Covid-19

Boris Johnson, COVID and the Media

Spread the love

The Pursuit of Truth – Or Not Boris Johnson, COVID and the Media Dorothy Byrne 21 June 2021

When a man lies often enough, every now and then, something he says will turn out to be true. And so it happened with Boris Johnson. He said our country would be “record-breaking” in this pandemic and it has been, twice over: at one point, the UK had achieved the highest rate of COVID-19 deaths per capita in the world; and it also suffered the worst fall in GDP in Europe.

How have the Prime Minister and his Cabinet fared when it comes to telling the truth about the greatest disaster our country has experienced since the Second World War?

Privately, radio and television journalists will reel off what they think are the most outrageous lies of this Government’s Coronavirus catastrophe – how it claimed that it was simply ‘following the science’ or ‘protecting the NHS and care homes’ or awarding contracts for personal protective equipment (PPE) sensibly. 

…

Back in autumn 2019, I condemned Boris Johnson as a known liar in the annual MacTaggart Lecture at the Edinburgh Television Festival. A number of my colleagues in broadcasting disapproved strongly even though they did not dispute the accuracy of my statement. That the Prime Minister is a notorious liar is accepted among journalists in the UK across the political spectrum.

Johnson was sacked by The Times early on in his career for an untruthful front-page story which he misattributed to his own godfather. As the Daily Telegraph’s Brussels’ correspondent between 1989 and 1994, he regularly disseminated ‘Euromyths’. He was sacked in 2004 as the Conservative Party’s vice-chairman and Shadow Arts Minister for dishonestly assuring the then leader Michael Howardthat reports he had had an affair with a columnist were an “inverted pyramid of piffle”.

Yet, almost all broadcast journalists believe that they should not use the ‘L’ word about Johnson.

Why? Firstly, it’s rude and we’re British. Secondly, they fear that the public could thereby think we have lost our impartiality. Well, that’s a risk we have to take. I am indeed not impartial between truth and lies. The public doesn’t have the wherewithal to research the facts about politicians’ statements and therefore judge accurately whether they are telling the truth. They rely on us for that. 

…

Ministers have made untrue statements over and over again and it has worked for them. A significant proportion of the population has accepted these statements. This is partly because they sympathised with a Government dealing with a plague without precedent for which it could not be blamed. But this is also because broadcast journalists have not said that we have been lied to in significant ways.

Back in 2019, I was complaining about Johnson’s lies concerning EU rules on condoms and kippers. What halcyon days they were, pre-pandemic, when a politician lying about fish seemed like a big deal. Now, he and his Cabinet lie about life and death. Previously, his lies were specific. Now, they are are so vast in their ambition that they create a parallel universe.

…

In the past, lying politicians were held to account on television and radio. They were not named as liars, but their statements were analysed forensically in lengthy interviews. Not any more.

During the Coronavirus crisis, we have not seen Boris Johnson putting himself up for the sort of grilling to which, for example, Margaret Thatcher subjected herself over the Falklands. Johnson and senior Cabinet ministers have failed to appear on Newsnight or Channel Four News, the two programmes with the time to carry out in-depth interviews. 

A leading broadcast journalist told me: “They just don’t believe in accountability. In one of the great crises of modern times, where is the major interview with the Prime Minister? I can’t think of a time when a Prime Minister in a crisis has put himself up so little. There is no proper scrutiny. It’s a complete contempt for accountability.” 

…

This is an edited extract from ‘Populism, the Pandemic and the Media: Journalism in the Age of Brexit, COVID, Donald Trump and Boris Johnson’ to be published on 24 June 2021 by Abramis. Dorothy Byrne is a television journalist and producer. She was formerly editor-at-large at Channel 4 Television, where she previously served as head of news and current affairs

Continue ReadingBoris Johnson, COVID and the Media

Doctors worldwide call Covid Vaccines “Unnecessary, Ineffective and Unsafe”

Spread the love
https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/05/01/doctors-around-the-world-unite-to-call-the-covid-vaccines-unnecessary-ineffective-and-unsafe/

“In most countries, most people now have immunity to SARS-CoV-2. Depending on their degree of previously acquired cross-immunity, they will have had no symptoms, mild and uncharacteristic symptoms, or more severe symptoms, possibly including anosmia (loss of sense of smell) or other somewhat characteristic signs of the COVID-19 disease. Regardless of disease severity, they will now have sufficient immunity to be protected from severe disease in the event of renewed exposure. This majority of the population will not benefit at all from being vaccinated.”

