Vaccine Passports

More than 1,200 UK church leaders have urged Boris Johnson not to introduce Covid vaccine certificates, saying they are an “unethical form of coercion”. In an open letter, the leaders – who include Anglican and Catholic ministers – warn that passports could create a “surveillance state”.

So, it seems that church leaders get what the supposedly freedom-loving Tory government doesn’t. Vaccine passports are one of the most dangerous policy proposals ever to be made in British politics, and would signal the end of tolerant democratic freedom.

Bullying people to take the Covid vaccine – whether through incentives or punishments – is not social solidarity or social responsibility. It is a smug liberal conceit masquerading as those things, and is dangerously misguided.

Vaccine passports are not necessary, and are deeply discriminatory.

~ article by Jonathan Cook

The Great Reset : ‘No pasarán’

The Great Reset; ‘No pasarán’ ~ article by Ghassan and Intibah Kadi

”Did the pre-COVID world need a reset ? Definitely. Many of its founding determinants have been based on injustice, shortsightedness, divisiveness, lack of good old values, the inability of being sustainable; just to name a few.When millions cannot find food to eat and clean water to drink yet others fly half the way across the world to attend a baby shower, something must be amiss and a reset is way overdue.

But what is it that the vision of the World Economic Forum (WEF) and its ‘Bible’ (COVID-19 The Great Reset) have to offer in order to provide the world and future generations with a brighter new direction?

It doesn’t take long to see that within the WEF “Great Reset” … there are clear indications that what it is attempting to do is to create more compliant robotic individuals and draw the world and its population deeper into the abyss.”

Full Article : The Great Reset; ‘No pasarán’

Lockdown Deaths : ”An irony to top all others”


~ article by Brendan O’Neill

”Around half of beds in some English hospitals are currently empty.

Health officials fear, in the words of the Financial Times, that this is because ‘people may be failing to seek help for life-threatening conditions during the coronavirus pandemic’….

More people are dying of non-coronavirus-related illnesses than normal because they are reluctant to leave their homes and be a burden on their local hospital.. There has been a sharp rise in the number of seriously ill people dying at home….

In the UK we are locked down and we are ferociously told, in particular by the media class, not to go outside. Don’t be a pest, don’t be anti-social, don’t be a burden. At the same time, the NHS has been sanctified almost as a new religion and we are instructed every single day by political leaders to ‘Save the NHS’. If in this climate people are getting the message that it is immoral to leave your home and even more immoral to pester the saints of the NHS, that is not at all surprising..

It seems particularly irresponsible for the media constantly to share clips of doctors and nurses in floods of tears over how difficult their daily work is. Nobody doubts that it is difficult, and everyone is grateful for what they are doing. But the dangerous message communicated here is: we can’t cope. Stay Home, Save The NHS, Don’t Bother These Stressed Doctors …

The supposedly virtuous pro-lockdown lobby is implicitly making a ‘trade-off’… between lives at risk from Covid and lives at risk from the lockdown. They have decided, it seems, that the latter are not very important.”

Full article :


A cure worse than the disease: UK lockdown could cause 150,000 ‘avoidable’ deaths, MORE than the virus it’s meant to stop

~ article by Peter Andrews

”The cause of the non-Covid deaths will be varied, from cancer sufferers and other seriously ill people not getting treatment, from people avoiding going to hospitals (visits to accident and emergency units are down by a third), from an increase in suicides among depressed people forced to self-isolate and from the effects of increased domestic abuse….

So how exactly could the lockdown kill people? The first and most obvious way is in the almost total overnight cessation of normal healthcare measures. If you are sick right now, unless you can test positive for coronavirus, then healthcare systems do not want to know about you. In anticipation of a crisis in public hospitals and a rush on limited intensive care units, hospitals were more or less cleared out in preparation for the coronavirus…..

When all is said and done, more people could actually have died as a result of the lockdown measures than from Covid-19-related complications. That would be an irony to top all others.”

Full article :


~ article by Dr Malcolm Kendrick

”The focus, the entire focus, has been to clear patients out of hospitals, waiting for the deluge of patients. This has been so effective that, in my area of Macclesfield in Cheshire, the local hospitals have never been so empty.

