THEY THINK IT’S ALL OVER

I thought it was all over. I really did. I really hoped. I fully expected it would be the end of the matter and I wouldn’t have to shout and moan anymore about Covid: about the lockdown, about the masks, about the vaccine. The truth would eventually out and people would make their own judgement on the whole sorry business. The movers and shakers would finally confess to their duplicity, an amnesty declared and we could move on.

Apparently not. A letter from our Public Health Director came through the door the other day, inviting me for a winter (Covid and Flu) vaccine, explaining, in the predictable language that we have gotten used to, that this was the best protection against the disease, with the mantra “safe and effective”. My appointment was already made. It was up to me to accept or cancel.  I had a similar letter the previous year and wrote to the Director explaining my reason for refusing it and my misgivings over why the MHRA vaccine was still being promoted by our National Health Service. When there was so much concern over its safety and efficacy, why had the roll out not been halted?  I had no reply. I understood, of course, that Directors of Public Health would already have too much on their minds to respond to a dissident patient. 

So, I hesitated from responding, this time round, but decided to try again and seek a response to my concerns. In my letter I again detailed my disquiets and challenged the director to take the issue seriously. I thought it was her job to do just that. To her credit, I had a reply by return.  It didn’t answer my questions directly but pointed me to the reports and analysis which justified the continuation of the MHRA vaccine. It was the classic case of passing the buck. She has to follow the guidance offered further up the chain and wasn’t in a position to give personal opinions. Even if she had some misgivings herself, she wouldn’t feel it was in her gift to go against or challenge the given line. It is disturbing and destructive trend in much of public life when common sense is eclipsed by protocol. When “whistle blowers” have to be protected you know how deep corruption has set in. “Theirs’s not to make reply, theirs’s not to reason why, their’s but to do and die,” As someone has said.

But the truth will out and it is already seeping from the rancid bags of lies that have been festering over the past five years. Bit by bit people are quietly coming out with admissions of “errors of judgements”.  Chris Wittie now says that masks, out-with the health care environment, were always ineffective, Patrick Vallance openly admitted that lockdown could do more harm than good, Rishi Sunak protested that he was always against school closures, Pfizer admitted that they never tested the vaccine for transmission, the World Health Organisation downplayed the aerosol theory of transmission, all the key players showed, by their own lifestyles, that they never actually believed in the message, Mark Zuckerberg regretted that he supressed anti-Covid messages on his Facebook platform and Neil Ferguson confessed his surprise that they were able to get away with enforcing the lockdown. Well it seems he did and all the others too.

It is the classic state of a corrupt institution. Those who were found out, whose untruths and deliberate lies directly caused so much damage and suffering, are still there, moved sideways, perhaps, into equally remunerative posts while the much vaunted Public Enquiry trundles on tip-toing around the edge and staying clear of the real questions.  No one can speak out, it seems, or it will bring the whole thing down and the foot soldiers, those loyal to the organisation and faithful to the protocol, are left to answer the difficult questions.

I thought it was all over, but it looks like it won’t be.

THEY THINK IT’S ALL OVER

You would think that now, four years after the day the world went mad and governments flipped like circus dolphins in near perfect unison, it would be a time to lay things finally to rest. Now that those responsible have had their day in court, been held to account, the truth now revealed and lessons learned, you would think that a line could be drawn, the whole sorry tale could be laid to rest and we can move on. It turns out not to be so.

It is not over, because even after four years there is still no definitive account on where the nasty virus came from and we are unlikely ever to get that. There seems no will or interest in finding out and anyway, does it really matter? Well, yes, it does. If this was deliberately created in a lab as part of a biological weapon programme and leaked by accident or on purpose, it would be good to know.  

It’s not over, because there has been so little recognition of the terrible harms that have been needlessly caused to the very fabric of our society.