And the group was at pains to stress their main message – “these vaccines are dangerous”.

The statement continued: “Population survival of COVID-19 exceeds 99.8 per cent globally. In countries that have been intensely infected over several months, less than 0.2 per cent of the population have died and had their deaths classified as ‘with covid19’

…

“With the mRNA vaccines, the risk of severe adverse events is virtually guaranteed to increase with every successive injection. In the long term, they are therefore even more dangerous than the vector vaccines. Their apparent preference over the latter is concerning in the highest degree; these vaccines are not safe.”

Continue ReadingDoctors worldwide call Covid Vaccines “Unnecessary, Ineffective and Unsafe”

Covid-19 vaccine safety concerns

Spread the love

Many European countries have halted using the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine over concerns about blood clots and related medical conditions. It causes difficulties since this vaccine is the only one many of these countries have.

The UK government is desperate that its population gets vaccinated and there is so much total BS in the media pursuing this objective. While I am not an anti-vaxxer people have the right to make an informed decision which – of course – requires that they are informed. All Covid-19 vaccines are licenced only for emergency use since they have not finished their testing.

I am quite impressed by this analysis which I consider appears reasonable and measured. It appears reasonable that adverse events are grossly under-reported through the Yello Card Scheme, which is supported by the fact that many reports are from medical staff.

U.K. Gov. release 6th update on Adverse Reactions to Covid Vaccines which sees rate increase to 1 in 166

BY THE DAILY EXPOSE ON 

…

Now you may have heard the argument by those in authority that the adverse reactions reported are not showing cause for concern as they are in line with what would be expected in the population without the vaccine being administered. The Government even claim this in their own report –

‘It may be difficult to tell the difference between something that has occurred naturally and a suspected adverse reaction. A range of other isolated or series of reports of non-fatal, serious suspected ADRs have been reported. These all remain under continual review, including through analysis of expected rates in the absence of vaccine.‘

The thing is, there is a way to prove that the vaccines are the cause of the adverse reactions and that is to compare the adverse reactions to the Pfizer jab and the adverse reactions to the Oxford jab side by side.

If there is no difference between what we would expect to see in the general population without the vaccine being administered then the rate of reported reactions should be pretty similar for both jabs, shouldn’t they?

…

Finally we come to deaths. There have been 94,809 adverse reactions as a result of the Pfizer / BioNTech vaccine reported to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme with 227 sadly resulting in death as of the 28th February 2021.

However, even though there have been one million less doses administered than the Pfizer jab, there have been a total of 201,622 adverse reactions to the Oxford / AstraZeneca vaccine reported to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme, with 275 sadly resulting in death as of the 28th February 2021.

So there you have it. We have just proven that the Government are talking utter nonsense when they claim there is nothing to worry about as the adverse reactions to the Covid vaccines are in line with what would we would expect to see in the general public who have not had the vaccine.

…

Continue ReadingCovid-19 vaccine safety concerns

WORSE THAN USELESS BORIS AND HIS NASTY TORY PARTY SCUM :: Mishandling Covid-19 :: Following Politics not Science

Spread the love

An interview (and part two) with David King, former government chief scientific adviser (2000-2007) and founder and chair of Independent SAGE (Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies) about SAGE and following the evidence. The articles are from September 2000 while the main criticisms remain valid.

…

HW: How many civil servants are on the official SAGE, relative to independent scientists?

SDK: Not counting sub-committees, out of the main group of 23, 13 are civil servants

HW: So SAGE is not a body of independent scientists? It’s a body that is controlled by government, given the dominance of civil servants in it?

SDK: I’m afraid I think that’s right [although] I have enormous respect for Sir Patrick Vallance [the current chief scientific adviser].

HW: Was this anything to do with this government’s view of the public – that the public must simply be told what to do, so the debate about the science can’t be open?

