436 ▶▶ Jamie, replying to Paul Mendelsohn, 1, #1456 of 2087 🔗

I’m no christian, but I think “the road to damascus” was about a man called Saul who renamed himself Paul afterwards. I think your incident might be the other way round, once they take the mask off they’ll feel a bit less paul-y.

171437 ▶▶▶ Jamie, replying to Jamie, 1, #1457 of 2087 🔗

On the other hand, the mask will not be Saul-y missed.

170641 2 pence, replying to 2 pence, 9, #1458 of 2087 🔗

Supertramp – Crime Of The Century Lyrics from album: Crime Of The Century (1974)

Now they’re planning the crime of the century
Well what will it be?
Read all about their schemes and adventuring
It’s well worth a fee
So roll up and see
And they rape the universe
How they’ve gone from bad to worse
Who are these men of lust, greed, and glory?
Rip off the masks and let’s see.
But that’s not right – oh no, what’s the story?
There’s you and there’s me
That can’t be right


170683 ▶▶ DavidC, replying to 2 pence, 2, #1459 of 2087 🔗

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

170701 ▶▶ crimsonpirate, replying to 2 pence, 3, #1460 of 2087 🔗

These 70’s albums do eerily predict where we are now: This one joins my current covid listening list:
In the Court of the Crimson King-King Crimson
Lifehouse – The Who – (ok that’s a bit crypt)
Animals – Pink Floyd
The Wall – Pink Floyd

170734 ▶▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to crimsonpirate, 3, #1461 of 2087 🔗

Funny you should say that. Every time Wancock is mentioned, these classic lines sing themselves in my head:

Mama, just killed a man
Put a gun against his head
Pulled my trigger, now he’s dead

And I’m normally a non-violent person!

170725 ▶▶ anon, replying to 2 pence, 1, #1462 of 2087 🔗
170654 calchas, replying to calchas, 6, #1463 of 2087 🔗

Surely, if Covid is to take priorityy over cancer, then in that situation all cancer patients will be moving heaven and earth to get a ‘positive test’, so that they move up the priority list?

170721 ▶▶ l835, replying to calchas, 5, #1464 of 2087 🔗

You won’t receive any treatment for cancer if you have even the slightest infection. As Chemo severely compromises your immune system, I suspect cancer patents will be doing everything possible to not contract Covid or test +

170668 Sarigan, replying to Sarigan, 8, #1465 of 2087 🔗


A call for testing instead of quarantine to permit travel could be ditched from a meeting agenda of two influential European Union committees.

Germany, which holds the presidency of the European Council, has asked to delete a motion calling for tests instead of quarantine at a meeting this week of the EU’s Integrated Political Crisis Response (IPCR) and the EU’s Permanent Representatives Committee (Coreper).

Coreper comprises ambassador level representatives and prepares the work of the Council of the European Union.

In a joint letter, the European Travel Commission and World Travel & Tourism Council said they were “very surprised and concerned”.

“Quarantine measures have a damaging and devastating effect on crossborder/international business and leisure travel and are killing the recovery of the travel and tourism sector,” it said.

“Quarantines are disruptive, unhelpful and should be replaced by comprehensive cost-efficient testing upon departure based on an agreed EU/International testing protocol.”


I hold little hope for the travel industry as a whole. No targeted support, deemed not viable.

170671 ▶▶ Sarigan, replying to Sarigan, 5, #1466 of 2087 🔗

I should add, not that I agree with either testing or quarantine!

170681 ▶▶▶ Julian, replying to Sarigan, 7, #1467 of 2087 🔗

Of the two, in the long term maybe quarantine is best because it is more likely to be abandoned eventually, whereas if testing takes hold we may be stuck with it forever.

170693 ▶▶▶▶ Michael C, replying to Julian, 6, #1468 of 2087 🔗

Absolutely certain that if introduced for travel, testing will be with us forever. The ‘war on terror’ regulations at airports etc. are still in place years after 9/11!