There are wards with no patients in them. The shiny new Nightingale hospital in London, with four thousand beds, apparently had just nineteen patients in it last weekend. Yet still the pressure comes down : get patients out of hospital and back into care homes…..

The actions taken, so far, have made the problem far, far, worse. All the thinking and resources have been directed to the NHS. Meanwhile, the residents and the staff of nursing homes have been, effectively, thrown in front of a bus. On Thursdays, while others have been clapping the NHS, I have been clapping for the unsung heroes of this epidemic. The care home staff.”

Full article :

In an earlier article Dr Kendrick wrote :  ”I care for patients in intermediate care, two of whom we sent to hospital last week, with non-Covid related illness. They were both sent straight back, they both died. They were elderly, they were ill, but in normal circumstances they would have been admitted and, hopefully, successfully treated.”

Full article :


Primum Non Nocere


To the infinite shame of the UK Government – and yes, the ‘sacred’ NHS – some elderly people are now being handed documents by their doctors (who are, incidentally, bound by their oath to “Do No Harm”), and are being ‘invited’ to sign them. On inspection, these documents declare nothing less than that the patient does not wish to be resuscitated should they become unconscious from the coronavirus.

This ‘initiative’ is not only distressing to the patients who receive the documents, and unethical, but arguably unlawful : another hidden euthanasia, by any other name.

On Covid-19


When the eminent epidemiologist Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London first testified before the British parliament on how many people he thought would ultimately fall prey to Covid-19, his initial projection was that the virus could claim the lives of 500,000 people in the UK.

But he has revised that projection. Professor Ferguson now believes that at most 20,000 people will die – ”and it could be much lower.”

(For comparison, Public Health England estimates that on average 17,000 people died from influenza in England annually between 2014/15 and 2018/19).

Professor Ferguson’s U-turn has not been widely reported to the public, but he is now calling a figure 25 times smaller than his original prediction the absolute maximum.

So, while of course there is no cause for complacency, there is surely no reason either for panic and over-reaction, which themselves have extremely harmful, even fatal, consequences.

In 2009 UK government experts wildly over-hyped dangers of swine flu — is history repeating with Covid-19 ?

Even If the eventual total number of Covid-19 deaths in the UK is in line with current ‘worst-case scenario’ estimates, at around 20,000 maximum, the virus will end up having a minimal impact on overall mortality for the year.

Covid-19 is meant to be a new Black Death, but in Britain no more people are dying than NORMAL. What does this say about the virus?  

Here’s a realistic and balanced perspective of the threat – or lack thereof – based on analysis of available data.

~ from Peerless Reads

~ update :  April 2, 2020

There are good reasons to doubt the officially reported UK fatality rate for Covid-19.

As things stand this Covid-19 mortality rate – 2,921 as of today, from 33,718 reported cases –  is added to whenever a person authorised to do so signs a death certificate giving Covid-19 as the cause of death. What we do not know is how many of those deaths were actually caused by Covid-19, or were merely of persons in whose bodies the virus could be detected, – or worse still, of persons who died in institutions where the virus had been detected (or suspected).

Without testing, it is impossible to know how many people are carrying the virus, how many have mild (or no) symptoms, or how many have recovered.

The key information, which I urge everyone to follow closely, is the background death rate. That is, the rate at which people are dying of ALL causes.

The background rate for March 2020 does not differ markedly from that for March 2019 or March 2018. In fact the figure for March 2020 is below the average for the last five years, This means that few (if any) more people are dying than usual, despite Covid-19.

The average age of those reported to have died from Covid-19 in Italy is 80, and 80 is also the average age at which Italians die of all causes.

If we want to deconstruct or reconstruct society from free will, informed choice, and a desire for change for the better, that is all to the good – in fact it is our democratic duty. But it is something else entirely to deconstruct society from misplaced fear, causing immeasurable collateral damage out of all proportion to the actual threat.

Ironically, and tragically, this damage will be felt disproportionately by those already perceived as ‘at risk’.

Involuntary Euthanasia


The culture of ”involuntary euthanasia” exposed at Gosport today is by no means unique, or even extraordinary. It is merely the tip of a very large iceberg.

It is a great, yet unspoken, on-going national scandal that NHS doctors routinely end the lives of thousands of elderly hospital patients prematurely because they are difficult to manage, or in order to free up beds.

