Monday, April 17, 2023

Do A Majority Of British Citizens Still Think Lockdowns Should Have been Stricter?


It is astounding to think that after all the obvious evidence that lockdowns imposed in the COVID pandemic did nothing to protect anybody or stop the spread of the virus (assuming all those people who tested positive for SARS-COV2 were actually carrying the virus and the numbers were not just made up,) that recent polls have found that the majority of British citizens are still very much pro-lockdown. In a YouGov poll taken in early March, only 19% of respondents said the government’s handling of pandemic was “too strict”, and a remarkable 37% said it was “not strict enough”.

Likewise, when UnHerd asked Brits whether “in retrospect, lockdown was a mistake”, they found there wasn’t a single constituency in the country where a majority of respondents agreed. Overall agreement was 27% – which is barely more encouraging than YouGov’s finding.

The keyword here is respondents of course, polling companies admit that as few as one in ten of the people they contact actually agree to answer questions.

Sensible people gave up on polls years ago of course, but its doubtful that those who would have said lockdowns were a disastrous mistake but couldn't be arsed listening to a load of stupid questions could have turned the poll round . So what explains Brits’ continued support for a policy that apart from violating the human rights of every citizen and imposed such huge costs succeeded only in trashing the national economy and shovelling taxpayers money into the Big Pharma Cartel's pockets.

As veteran-lockdown sceptic Dan Hannan has noted with regret, “many of my countrymen couldn’t give two hoots about liberty”. Like the citizens of most Western countries, Brits have long favoured higher taxes, nationalisation of industry and the continued expansion of Nanny State. So their support for lockdown isn’t exactly a major anomaly that needs to be explained, the lazy paskudniaks fancy another year of sitting at home, getting paid for doing nothing. 

Second: as has been noted by many alt_media commentators, the government's scientific and medical advisers Brits massively overestimated the risks of Covid, particularly the risks to the young. This owes partly to general biases in the estimation of small quantities. But it is also a rsult of the intentional use of fear tactics whose very aim was to increase compliance with lockdown.

Third: the theoretical case for ‘flattening the curve’ was strong. If infections rise too high, hospitals will become overwhelmed, leading to huge numbers of deaths; a temporary lockdown can prevent this from happening. The argument is flawed, of course – not least because it again ignores the ‘costs’ side of the equation. But it seems quite compelling.

Fourth: case numbers did start falling around the time of each lockdown in 2020. Yet as the statistician Simon Wood has shown, infections were already in decline before the lockdown was called – in all three cases. This can be seen in the chart below, which shows the timing of lockdowns in relation to five reconstructions of infection numbers.

The five reconstructions are shown in red, red-shading, blue-shading, grey-shading and dashed, respectively.

Fifth: while the supposed benefits of lockdown were obvious and immediate, the costs were largely delayed. As a result, members of the public are more likely to credit lockdown for its ‘successes’ than they are to blame lockdown for its failures – including debt, inflation and a lowering of education standards.

Sixth: for months, credentialed scientists appeared before the television cameras and informed the public that lockdown was the right choice – that the Government really was ‘following the science’. Meanwhile, dissenting scientists (like those who signed the Great Barrington Declaration) were consistently marginalised. Through a combination of groupthink, deplatforming and biased media coverage, the public became convinced that there was such a thing as ‘the science’ and that it supported lockdown.

For a committed COVID sceptic like myself this is hard to swallow. While it'sfeasible that the majority *were* pro-lockdown when the world was in the midst of the worst and most intensive scamdemic /  PsyOp in living memory, but to carry on clinging to the fear generated by negative propaganda is stretching things even by the standards of Labour voting, Guardian reading herd creatures. In 2021 their brains would have been successfully washed with the elaborate fear porn and propaganda, their thinking too addled by the incessant lies they were bombarded with from all angles, MSM, politicians and other authority figures including doctors and academics. However, with the benefit of hindsight and all the data we’ve accrued and knowledge we’ve gathered through lived experiences, I call absolute BS that it is still the case that the majority of the public support lockdowns. So I do think it’s important to make the distinction between past and present tense here. Are people still as terrified of a virus now as they were in November 2020? Highly unlikely. Michael Senger has done an excellent article relating to this topic;

”Across the western world, governments used propaganda on their own citizens for the specific purpose of ratcheting up fear of the coronavirus and increasing compliance with lockdown measures. State scientists in the United Kingdom later admitted they’d used fear to change minds in a series of interviews with author Laura Dodsworth: “Using fear as a means of control is not ethical. Using fear smacks of totalitarianism.” 

“The use of fear has definitely been ethically questionable. It’s been like a weird experiment.” 

“Psychologists didn’t seem to notice when it stopped being altruistic.”