Lockdowns were a holiday for those in secure jobs, a party for those making the decisions, a gift to those with latent ambitions to boss others around, a respite for those who like to be told what to do, and a middle-class indulgence with gardens and welcome time to spend with their kids . But for the rest, for most, the experience and the long-term effect on our society on our economy on our health, on respect for authority, on value for education, on our humanity, was a disaster and, critically, one needlessly and recklessly imposed upon us.

Masks were a fiasco. The virus was transmitted by aerosols not droplets. The scientists knew this from the start, which was why they told us, on camera, that the pieces of cloth were worthless. That was before they flipped because of political pressure. Not only were they worthless in halting transmission, they were dangerous. The warnings which should have been printed in the package of every mask would include a list of likely side effects; dermatitis, headaches, perpetuating fear, stunting infants’ cognitive and emotional development; excluding the hard-of-hearing, evoking fatigue, reducing lung efficiency, tormenting the autistic, increasing falls in the elderly, re-traumatising the historically traumatised, the inhalation of micro fibres, concentration impairment, reducing the quality of healthcare, discouraging patients from attending hospital, impeding school learning, the aggravation of existing anxiety problems, encouraging harassment of the mask exempt, enabling criminals to escape conviction, and polluting our towns and waterways.  I am still waiting for someone to put their hand up.

The vaccine might have saved lives but there is no actually proof that they did. With mass vaccination there could be never be a controlled test, so we will never know. We do know, however, that it was never fully effective and there were genuine doubts about its safety. Enough doubts for alarm bells to ring and the roll-out halted. But it wasn’t. Curiously, unlike what happened with other vaccines, no alarm bells were heard and nothing, it seemed, was to get in the way of the programme.  So many untruths were told: that it would stop you getting the disease, that it would stop you transmitting it, even though the manufacturers knew and have admitted that these were false from the start. No answers were given to the very reasonable question “ Why were the pharmaceutical giants given a free pass with no liability?”.  Anecdotally it is clear they had little, if any, effect. All the people I know who get covid have had the vaccine multiple times. People I know (a few) who refused the vaccine didn’t get covid. For myself, I took two doses of the Astra Zeneca vaccine before it was quietly withdrawn. I wasn’t aware of any bad side effects, but not long after I was serious ill and spend over two weeks in hospital with an unexplained large abscess in the liver.  The consultant couldn’t say why the bacteria lodged itself there, but the likely hood that the vaccine had tampered with my natural immunity made that a credible explanation.

It is not over, because there has been no proper accountability. The behemoth covid enquiry trundles on, studiously ignoring the very questions it should be asking and the key players with some exceptions are still there, many moving sideways in the revolving door of our corrupt institutions. And they are corrupt. When the institutions of government shuffle failed politicians and executives into other salaried positions carrying their pensions with them, then you know serious corruption is involved. So, an Inquiry wont’ cut it. Perhaps a “Truth and Justice” commission might be the thing, but I fear that a line can only be drawn once the matter comes to court.

Emily Oster wrote an astonishing piece in “The Atlantic” in October 2022 calling for “a pandemic amnesty”. The reason she gave for moving on was that governments and those making the decisions were well-intentioned and their pronouncement rested on benign ignorance. You know the sort of thing, “We were doing our best.. we might have done things better but .. it was all for the common good.” Oster’s generous forgiving attitude to those culpable is understandable and even commendable but it doesn’t serve the interests of justice.  

It is not over, because we still can’t talk about it. Many a social gathering has been ruined when someone carelessly mentions the dreaded C word, or when you innocently profess that you never believed in it, and everyone goes silent.  It is that awful moment among friends or family or just folks you know when they discover they have a traitor in the midst and the surprise is palpable.

It is not over until there is truth and justice and honesty and transparency and it’s not over until we can talk about it.

