Published On: Tue, Jun 1st, 2021

Being led like a lamb to slaughter?

“Save Our Rights (UK)”, according to its very professionally composed website, is an organisation that has bigger ambitions than opposing the UK Government’s measures in the name of Covid-19. It wants a “Real Democracy”, which makes the author very nervous. Tellingly, but perhaps not surprisingly, one has to look very hard on its website to understand its position on “Covid-19 vaccines”; one flyer says this:

Covid status certifications (or vaccine passports) will coerce people to partake in tests or vaccines they otherwise would not.

They also discriminate against those who cannot have the vaccine for health reasons.

The question that someone looking at this might ask is, what was it, exactly, about the “vaccine” that meant it deserved to be refused?

At the foot of the same flyer, “Save Our Rights” explains that it wants “Government to protect our rights and freedoms so that we all have the ability to choose by passing a Medical Freedom Bill”. The answer to the problem, says “Save Our Rights”, is more legislation. “Save Our Rights” wants to introduce a legal layer between an individual and his rights in terms of health – so very much in keeping with how UK Government has arranged and continues to fix the system to its advantage on the basis of gaining consent to be governed by appearing to be the authoritative power. In short, it’s all about having an individual misunderstand that rights are not a thing freely and directly in their possession, but something instead to be legislated for by government. “Save Our Rights” wants Government to protect you, reader. Did you follow behind these people in London on Saturday, 29th May?

But which coloured flag for “every sheep successfully penned”?

The event being referred to was a protest, or a rally, or a march. One could tell that “Save Our Rights” was leading it because another flyer it produced to promote the event told prospective attendees that there was a flag system, and different colours were instructions so that the progress of the crowd could be controlled. “Follow the flags” it said, “Green – Go, Yellow – Slow, Red – Stop, Blue – Disperse”. It would be interesting to know how many people who attended this event saw this material and were concerned by it to the extent that they wondered who it was they would be following, quite blindly and trustingly and yet so completely, around the streets of London – and to what end. The author would bet very few, knowing how that very British quality, know-it-all-know-nothingism, extends deeply into undiscerning alternative media audiences.

Moreover, how many people who attended this event, without any sense of irony, would think themselves better than the uncritical slop of humanity, who they would call sheep for unquestioningly accepting how to think and act (and to go, slow, stop and disperse) after putting themselves at the mercy of an authority figure? Indeed, what could represent more of a dunderheaded surrender of individual control over one’s own destiny than being amongst a very large mob being led, with the potential to go anywhere and into any danger, by an unknown quantity that potentially could be of a hostile disposition. How different are such people from the others they like to scoff at for being led by the nose to their slaughter – especially when they were so clearly being led into a trap?

The event in London on 29th May culminated in an attempt to occupy private property – namely the Westfield shopping centre, or mall. It was a development that would present the Metropolitan Police with the free gift of a moral high ground (which wasn’t exploited), and the right to act with force against the protesting crowd in a way that would not have been justified if it had remained on the public highway. One doesn’t need to have much IQ – surely – to understand that a shopping mall would be a structure built on privately owned land, with the public invited on to it strictly for a purpose that would be in the interest, ultimately, of the people to whom the property belonged. A lawful right would therefore belong to these people (and even to shop owners that rented space on certain terms and conditions) to force trespassers from the premises. What is more, the Metropolitan Police clearly had assembled in large numbers ahead of the crowd’s descent upon the mall, suggesting that the police had foreknowledge: there had been information given to them by the leadership of the protest. It looked, then, like a set up – and the author wasn’t alone in having the impression.†

Unfortunately, but perhaps not surprisingly, when one looks at LockdownSceptic message boards and comments sections and at the remarks made there by people who attended on the 29th May (very happy and proud that the event took place and they were there), there is no sense of a very lucky escape having been had, or of a catastrophe avoided when, in the end, there weren’t serious moments of violence between police and protesters that there could so easily have been, nor even any vandalism, accidental or otherwise, that could have happened in the course of a lot of chaos. What does surprise, however, is the good deal of a lack of appreciation of the disadvantage that the crowd was put to by finding itself on private land and being disruptive to its normal usage – but this actually does not surprise the author, after all, given that he thinks that the forums would be full of UK Government “outreach” operatives egging people to the next event, and the next potential public relations disaster.