SDK: Yes. The government want to be able to say, ‘We are following the science.’ If the public doesn’t know what the science advice is, the public has no means of knowing whether or not the government is being honest. But it’s going further than that. If it goes pear-shaped, it’s the scientists’ fault.

…

(part 2)

…

SDK: The prime minister believed in the herd immunity programme. In other words, if there are enough of us who have had the disease, we’ve got the antibodies and the disease can no longer spread. Enough means about 70 per cent. It’s like a vaccine. You’ve got the antibodies and the disease is just wiped out. That, of course, was how the plagues were eventually wiped out, but the human cost was enormous. Now the chief scientific adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, did say in one of his press briefings, with the approval of the prime minister standing on his right, ’With herd immunity, it is likely to take a while but we will eventually come out of it.’

HW: Did he admit that it would be at the cost of tens of thousands of deaths?

SDK: The prime minister said, ‘We have to be prepared for losing some of our loved ones, every one of us has to be prepared.’ So, there was that expectation. They consciously allowed the disease to spread.

There was the football match up in Liverpool in early March against a team from Spain. Spain had the epidemic, massively, and we allowed the crowds into Liverpool to attend that match, British and Spanish crowds. It was the best possible way to make sure that it was spread in the country at large. Then we had the Cheltenham races on 10-13 March with a quarter of a million people there – another wonderful way for an epidemic to spread. That was a formula for us to all quickly get immunity by having the disease.

The problem was a delay period before they actually pushed the lockdown button. In that period of time, we all knew that the epidemic was doubling every three to four days. So, in one week it was quadrupling. My analysis was that if they had just gone into lockdown one week earlier – when they began discussing the Ferguson paper [predicting that around 250,000 people would die if we didn’t go into lockdown] we would have a quarter of the number of deaths that we have today. It’s going to turn out to be 40-50,000 unnecessary deaths in this country – unwarranted, a complete cock-up by government.

…

Continue ReadingWORSE THAN USELESS BORIS AND HIS NASTY TORY PARTY SCUM :: Mishandling Covid-19 :: Following Politics not Science

UK govt attributing blame for Covid-19 on the general public

Spread the love

Nishat Siddiqi is a consultant cardiologist based in South Wales. He discusses the UK government under Boris Johnson’s lamentable response to the Coronavirus crisis. Boris ‘the falaffel’ Johnson neglected to attend 5 consecutive Cobra meetings addressing the UK’s response to Coronavirus.

Shifting the Blame

By Nishat Siddiqi

As Britain’s Covid death toll exceeds 100,000, the government has set out to blame the public – but from the very beginning its recklessness, ineptitude and cronyism have paved the way for this tragedy.

…

Because reality showed Boris to be wrong, the government has firmly decided that we, the supposedly feckless general public, are primarily to blame. During one of her rare public briefings on the coronavirus, Priti Patel proudly declared that the police have issued 45,000 fines to people who have flouted the rules, saying that a minority of people were putting the health of the nation at risk. Scrolling through Twitter feeds of my fellow doctors, I often see remarks on how the flow of traffic has not reduced, unlike the first lockdown. They ask: “where are all these people going and why aren’t they staying home?”

…

Meanwhile, contracts for PPE were awarded to firms with no experience in this field, but with close links to the Conservative Party, often leading to delays, substandard equipment and the waste of millions of pounds. Since 11 March, at least 216 frontline health and social care workers have died from Covid-19, with many complaining about inadequate PPE before succumbing to the virus. The British Medical Association is now calling for all healthcare workers to be given face masks identical to the ones used in ICUs.

Johnson promised a “world beating” test and trace system. But like so many of his promises, the reality was a source of national shame more than pride. The outsourcing to companies with next-to-no experience led to an overwhelmed system with poor communication between private companies and the NHS. The initial policy of discharging elderly patients from hospital back to care homes without testing for the virus was an unforgivable move that led to the virus spreading among some of our most vulnerable people; the fact that this coincided with strict lockdown measures, meaning that many care home residents were denied visits from loved ones, only added to the tragedy.

…

As Johnson finally condemns Trump, Britain should examine its own shift to the right

Continue ReadingUK govt attributing blame for Covid-19 on the general public