Doctors and complicit hospital staff have turned the so-called ”care pathway’’ into the equivalent of euthanasia of the inconvenient elderly, and around one third of all hospital deaths are induced in this way.

Top doctor’s chilling claim: The NHS kills off 130,000 elderly patients every year

The lack of evidence required before initiating the Liverpool Care Pathway makes it an assisted death pathway rather than a care pathway. Many elderly patients who could live substantially longer are being killed by the LCP. Patients are frequently put on the pathway without a proper analysis of their condition. The personal views of the physician. or other medical team members, of the perceived quality of life or low likelihood of a good outcome are central in putting a patient on the LCP.

If we accept the Liverpool Care Pathway, we accept that euthanasia is part of the standard way of dying, as it is now associated with 29 per cent of NHS deaths.

~ Mail Online  article published June 20 2012

The Government ordered an independent review in 2012 which recommended that hospitals abolish the practice of LCP by July 2014.  But nurses and other experts have since  given evidence to MPs on the health select committee that the pathway is still being used by hospitals ‘under a different name’.

In nearly every hospital it is ”Trust” policy ( for ‘Trust’  read  ‘Government’  ) not to  waste money or time on ”non-productive units”  ( i.e. the over 70s ).  They are sedated and food and drink is withheld.  They then die of ”natural causes” and the doctor can write –  for example – ”pneumonia” on the Death Certificate.  (Incidentally, every Trust that operates this scheme is merely following NHS Minister Hunt’s directive as spelled out in his book.)

This is indeed a long-running national scandal, but most people will either choose to believe that Gosport is an isolated, untypical case, or worse, will continue to turn a blind eye to , or even approve of, widespread state-sponsored euthanasia.

The Self Has Become A Commodity

London__Westminster_-_Vauxhall_Bridge_Road_Pedestrian_Crossing_-_geograph.org_.uk_-_1739902-1304x400Every measure of mental ill health imaginable shows a society in freefall, not only making its citizens sicker but denying them the help to get better. That is unless your stated aim is to get back to work as quickly as possible. For soon there will be a Department of Work and Pensions employment advisor at your therapy centre, your GP, damn it probably your local supermarket if the Tories get their way. For what worth does anyone have if not to contribute to the job market ? …

The self has become a commodity, with simplified ideas from Cognitive Behavioural Therapies (CBT) used to inject into people the idea that they can and should be able to excise certain traits, emotions and behaviours for maximum marketability, be that on their CV or via Instagram hits. This responsibilisation and the pressure to display a positive mental attitude and upward trajectory creates casualties, for not all of us can succeed as measured according to neoliberal ideals.

Tackling the Mental Health Crisis Means Defeating Neoliberalism Once and For All

~ article by Jay Watts, Novara Media

Implied Consent

sale on

”Implied consent” for organ donation is a problematic and in my opinion a very dangerous suggestion, especially when it comes from NHS privatiser-in-chief  Jeremy Hunt.

In a privatised and market-driven health service, human organs become a valuable ”commodity”, with harvesting and sale to the highest bidder a far from impossible scenario in the not so distant future.

It is a well-documented fact that Israel already routinely strips vital body-parts –  especially corneas apparently – from the corpses of young Palestinians killed by its security forces before returning their bodies to their families. These organs are then sold on the thriving international market for such ”goods” .

Asset-stripping and exploitation is thus continued even after death.


I’m not a gynaecologist, but I know a Hunt when I see one

sale on body parts

Ebola Scare : ‘Disaster Capitalism’ at work ?