170707 ▶▶▶▶ Michael C, replying to Julian, 2, #1469 of 2087 🔗

Better re-word. Absolutely certain that if introduced for travel, testing will be with us forever. Airport regulations after the twin towers event are still in place years after the event.

170810 ▶▶▶▶▶ BeBopRockSteady, replying to Michael C, 1, #1470 of 2087 🔗

And if required for travel, it’ll be required for employment, which means required to earn, which means required to live.

170710 ▶▶▶▶ Michael C, replying to Julian, #1471 of 2087 🔗

Oops Toby’s site is very sensitive!!

170674 DavidC, 5, #1472 of 2087 🔗

The Great Barrington Declaration, released by Martin Kulldorff of Harvard, Sunetra Gutpa of Oxford, and Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford has a web site;


They are asking health-care professionals as well as members of the general public to add their signatures as well. I have already done so.


170680 Sir Patrick Vaccine, replying to Sir Patrick Vaccine, 16, #1473 of 2087 🔗

Forward this to you MP – it might seem pointless, I understand, but it’s better than doing nothing.

When killing people is Government policy
Peter Lloyd Conservative Woman

October 6, 2020

NO Conservative Prime Minister can survive if he or she is taking decisions that are contrary to the interests of most people in the country. The Covid-19 measures which Boris Johnson is forcing on the public are clearly against those interests, and worse is being planned.

The health, education, employment, finances and social and mental wellbeing of the population is being destroyed for the illusory goal of stopping the spread of a coronavirus that is essentially harmless to 99 per cent of the population, and lethal almost exclusively to the elderly with serious underlying medical conditions, as are many strains of seasonal flu.

Much of the damage being wreaked is disguised by the Chancellor’s furlough scheme and other taxpayer-funded handouts, but revealed through an explosion of government debt which will have severe negative consequences for all of us, particularly future generations.

The ramping-up of virus tests with the dubious PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) methodology is inevitably showing more ‘cases’ which in reality may be just harmless fragments of the Covid-19 (or other) coronavirus RNA that can’t be transmitted to others. These are not infections and certainly not illnesses. The bar on proof of infection is too low.

The government refuses to acknowledge that this increase in cases is largely due to the increased testing, and allows the message to embed in the surrounding narrative that a positive test – which may also be a false positive – is equivalent to being ill when the overwhelming majority of those who are Covid-19 positive don’t become ill, let alone die. It is in the business of exaggeration and fearmongering along with most of the mainstream media.

The most important measure of what is happening medically is surely the number of deaths that can be attributed, to a greater or lesser extent, to Covid-19. The graph below from the Office for National Statistics (taken from the ‘Lockdown Sceptics’ latest newsletter) gives the up-to-date figures, showing that Covid-19 attributed deaths since June are running well below those of flu/pneumonia, and that the total weekly UK death numbers from these lung-related infections are running in line with the five-year average.

As fast as the numbers of those seriously ill, and the daily death toll from the virus, are declining, the risk of other undiagnosed and untreated serious illnesses and deaths is rising because of the lockdown mentality still affecting the NHS and other public services, encouraged by government.

On Saturday 66 GPs wrote to the Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, urging him to treat non-Covid deaths as equal to those from Covid. The doctors know that this is not happening at present. For reasons of projecting an image of action and having illusory control over the path of the virus, only Covid deaths matter to the government.

The doctors’ letter reports that there have been more than 30,000 excess deaths in private homes since March, but fewer than one in ten are caused by Covid-19. They are also concerned that ‘the pandemic has resulted in an inflation of acute cardiovascular deaths, most of which did not relate to Covid-19’. They also point to a report suggesting that child suicide rates increased during lockdown and, for these doctors, harm should be measured as more than Covid deaths.

