Good hard look required as drawn-out lockdown finds tolerance level for authoritarianism even though psychological stranglehold should be smashed

There are 886 patients with something called “Covid-19” in critical care units in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. This is according to the latest report from the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre (ICNARC). Again, according to ICNARC, 3685 critical care unit patients have died of something called “Covid-19” since 19th March (16 had died up until that date). This number is actually the best indication of the real number of deaths because of how the condition would complicate to necessitate treatment in a critical care unit. Real Covid-19 involves the binding of SARS-COV to something called ACE2, which is a protein expressed by cells at the lung, and from thence an infection and pneumonia. The causation agent has here been called SARS-COV because SARS-COV-2, which is supposed to be the virus at the root of Covid-19, has never been isolated. Moreover, if the pathogen we are calling SARS-COV is even a virus, its propensity to reproduce from one host to another looks to be a lot less important than the health terrain of the host. Susceptibility to SARS-COV, or the lack of it, may be a simple matter of levels of ACE2. Another theory, however, negates the need to ask the question about what creates a favourable ACE2-rich environment by suggesting that the body deals with SARS-COV before it can take a-hold at its entry point (by binding with ACE2 at the respiratory tract). This theory also conveniently explains the absence of antibodies (please see the previous FBEL article for more information), but as such it cannot escape the fact that Covid-19 is fundamentally an illness that requires a particular set of circumstances involving a pre-existing deficiency in the health terrain.

It goes without saying that all the mitigation measures enacted by UK Government have been pointless. Indeed, it is more precise to say that given the obscurity of Covid-19, the lockdown and all the behaviour modification associated with it has been a gross overreaction – at least for the reasons for which the public was told it was necessary. And this is why it is abundantly clear that lockdown has been an economic weapon wielded under the pretext of a hoaxed public health crisis. Even so, the charade of coronavirus continues to play out. And it makes no difference that lockdown is now decreed in an increasingly eased-off version; in fact, it is more of an issue of concern because essentially what has happened is that UK Government has evidently been looking for, and is perhaps now finding a level of imposition at which a majority of the public is happy to remain. There is talk of a new one-meter social distancing rule; well, what is this if it isn’t a psychological effect overlaying what would be normal behaviour in most social settings? Or to put it another way, behaviour that is more normal than it yet has been will still appear to be possible only through sanction by UK Government.

When the FBEL readership were first treated (in April) to an unabashed declaration regarding the nature of the Covid-19 public health so-called crisis in the article, Coronavirus/Covid-19: the anatomy of a hoax, it was imagined that what was happening in the country, when it at first appeared that UK Government had legislated so that people could not leave their homes, would serve as a much needed shock, and then there would be pushback. And, although enough people defied lockdown so that UK Government had to modify it, as that continual process of equalisation of balance now threatens to produce a modulation of totalitarianism that most people can tolerate, then serious people who can understand that, as it was put here at FBEL, unsanctioned behaviour is the disease, need to be very concerned about the sustained ability for UK Government to spin out its psychological manipulation.

In the author’s opinion, the situation suffers from the fact that English-speaking alternative media has not broken with type (in terms of serving its apparent function of breaking up the outline of a psyop with a profusion of tangential over analysis, and with chatter in order to create complication and dispersion of conspiracy theory), and has not got to the matter at the heart of the perception of a health threat, to fully rend open the veil and kill the great mystery. The reality of Covid-19 can be explained in much less than 300 words (see the opening paragraph), but a simple, coherent message explaining exactly how and why there has been a hoax does not emerge into a body of cognizance from alternative media.

Alternative media is in fact not too dissimilar from the section of pre-911 attitude blogosphere that has taken an oppositional stance. The following image is a screen shot of a twitter publication by someone whose feats of gatekeeping have been well documented hereabouts as he retweets what is essentially an irrelevance submitted to him by a character that has previously drawn criticism from these parts in relation to the Salisbury poisoning psyop of 2018 (see here for more detail).

The original tweet contrasts the Swedish Covid-19 death toll against the Imperial College model applied by a Swedish team of statisticians. It is hard to see what the point of this is in terms of getting to grips with the British experience. The official UK Covid-19 death toll has exceeded the number predicted by the Imperial College modelling for the UK with full mitigation measures in place (i.e. 20,000). If the point is to argue that the Imperial College modelling is wrong, then this can be demonstrated against using the official British numbers (along with any number of rationalisations for the Swedish discrepancy).  On the other hand, it would be more effective to rubbish the Imperial College modelling by exposing the real numbers of Covid-19 death, which are much lower than 40,000 (the official number), and to expose how, with reference to the nature of real Covid-19, that the modellers could not have had the proper knowledge to make many of the assumptions that they did, and therefore to formulate any estimate, let alone anything remotely accurate.

The irrelevance is nevertheless promoted into an example of dissenting expertise that Hitchens appears to be saying would form policy by force of public pressure if only the BBC did not fail to report it. Hitchens’ would like people to think that lockdown is panic based on ignorance based on incompetence, but nothing could be further from the truth. And that Hitchens criticises the BBC for omitting crucial information is rich irony indeed. The FBEL twitter account (which has lately been unsuspended after what appears to be the expiration of a penalty period) has often been pointed at Hitchens, for he has plenty of time to retweet communications to him of which he does not approve, along with correction, reproach or admonishment. The FBEL account has not yet generated a reaction, but of course, otherwise Hitchens would not be a gatekeeper.

If we believed in such a thing, the article that appeared at FBEL at the end of 2019 might be called a premonition, except that in 2020, when the day did come, the UK Government did not need to physically force people into a state of imprisonment:

… the day that they come to take people away to incarcerate them in football stadia, people are going to go. They are going to run there if the police tell them to hurry up… come the day, people are going do exactly as they are told because the request will be presented with a smiley face, and in the context of providing a solution to a problem: the synthesis from the confliction of the thesis and the anti-thesis. People will have their “go-along-to-get-along” buttons pressed; what they will be asked to do will be sold as being entirely reasonable. And there will be no curmudgeonly voice loud enough to tell them that, hang on, actually the authorities are being entirely unreasonable, and need to be refused.

The piece actually shows good prescience although there is also some misanalysis. While there might well be, after all, a loud curmudgeonly voice, to what good purpose is it if it conducts itself in the manner the reader can see for himself below?

In 2020, as people have their “go-along-to-get-along” buttons pressed, we proceed into a state of drawn-out ludicrous lockdown not because there is no dissenting voice, but because there has been no powerful revelation of the emperor’s nudity. In fact, to be precise, there has been revelation because the reader will find it in these pages; unfortunately, it is only as good as the discernment in a prospective audience (we live in an age where people can’t identify the weapon they require to fight the battle that they need to win, and that’s even if they appreciate their struggle), and the facility to reach such a thing (which certainly isn’t granted by self-contained alternative media).

So, try as we might, what is missing is a great hammer against the narrative from which is issued a devastating psychological manipulation; a hammer that smashes that narrative to pieces. Moreover, and quite stunningly, there is no evident collective desire to obtain one, nor even the ability to recognise circumstances where such a thing is more essential than it ever has been.

<Additional; 28/02/21>

Please also see: This Is What You Want… This Is What You Get (link)

</>