Published On: Mon, Jul 6th, 2020

The 77th Brigade must go to jail: Part Two

Share This
Tags

The judicial review brought by Simon Dolan contesting the legality of the Coronavirus Restrictions Regulations has had a good result even if it might yet be denied. At the High Court hearing on Thursday, the Queen’s Counsel for the UK Government (essentially) said “there is no basis for — and can be no point in — challenging any regulations other than the current [ones]” (via Joshua Rozenberg’s tweeted court reporting). It was an argument for denying the application for a judicial review based on its being academic because of how regulations that it contests are no longer in force. But while this may be clever lawyering to win a case, what it actually does is indicate that the UK Government eased lockdown so that the law couldn’t overtake it.

In other words, the UK Government had to gather its trousers up over its knees so that an inevitable inrushing tide didn’t soak the material wet through. Moreover, the UK Government must either keep the cloth in a bundle, only letting it down until after the waters recede, or abandon the position entirely.

True, it might be the case that the UK Government has an idea that it can win against a legal challenge on the basis of a lack of current validity, and then impose regulations again when there’s nothing due in court to cause a problem, and Dolan’s team has seemingly indicated cognizance of such a possibility. However, the UK Government has undoubtedly shown that it is always on shaky ground, or territory that can be denied to it by the law. If Dolan’s judicial review fails, and there is no retry after that (and although Dolan’s team appears to have a large war chest – it is crowd funded by 6,623 people to a tune of a fifth of a million pounds – another effort might fall foul of being labelled the same case already dealt with), there is yet a challenge coming in October when Piers Corbyn is up before Westminster Magistrates’ Court for breaching Coronavirus Restrictions Regulations, so this will conceivably test the legislation that had previously been enforced: Corbyn must be measured against the regulations as per the state they were in contemporaneously to his arrest.

Further to any of that, the way that the high water could be maintained so that UK Government is forced to give up the ground completely is activity by people living in their liberty. As such, UK Government will, like never before, require the public to volunteer into the mode of living that is required of it.

Bearing in mind that at the crux of the coronahoax is an economic siege, at the heart of any necessary operation to fool the British people to cause volunteerism will be the UK Government having businesses understand that they need to be desirous of compliance with guidance (not law, and not even legislation in force) from their customers in order to attract trade (because, or so the message will go, the measures are what the public wants). And so, as a matter of resistance, it is up to the public to bring market pressure to bear so that businesses do not do the bidding of UK Government.

If things get so far that a significant amount of businesses in the country are made to abandon expectation for adherence to Government rules, there will be two possible outcomes. Either UK Government will enact draconian legislation that it can properly enforce, or it will have to declare “mission accomplished” as far as Covid-19 is concerned. Now, UK Government will not suffer much in the short term for finally stepping over the line so that Britain becomes a fully formed and overt totalitarian dictatorship because the public, generally (if the empty streets at the beginning of the coronahoax are anything to go by), is not up to much by way of being reactive to such a state of affairs (and the portion that might, stubbornly refuses to find the ways and means it needs to be effective in defiance). However, such a step might prove an all too unpredictable route to go, because there are one or two unknown quantities beyond the control of UK Government.

So, of course, because UK Government will not give up very easily, it would be eminently reasonable to suppose that there will be a tremendous amount of effort to coax the public into conformity, and the chief way that this will and is being done is by threatening the second wave of “Covid-19”.

The reader will no doubt have seen stories of increasing cases of “Covid-19”. Although there is a way to engage against this, as so-called dissenting voices have done, which involves pointing to increased testing (producing higher rates of detection) but also pointing out that there is no automatic implication for the size of death tolls, to be so occupied is to sustain the narrative of the coronahoax. On the contrary, one can in the first instance question the assertion that there has been more testing. Maybe, in fact, there has only been the appearance of it (track and trace must be going very badly if the NHS is making noises that sound suspiciously like threats to withhold normal service in return for submission into the scheme).

After that, of course, there is no reason at all to believe statistics regarding supposed new infections; the PCR test for SARS-COV-2 is like a one to see if a person has a head: if it’s wrong, it can’t be, so keep trying until the right result materialises. The only thing to know about increased testing is that it is a stanchion in a campaign to create a perception of a looming second wave. Supplementary to that, the public will be told that its behaviour will be the cause of the increased positive testing.