There is so little pressure from the Conservative Party, MPs and the media for the government to act rationally and in the interest of the country as a whole that the government doesn’t feel it has to explain why non-Covid-19 deaths and serious untreated illnesses don’t matter. It has a monomaniacal obsession with Covid-19 which demonstrates how unaccountable the government is to the overall public interest. There is no rigour left in our system of parliamentary and public accountability, which needs a major overhaul.

Far more people are dying because of the government’s measures than are being saved by them. The wholesale destruction of society is taking place for no significant gain in health or mortality and it is government policy.

170802 ▶▶ BeBopRockSteady, replying to Sir Patrick Vaccine, #1474 of 2087 🔗

Well said.

171137 ▶▶ Monty Bodkin, replying to Sir Patrick Vaccine, #1475 of 2087 🔗

Right, I’ve done that and thanks for the post. I await my MP’s response but I think I’ll be waiting for a very long time

170684 Sarigan, replying to Sarigan, 13, #1476 of 2087 🔗

The travel industry is planning a Twitter storm on Thursday at 10am. For all those who love travel and have twitter, can I please ask that you tweet this:

90,000 jobs already lost/at risk,only 6 countries without restrictions – the UK travel industry is collapsing in front of your eyes @grantshapps . Enough is enough. Where is the sector specific support? The airport testing? Why won’t you #SaveTravel? #SaveFutureTravel #Test4Travel

The below image can also be added.

Thank you all in advance.

170698 ▶▶ Richard O, replying to Sarigan, 16, #1477 of 2087 🔗

If they are lobbying for airport testing, then they will not be receiving my support, or my custom ever again.

170795 ▶▶▶ Sarigan, replying to Richard O, 3, #1478 of 2087 🔗

We/They are lobbying to help the industry survive. The vast majority I have spoken to are completely against it but if it means they can keep their jobs and businesses they are will to support it on paper.

Already 5 million less people will be going on holiday anytime soon:

Top ten Atol holders reduce licences by five million passengers


The travel industry, including airlines, hotels etc is on the verge of complete collapse.

170877 ▶▶▶▶ JHuntz, replying to Sarigan, 2, #1479 of 2087 🔗

Its utterly insane but if we accept the testing and the masking it will never revert back. Just like the full body scanners and the maximum liquids.

170933 ▶▶▶▶▶ Lisa from Toronto, replying to JHuntz, 4, #1480 of 2087 🔗

I have to agree with you. It’s not as if the testing will abolish the mask requirement on planes. So long as that’s in place I will not fly. And where would I fly? Somewhere with even more draconian measures than I’m currently subjected to?

170884 ▶▶▶▶ Richard O, replying to Sarigan, 3, #1481 of 2087 🔗

This is by design. I recall a swivel-eyed Extinction Rebellion spokesperson being interviewed by Andrew Neil in October 2019 when they were holding their occult ritual “protests” in London. She stated to Neil’s astonishment, and widespread derision, that all civilian air travel must be terminated by 2025.

I laughed at the time. I am not laughing now. It was a threat and a warning straight from the top.

My advice to anyone in the travel industry is get out now and find another source of income.

171432 ▶▶▶▶▶ Jamie, replying to Richard O, #1482 of 2087 🔗

There could still be business in the travel industry for anyone willing to consider less law abiding methods of transport. In a quarantined world experts who could advise on back routes between countries could do pretty well, evryone would be needing their services to find ways to escape to Sweden.

170705 ▶▶ Cheezilla, replying to Sarigan, 2, #1483 of 2087 🔗

Good luck Sarigan!

170712 ▶▶ Awkward Git, replying to Sarigan, 2, #1484 of 2087 🔗

Tell them to ignore the WEF controlled WTTC who re driving all this “new normal” bullshit in the travel industry.

Don’t you know mass tourism is non-viable under Agenda 2030 new green utopia that is coming after the great reset?

170800 ▶▶▶ Sarigan, replying to Awkward Git, 2, #1485 of 2087