David Robertson & Peter Doshi, “The end of the pandemic will not be televised", BMJ (14 December 2021)
Yet again it's the British Medical Journal that publishes something worth reading. Basically, via pretty solid argumentation, the authors are saying: "If we want the "pandemic" to end, it's up to us; we need to turn off the sources of propaganda and get on with life. History tells us so." Which is a good antidote to the depressing display of idiocy we saw yesterday by so many (not all) of our MPs here in the UK.
That so many of these dim-witted MPs accepted "assurances" from a government (I'm calling them Ingsoc from now on) that engages in habitual lying, is almost beyond belief. "Don't worry", we heard (I paraphrase), "these are not Vaccine Passports; they're COVID Certificates. Ingsoc has listened to our concerns! Hooray! A negative test will be sufficient for these passes, so they won't discriminate against the vaccine free."
Well, just wait.
And masks make people "feel safe". Just think about that—"feel safe". They're sold to us as a "non-pharmaceutical intervention", with some (not much) scientific support, that's supposed to have some effect on reducing viral transmission. Yet they make people "feel safe", thus emboldening us to go out and about and undo any transmission-reduction benefit they are claimed to provide. Don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying people shouldn't go out and about. I think we should. I'm just saying that the mask-wearing policy is incoherent. The real function of masks, in my view—as I discussed with Antony recently—is to serve as a sign (as David Halpern himself admitted to Parliament, I believe Laura Dodsworth said): a sign of fear and compliance that goes exactly in the opposite direction of making people "feel safe". (They only make people "feel safe" relative to the implied lie that if they don't wear them they're not safe.)
And mandates for health workers? What can one say? David Davis very clearly pointed to the solution (if a solution is needed): regular testing. Instead, health workers must receive one of these novel gene therapies (and their eternal "boosters") or lose their jobs, in spite of having battled through the earlier stages of the "pandemic" to cries of heroism—just when the NHS can least afford to lose staff.
"Oh, but there are a precedents! Health workers are already required to have certain vaccinations."
So, let's ignore the fact that COVID-19 "vaccines" are a new technology. Let's ignore the fact that they do not have long-term safety data. Let's ignore the fact that there are serious questions about the research integrity behind (at least one of) them. Let's ignore the fact that they are arguably more dangerous than any other "vaccine" people normally receive. Let's ignore the fact that suspicion of these "vaccines" far outweighs that of any other health-care-mandated pharmaceutical intervention. (I mean, since when did so many nurses and doctors express such deep concern about the "jabs" they were told to take?) Let's ignore the fact that there are worrying reports of really bad side-effects from these things, plus a stifling culture of under-reporting. Let's ignore all this—(let's also ignore the obvious solution: daily testing)—and force these medical hero-ingrates to roll up their sleeves and ingest the elixir of Ingsoc's selfless largesse.
And, don't worry. Surely Parliament will be able to scrutinise any further "measures". We're safe in their effective hands.
Well, all it will take is another hyping-up of the narrative—with dashboards of frightening statics and people dying WITH whichever scariant is in vogue at the time—and they'll pass anything. Anything.
Fear can do amazing things. We know it can. History tell us so.