We need to talk about masks

The thing that epitomises the age of covid more than any other is the face covering. While there are big issues with lock down, the restrictions, the interference in personal lives, the terrible cost, the collateral damage, the serious problems with the vaccine, nothing quite sums up the whole wretched business like the mask and I can never get used to it. It is the flag of allegiance the icon of conformity. The fact that they come in all different sizes and creative designs only conceals the fact they are potent ideological symbols. Wearing one, makes it clear you are on the right side. Even if you have absolutely no conviction that it does any good, wearing one demonstrates that you are in solidarity with the vulnerable and you care. It signals your virtue. It’s the “workers of the world unite” poster you put up in your grocer’s shop.

When I complain about the mandate, friends keep telling me “och, its no big deal….what’s the problem? people in Asia have been wearing them for years… just be patient, nobody likes them, but, hey, we have been through this for over a year we can manage another month or two surely?…there are people really worried about the virus and it helps them if you toe the line…See it as an act of kindness…we all need to do our bit” etc etc. The overwhelming majority of those in my circle take that line and think that I am being really obtuse and deliberately awkward if not downright misanthropic in doubting the perceived wisdom. They come over as being pretty wearied of my cantankerous obstinacy and unwillingness to shut up. As it happens, most of the time I do. But there comes the time when we need to talk.

I can only speak for myself, but my hatred of mask wearing is visceral. It is not the face covering that I use to stop plaster dust getting into my lungs when ripping out the lath, it is not the mask our friend in Nepal would wear when she ventured into the heavily polluted air of Kathmandu, it is not the masks that the surgeons wear in medical procedures. There is sense in logic in all of those. But there is no logic or sense in the mandating of face coverings in certain public spaces, as is the law in Scotland today. A law that seems unlikely ever to be repealed.  

But my revulsion goes deeper. Masked balls in period dramas always gave me the creeps and I would never watch the phantom of the opera for the same reason.  Faces covered with a mask of an animal or a bird a bear or a goat, often associated with some pagan caper, always unsettles me and even a photomask of a person’s face with slits for eyes does the same. I remember a surprise engagement party that was arranged for a friend of ours while her boyfriend was in a different country. When I brought her to the party, all the friends had facemasks made from a photo of his face. It was so creepy. She did manage to carry it off with astonishing grace but it would have traumatised me. Now, seeing people I know and love and care about obscured behind pieces of cloth is extremely disconcerting. I will never get used to that and I refuse to.

Everyone, I assume, now knows that the science is not only pitifully weak on the efficacy but weighted against any value that face coverings have in halting transmission of the virus. I am not a scientist, but common sense tells me so and there is a simple experiment that pretty well proves it. The decision for the mandate is almost certainly a political one, not a scientific one and it divides people. 

For my own part I simply try and avoid any place where I am required to wear one or, at most, keep it to an absolute minimum. I used to love public transport but now take any other option than board a bus or a train. I walk or cycle or just don’t go. I chose cafes who are more relaxed and who apologise for what they have to do. I make visit to shops, in an out, as speedily as possible. I avoid eye contact with people wearing masks in the street, while exchanging smiles with faces I see. It was not what I wished for, but I guess I can cope with all of that.

Still I have a problem, a serious one that is still unresolved and it is to do with the wearing of masks in Church. It is doubly complicated, as I have a leadership role and there is constant internal argument, that rages in my mind and ties nasty knots in my gut. We are of course following the official line being “Subject to the Governing Authorities” who are there for our good. We are also discouraged from discussing the issue. It could be divisive. “This is not the time” we are told, “to air personal opinions. These should be put aside as we work for the common good”.  We are to be sensitive and considerate of our “weaker brother” who might be fearful of a mask-less community. We should show love. All of this pulls incessantly on my emotions and throws doubts into my resolve.

At the same time the logical reasoned side of my brain tells me this is all wrong. Somehow the experience, the vital experience, of coming together with the people, to worship God should not be hindered or shackled by the diktats of the state. The Free Church of Scotland, would surely be the last church on earth to acquiesce with the government but that is what we have done. Goodness me, this is the denomination that was born out of a rebellion against the unlawful interference of the state in the life of the church.  So this is deeply troubling.