As one Member of Parliament put it:

If it is true that the state took the decision to terrify the public to get compliance with rules, that raises extremely serious questions about the type of society we want to become. If we’re being really honest, do I fear that Government policy today is playing into the roots of totalitarianism? Yes, of course it is.

Likewise, a report later published by the Canadian Armed Forces revealed that military leaders saw COVID as a unique opportunity to test propaganda techniques on the public, “shaping” and “exploiting” information to bolster government messages about the virus.

As a result of these domestic propaganda campaigns, across the western world, we were all treated to such delightful slogans as “just stay home,” “two weeks to slow the spread,” “follow the science,” and “we’re all in this together”—each of course, in truly Orwellian fashion, being a boldfaced lie.”



The Lockdown Scams Exposed
Excuses are flying thick and fast and panic is the order of the day among elected representatives and salaried pubic servants in the UK government as, day after day for the past week, UK print and online news organisation the Telegraph has published more leaked documents revealing the lies, quid pro quo arrangements, fabricated data, bad science, personal vendettas and dodgy deals that shaped the nation's response to the COVID hoax pandemic.

Forget The Hysteria, The Real COVID Infection Fatality Rate
For three years screaming headlines in mainstream media have whipped up fear of the mild effects of the SARS - COV2 virus which causes a didseas known as COVID19. Doctors employed by the government repeatedly warned that unless we accepted an untested, experimental medication marketed as a vaccine (though it was anything but,) this disease would surely either kill us or leave us severely delibitated.

Will Swiss court action over vaccine injuries turn the worldwide tide?
CRIMINAL charges have been filed against the Swiss drugs authority on behalf of six people allegedly injured by the Covid vaccination. A team of lawyers and scientists have compiled a comprehensive evidence report and have made publicly available around 1,200 items of evidence, arguing that Swissmedic has created a risk to public health which significantly exceeds that of SARS-CoV-2.
They assert that the authority approved the new gene therapeutics, although the minimum standards required by law were never met ... Continue reading >>>

The Conspiracy Theorists Were Right Again: UK Gov. report admits 19.2 million people in England have not had a single dose of a Covid-19 Vaccine,
For two years this blog has insisted that the published data on COVID cases and deaths were fabricated, an essential part of a massive campaign of scaremongering propaganda. There were numerous attempts to make those of us wise enough to refuse the killer vaccines feel as if we are oddballs or freaks. In November 2021 the government's Chief Scientific Advser, back by the chief medical adviser announced that just 5 million people in the United Kingdom were unvaccinated for COVID, having declined the offer of a Covid-19 vaccine.

How COVID Corrupted Science
Politicians who criticised AstraZeneca vaccine 'probably killed hundreds of thousands', says Oxford scientist in an outburst that reveals how the science acedemy have been totally owned by corporate money and thus have been guilty of lying, scaremongering, fabricating evidence, publishing fake statisics and spreadsing misinformation. And the politicians who told us to 'trust The Science' are just as guilty. ...
Continue reading >>>

COVID cover-up: UK media refuses to report that 4 of 5 coronavirus deaths over the past month occurred in the vaccinatedEarlier this evening Prime Minister Boris Johnson, in a broadcast to the nation, implored British citizens to continue doing what they’ve been told to do throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Unfortunately everything the government has told us to do: Stay at home, Work from home, Wear masks, wash your hands every twenty seconds, do not touch anything, Shun your friends and relatives especially if they are sick, Get a vaccine, Get a second, vaccine, Get a booster vaccine, ... etc, etc, etc,
Continue reading >>>

A few weeks ago this blog reported a Swedish study which showed that natural immunity provides much better protection against infection by the SARS2-COV virus which causes COVID (COrona VIrus Disease,) than the Pfizer vaccine which is currently hyped as the most effective on the market, though it is no more effective than the others at provinding immunity. The more responsible voices in mainstream media that actually reported the story described by the news as “a bit of a bombshell”.

Continue reading >>>

Vaccines Do Not Stop COVID-19 Spread As Governments Claim: Legal Advocacy Group

Vaccines are less effective effective in stopping the spread of COVID-19 that governments have claimed, an analysis of government narratives carried out by a constitutional rights group shows. The report was published Tuesday by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, found that claims made by governments promising vaccination will reduce or stop the spread of COVID-19 are not supported by either medical science or empirical evidence
Continue reading >>>

The Betrayal Of Humanity By The Corrupt Medical Professions
From day one, back in March 2020 when the pandemic was declared, this blog has been questioning the fake statistics, highlighting the distortion of statistics to serve the scaremongering narratives of the elites and exposing the lies and dishonesty of politicians, sciencetitis (sic) and, surprisingly perhaps if you are of a credulous nature, doctors and the medical professions. ... Continue reading >>>