In her impassioned and informative book ”The Shock Doctrine : The Rise of Disaster Capitalism”, Naomi Klein reveals how the corporations who own the antidotes to deadly diseases (including the supposedly ”eradicated” smallpox) came to possess such dangerous monopoly power.
The answer is that it was handed to them by their privatising neo-con buddies in the White House, Whitehall and elsewhere.
A dominant player in this deadly business is Gilead, whose major shareholders include(d) none other than ”Mr Disaster Capitalism” himself : Donald Rumsfeld.
For the six years he held office as Secretary of Defence under President George W. Bush,  Rumsfeld had to leave the White House room whenever the talk turned to the possibility of Avian Flu treatment and the purchase of drugs for it. (His colleagues however, took good care of his interests). Rumsfeld is also a former CEO of the pharmaceutical corporation G. D. Searle & Company (now part of Pfizer).
rums2  big pharma
Corporate America wants to maintain a monopoly on life-saving drugs, and stifle efforts of foreign nations to obtain such products easily and affordably.
In ”Big Pharma: How the World’s Biggest Drug Companies Control Illness’ ‘ (2006)  British journalist Jacky Law exposes how major pharmaceutical companies determine which health  care problems are publicised and researched.
Outlining the history of the pharmaceutical industry , Law identifies the failure of a regulatory framework which disingenuously assumes that pharmaceutical companies always produce worthwhile products that society needs.
 big ph3      fear
” I no longer believe in the United States’ government. It has a terrible record when it comes to telling the truth on any serious subject,”
Film by Michael Winterbottom, based on Naomi Klein‘s terrifying book ‘The Shock Doctrine :
ebola 5

”Assisted Dying”


We must be very careful about this, and I am most emphatically not  in favour of changing the law on ”assisted dying”.

Without suggesting that anyone you or I know would abuse any change, I can think of circumstances where others, including financially constrained health-care professionals/administrators, or unscrupulous relatives awaiting inheritance, might.

Much more research and development of palliative care, ( despite the expense involved ), is the way forward in my opinion. The phrase, ”thin end of the wedge’’ also springs to mind. Having said that I do not doubt that this cause is supported from the very best of motives;  but all in all I rather agree with the point in a Facebook post on this subject by Mike Smith :……

”What utter lies Dignity in Dying utter. All the evidence from Oregon and the Netherlands shows that the numbers of people dying increase dramatically year-on-year. The so-called safeguards do not work. And in times of austerity, more and more people will feel they do not want to be a burden on their relatives, friends or society. This is absolutely not the time to say to people, we won’t give you decent social care, we won’t give you appropriate palliative care, But it is okay for a “doctor” to come and put you out of your misery. It wouldn’t be misery if we looked after people properly in the first place.”…..

I also sympathise with these comments on the same thread by Terri Selby :

”So sad that so few feel that ending suffering is much more of an answer to some of the terrible diseases I’ve witnessed people die of over my three decades as a nurse. Terrible disease happens: I have had cancer, but I do not want any of you coming at me with your lethal injections!!  Ending life just because health care professionals don’t look for alternative methods of managing pain and suffering is a lazy approach to ‘care’. Even more worrying is people who use religious terminology such as ‘I pray’ when talking about supporting euthanasia. If you have a religious faith, please look at what your faith teaches you about the sanctity of human life…Good palliative care and proper management of symptom control is key. Economically I agree, it would be useful to rid society of these god-dodgers who stay over their time. Also, those refuse to just do as they are told and stop being a nuisance should know when we’ve had enough of their illnesses that cost us tax-payers so much money. But – wait- why not just invest in enhancing people’s lives and develop good palliative care? Instead of it being a cinderella service why not make it a sexy politic hot topic?…. Stop this sleep walking to putting folk to sleep. There is NO DIGNITY IN DYING if we kill ourselves or others. We are talking about taking granny to the vets (believe me this will happen) and encouraging a new, very dehumanising zeitgeist to a very un-brave new world.”

Yet another contributor to the same Dignity in Dying  thread ( who will remain nameless ) talks about terminally ill patients ”taking up space and resources” . Well then, the logical conclusion is that they should all  just top themselves soon as possible, so that the Government can afford a few more Nuclear Missiles !  (Come to think of it, that may be EXACTLY what this is all about !)……

Let’s not mince words : we are talking about euthanasia here, a problematic subject with a dark history, and we must be very careful and circumspect before we change the current laws to give the State such power over life and death.

Quotes From Doctors Against Assisted Suicide

When a patient says, “Help me, doctor,” he is assuming that his doctor is on the side of his life. Doctors need to have a degree of humility and remember their Hippocratic Oath, that they should use no medications to cause death even when asked.

Euthanasia kills the patient twice – once when we say, “Yes, your life is not worth living,” and then when we help him die.

The law Is unnecessary and dangerous. You kill pain, not the patient.

Assisted suicide laws put pressure on our patients: The right to die can easily become the duty to die.