The counter, of course, is that this is simply a health issue. We should comply and we are not compromising. I would like to think that is true but I suspect that something deeper and more sinister is going on and it is to do with the covering of the face. It is to do with the stoking of fear. It is to do with the emasculation of communication. It is to do with bearing allegiance to another god.  When we sing our songs of worship, we sing them through a cloth mandated by the state. When we listen, the preacher cannot second guess where we are, behind our forced facades. When we share, all subtleties and nuances are filtered out.   One, possibly the, most blessed and enriching experience in all of life, for me, is at once neutered and reduced to a bland innocuous and soulless happening. I can’t, I won’t get used to it.

For my sanity’s sake, at least, we need to talk about it.

The Conversation

THE CONVERSATION

This is a transcript of the conversation:

CompliantWhere’s your mask?
DissenterSorry?
CompliantWhere’s your mask?
DissenterI don’t have one
CompliantYou can get one …there’s a pile over there
DissenterNo, I don’t wear one
CompliantWhat do you mean?
DissenterI don’t wear one
CompliantOh, are you exempt or something? a disability? Do you have a card a lanyard?
DissenterNo, I am not exempt
CompliantBut if you’re not exempt you have to wear one… what’s your excuse?
DissenterI don’t have one .. I don’t have to wear one…I don’t need an excuse…I’m just not wearing one
CompliantWhy not? You have to…
DissenterNo, I don’t have to… you know as well as I do that they don’t do any good and a lot of harm. There is no reason why we should wear masks. A mask is a symbol of subjugation, a badge to humiliate. I am just not wearing one
CompliantAch, don’t give us this subjugation humiliation crap. Don’t be silly. Anyway  It’s mandatory, it’s the law and you could be passing the virus on to someone else who could get ill and die – you could  cause someone to die… its your civic duty to wear one
DissenterBut I don’t have the virus
CompliantYou could have
DissenterI could, but I don’t
CompliantBut how do you know that you don’t.
DissenterI don’t have any of the symptoms that they tell you about, the cough, the fever,   loss of….
CompliantBut you could be a carrier of it without knowing it.
DissenterI could be, but I am not
CompliantBut that’s crazy and stupid and reckless too! How do you know? Eh? Have you had the vaccine? Have you been double jabbed?
DissenterNo I haven’t and I’m not getting it…and anyway it’s my decision
CompliantBut that’s selfish!!
DissenterEh?  Its selfish not to take something to supposedly protect myself?
CompliantIts not about you!!!  its your civic duty to get vaccinated  
DissenterOh so its all about civic duty? Well, that’s where you are wrong… It doesn’t prevent infection or transmission, we know that, the evidence is in. We had a perfectly controlled experiment on the Royal Navy flotilla. There were 100 cases of coronavirus among the crew on the Queen Elizabeth all of whom were double vaccinated and they stated that they were operating all the social distancing measures masks and hand sanitising etc. So, there you have it. With the vaccine I can still get infected and I can still pass it on so on that score it doesn’t work. Vaccination can only be purely for personal protection, and a personal choice to do with personal risk. There is absolutely no social obligation to get vaccinated to protect others, and the idea of vaccinating children is not just crazy and senseless its terribly terribly dangerous and irresponsible…
CompliantOh so you’re an anti-vaxer now too.. you’ll be a covid denier as well I suppose…
DissenterOh, don’t give me these names, No!!!  I am not anti-vaccination, I just don’t want this one. I am not sure if it safe…
CompliantOf course it is… its been approved by all the important bodies and…
DissenterBut it’s not licenced, it’s still experimental we have no idea what bad effects may come from it. I have no idea what effect it may have on my grandaughter’s baby if she gets pregnant. We have just no idea what effects it may have on child bearing women or on fertility. You see I remember Thalidomide the wonder drug that was developed by…and it’s hard to believe this … by a German company based on the work of a former Nazi who worked for Mengele.. it was a wonder drug that would sort out morning sickness and it was only when the babies were born that they discovered the horrors of what it did. This vaccine has been tested over something like 4 months and from what I remember it takes 9 months for a baby. So we can’t know if it’s safe…