Starring in the role of public example in said campaign is the unfortunate city of Leicester, which is being picked on as if a laboratory rat. The following is from a corporate-media report of 28th June; note the relationship between extended lockdown, which has to be voluntary (although a lot of people in the rest of the country will be under the impression that it is enforced), and increased testing:

The Cabinet minister [Priti Patel] confirmed a report in the Sunday Times about the Government preparing to impose a lockdown “within days” on Leicester after a hike in coronavirus cases in the city.

The paper said Health Secretary Matt Hancock had been examining legal aspects of the shutdown after it was revealed 658 new cases were recorded in the Leicester area in the two weeks to June 16, having announced he was sending in a mobile testing unit to uncover how far Covid-19 had spread.

Ms Patel said the Government was supporting the local authority to take the necessary steps to “control the virus”.

The perception shaping of the sort that Leicester is being used for has been a long time in the making. In the same round of appearances on Sunday morning political programmes, Patel condemned a cluster of activity that happened in the days prior to weekend of the 26th and 27th June. She said:

What we’ve seen with mass gatherings and protests is unacceptable…

My message is the same – I would urge people not to participate in gatherings of that nature or protests, but I would also add if people do assault police officers, they will feel the full force of the law.

It is simply unacceptable to have people gathering in these awful ways that we have been seeing.

According to the headline, Patel at least insinuated that mass gatherings in June “risk[ed a] second wave of coronavirus”. And if she didn’t directly make a connection, colleagues did, because it was clearly a talking point.

Tweeting about the particular June mass gathering incident that will be of our focus, a local MP and the Chair of the Parliamentary Defence Select Committee, Tobias Ellwood, claimed:

Complete breach of Social Distancing yesterday- expect public health consequences.

The situation being referred to was something that Health Secretary, and chief coronahoax culprit, Matt Hancock, said was “irresponsible and selfish”:

In Bournemouth, a major incident was declared after 500,000 visitors overwhelmed Dorset, with the authorities forced into an ’emergency response’ after they clogged up roads and dumped tons of litter on beaches…

The Daily Mail article that reported this also carried a perspective from the aforementioned Member of Parliament for Bournemouth East:

Local MP Tobias Ellwood, speaking from Bournemouth beach, said: ‘This place was deluged and social distancing went out the window and that’s why a major incident was declared, because the local authority and indeed the police couldn’t cope.’

And now we get to the crux of the issue. Ellwood is a reservist in the 77th Brigade. If this information causes us to form a picture of Ellwood pulling on a khaki uniform to take part in weekend exercises, then this might not be entirely right. The 77th Brigade has a “Staff Corps”: “A specialist Army Reserve unit providing strategic level consultancy to the MOD and wider government”. If we use a little imagination, it might indeed be approaching the truth to say that a 77th Brigade reservist is a live tentacle for military intelligence into the organisation in which it is embedded.

It’s funny we should say this, isn’t it? In the March 2017 attack on the Westminster Parliament – which is the place where Ellwood works – where a so-called knife-wielding terrorist supposedly stabbed Police Constable Keith Palmer to death, Ellwood featured very prominently.

At the inquest into the death of Palmer (as told in the original FBEL article on the subject), another policeman who had been on duty during the incident referred to a wound to the head sustained by the deceased that would not have been caused by the attacker. The reference was to the bullet wounding to Keith Palmer that another police constable told the inquest was reported to him by none other than Tobias Ellwood. Moreover, witnesses heard three shots fired, but only two rounds were discovered in the corpse of the supposed terrorist. The police close protection officer who killed Khalid Masood inexplicably could not specify how many shots he had taken. Thus, a lot of good evidence points to Keith Palmer having been shot in the head. Subsequently, then, if such a thing were true, there must have been a cover-up to hide the fact that Palmer had been killed by an agent or agents of UK Government, with the point of doing this being to produce a more powerful false flag attack through the victimhood of a police officer, whose death could not be guaranteed by the flailing about of a knifeman faced with stab-proof jackets and a very limited window of opportunity. If all of this is true, it means that by not repeating at the inquest the observations he made at the time of the attack, Ellwood is party to a cover-up. But that is not all. Ellwood made himself the manager of the “first aid” that did not, in fact, save Palmer’s life.

Remembering briefly the theme of military intelligence controlled alternative media that featured in the first part of this series, we should note that there is no interest whatsoever outside of the pages of this site in the revelations that can be found in the text of the transcripts of the inquest into the March 2017 Westminster terror attack.