CompliantYes we do. They wouldn’t say it was safe unless it was. The pharmaceutical companies would not risk any mishap. They would be sued out of existence if there was a problem…
DissenterFunny you should say that, because the drug companies were given special dispensation that they would not be sued if there was a disaster. They only took on the work on that basis. Anyway, I’ve read the literature that they give you about the jab and they more or less say that they don’t know if It’s safe…
CompliantWhat! I don’t believe it… you’re havering there …
DissenterWell look I’ve got one here NHS Scotland IMPORTANT INFORMATION please read this leaflet before your get the vaccine under “fertility” it says “There is no evidence to suggest that the Covid-19 vaccine will affect fertility in men or women”
CompliantSo it is safe – there is no evidence that it affects fertility…
DissenterYou don’t get it do you?  It’s a sleight of hand. What they say in the leaflet is absolutely true but it is written in such a way to make you think that there are no effects on fertility, when what it is actually saying is  we don’t know if there are any. There is no evidence that there are. But there’s no evidence that there is not.
CompliantAch, it’s a waste of time talking to you… All these scientist and researchers all over the world can’t all be wrong… or do you think you are right and they are all wrong?
DissenterThey could all be wrong and , of course there are a whole lot of others who say different and you probably won’t here about them because they are basically gagged or black listed or cancelled.
CompliantWho?
DissenterWell… for a start… Sunetra Gupta, Mike Yeadon, Jay Bhattacharya, Martin Kulldorff, Robert Malone, Russel Blaylock, Peter MacCulloch, Karol Sikora, Peter Bregin,David Livermore, Carl Heneghan, John Lee… lots more…
CompliantOh I’m not sure why I bother… but look at it, the vaccine has broken the link between getting the virus and being sick. We know that for sure, So it works..
DissenterNo, we can’t be sure about that
CompliantWhat! Oh come-on! for goodness sake!  you are just being cantankerous. You are sold on conspiracy theories… You should get out more and stop listening to the lizards and phone mask conspiracy seeking creeps..
DissenterI don’t and I’m not…. but back to the point…because one thing follows another doesn’t mean the first caused the second. It is a classic false philosophical argument – there is a name for it but I’ve forgotten what it is – something about correlation and causation – like, every time Grannie comes to tea it rains, so granny caused the rain. There might be a connection between the two but there is no proof that there is. It’s the same with Lock-downs. They say the restrictions work because once these are in place cases drop but they might have been dropping anyway…It can’t be proved one way or the other
CompliantI was right, it’s a waste of time talking to you. You don’t really care do you? You want the virus to rip and if people die, too bad, as long as you can get to the pub and get on with your life. You are putting other people’s lives in danger. I can’t believe you would be so mean and so selfish. You are probably a grannie killer…
DissenterOh!!!  a grannie killer now!  -You know that’s pretty rich. It’s the government who have been killing Grannies!  you know that.. loading them off to care homes to get infected and die lonely and horrible deaths shut off from their loved ones. It is one the cruellest things about this whole debacle and there will be a reckoning. I am sure there will. When people find out what actually happened it could get very ugly… Someone must have known what they were doing. They weren’t interested in people’s lives they wanted to save the NHS and it’s all political. If you don’t see that, you must have blindly swallowed the whole thing. The NHS had to be protected at all costs to save the Tory party. If it collapsed under a Tory government, it would be a disaster for the party and the red walls would rise again. Care homes didn’t matter they were not the NHS. And all this nauseating clapping, sainthood, special services in St Paul’s Cathedral, oh dear,….  and now the George cross…
CompliantI was right, it’s a waste of time talking to you…  …. just keep away from me… …please…
DissenterNo worries.