Back to the Bournemouth beach incident, and when it occurred, it would not have been the only occasion in the UK on that particular weekend when a beach was packed out. Indeed, the Mail would have its readership understand that “coastal beauty spots around the country saw drunken fights amid blatant flouting of social distancing rules”. However, it was Bournemouth that received focused corporate-media attention. And then, lo and behold, Tobias Ellwood turns up in the midst of the furore to warn about this place of focus being the location for the emanation of a second wave. In fact, Ellwood did more than that:

He told BBC Breakfast: ‘The beach should have been closed down, or at least shut down to prevent further people from entering it.

‘We need to learn from this and recognise that if we’re going to be serious about tackling this pandemic then we need to be swifter in being able to provide support to local authorities who are unable to cope.’

Mr Ellwood asked for local authorities to be given more help to deal with incidents as lockdown measures are lifted.

He told the BBC: ‘I really would urge the creation of a national situation centre that can monitor events across the country.

‘Don’t forget on July 4 we’re going to add alcohol to this equation as well, and I would hate to see Bournemouth or any seaside resort become that place where the second spike is the first to appear.

‘That can only be avoided if local authorities are given the necessary and swift support. That means in an emergency being able to respond to requests for help, that didn’t happen yesterday.’

Mr Ellwood added: ‘We need to make sure no beach is seen like we saw yesterday, those scenes were unacceptable given this enduring pandemic.

‘Until there’s a vaccine we should not be seeing behaviour like this. If a local authority cannot help, cannot manage on its own, it needs additional support and it needs that support swiftly.’

(Quote from the previously linked to Mail article).

So, let us notice the ways that Ellwood found talking points to be had from the Bournemouth beach lockdown-busting public health disaster. The attention grabbing subject matter shouldn’t be a cause for concern. The vaccine, or the lack of one, gives a pretext for stretching out the need for measures until such time that the operation of economic vandalism has been completed (that’s not to say that a voluntary “immunisation” program might be introduced). What is perhaps of more concern is the idea of a centralised response unit to move policing manpower – or indeed the Armed Forces – to places to deal with crowds (or indeed any behaviour considered undesirable). This would be, we might suspect, irrespective of jurisdiction, but framed as cooperation with local authorities, with whoever is parachuted in pulling rank on regional police forces to do the things that they might not be prepared to do. And this would be just the sort of desirable tool to have should UK Government want to install draconian legislation and then enforce it against the law. In this light we would not only see Leicester as a laboratory to test public compliance to “extended lockdown”, but also a theatre for expectation management in terms of easing troops onto streets. The mobile testing unit mentioned much nearer the top of this article would be a military one – not located in some out of town industrial estate or shopping complex as the practice appears to have been during previous phases of the coronahoax, but in the city itself – as this extract from the Mirror tells:

Soldiers are carrying out coronavirus tests in Leicester as the Government considers keeping the city under lockdown for two more weeks following a spike in cases.

Members of the military are operating a walk-in mobile Covid-19 testing centre at the city’s Spinney Hill Park, as residents are encouraged to get tested if they have symptoms.

(As an aside, the location of the “MoD-run testing centre” is problematic for at least one city councillor who has expressed concerns that “encouraging people who may have the virus to go to a popular city park could lead to more people being infected”).

Back at the potential root of what might be things to come (if only they are troops on the street to give the impression of more testing), we find in fact that the supposed overcrowded health hazard of a beach in Bournemouth was not representative of all the shores lining the town. The following is the content from a tweet sent in answer to the one by Tobias Ellwood as quoted above:

You are destroying a hard one [sic] reputation of one of the countries [sic] best tourism destinations built up over many years because of a few hundred metres of beach that was overcrowded on 1 day. Overreacting. The vast majority of the bay was idyllic.

There was one short section of Bournemouth beach that for a few hours contained a lot of people who had been drawn to it by a blisteringly hot day. As the local resident stated on twitter, it made it look as if all the town suffered from aggressive beachgoers packing in together like sardines – or rather, Ellwood’s knowing misrepresentation (and he had to have corporate-media prepare the ground in order to do it) was the aspect that was so damaging. What we have, then, is a prominent 77th Brigade “reservist”, not to mention an individual with highly shady previous, Ellwood, being not only a proactive component, but the most notable perception-shaper (or information activity and outreach operative) in a psyop that we will no doubt discover has served as a pretext for something despicable.

The featured image is credited to Tom Maddick, SWNS, in the Mirror article linked to in the body of this piece.

It's important to donate to FBEL - please see here to find out why
A PayPal account not required.
T-shirts to protest compulsory face coverings - click image