So, the question is, how much appreciation is there, in the vast majority who attended but don’t tend to take to the internet to express an inanely unmitigated positive post-event report, that what happened on the 29th was so very different, in such a negative fashion, to another occasion, on March 20th,  when it  did some good to be in a large crowd in London? Very little, the author suspects.

The March 20th occasion was covered at FBEL, in the article, Huge Defiant Crowd Takes A Long Walk Through London; Metropolitan Police And UK Government Powerless To Stop It – but perhaps it would be a waste of time for the typical “at least I can feel like I’m doing something” protestor to read, such is the evident strength of his impulse to engage in an activity that might well create a sense of self-affirmation, but would explicitly have been designed to waste energy, and time, and of course, above all else, engender the sort of publicity that discredits the apparent cause.

Mockery was all too easy. This featured in a corporate-media report.

And for those who would justify the May 29th event as an attempt to get noticed by media (which isn’t necessarily necessary, as explained in aforementioned article), job done:

London protest: Anti-lockdown and No Vaccine Passport protesters storm Westfield shopping centre – ITV (link).

Covid: Reactions as lockdown protestors storm OPEN shopping centre and force it to shut – The London Economic (link).

Anti-vaccine passport protesters storm Westfield shopping centre as hundreds join Covid demonstration – The Independent (link).

Anti-lockdown protestors storm shopping centre, despite it being completely open to everyone – Indy100 (link).

Anti-vaxxers claiming pandemic is a hoax try to storm Westfield shopping centre and clash with cops – The Sun (link).

COVID-19: Major shopping centre forced to close as anti-lockdown protest causes ‘significant disruption’ – SKY (link).

Anti-vaccine protesters temporarily close Westfield shopping centre in London – The Guardian (link).

“Storm”, “force”, “shut”, “disruption”, “clash”! Be dizzied, dear reader, by the edifyingly constructive media coverage.

So, at this stage, it’s no wonder that the author feels that repetitively writing down the onomatopoeia that represents animal bleating noise would be a more worthwhile thing to do, when looking to address a LockdownSceptic audience, than trying to suggest ways, through peaceable, “stay-at-home” civil disobedience, to oppose the machinations of UK Government, and why they would be effective. In the same respect, it would probably be a complete waste of time explaining that, because now there is a history by which one should strongly suspect the leadership – that according to the “Save Our Rights” flyer includes the organisations “Stop New Normal”, “Event202”, “A Stand In The Park”, “The Great Re-Opening”, “StandUp-X”, “Empowering Small Business” – which took a crowd to this evidently pre-planned Westfield incident and allowed itself to be understood to be controlled opposition, people might finally give some thought as to who it is they are allowing themselves to be led by so that they are not strung along to that place of vulnerability, exactly where UK Government wants them to be.


† The author was following a YouTube presentation of the event by someone called “ResistanceGB”, and went to Twitter to look for the term “Westfield” when the storming began, and found that someone else had tweeted their dismay. A conversation then ensued; the reader can see that both parties had the strong impression that something was not right (while the reader might go to the FBEnemyLines twitter thread and be able to see the identity of the other party to the conversation, any element of it is obscured here because this is not about exposing innocent people):

It's important to donate to FBEL - please see here to find out why
A PayPal account not required.
Displaying 1 Comments
Have Your Say
  1. Theguvnor says:

    I’m afraid I was one of those that walked on Saturday. I have felt that for a change I needed to do something physical in a group rather than in isolation locally which I have been doing from the start. An italian friend once said that he wears aftershave not because it changes him but the feeling that it makes him feel it does which I thought would apply here.
    As you say there has been much on social media suggesting the whole rally has been commandeered and previously it was noted that it should go to the hub of the issue the mile squared and not popular venues. However I had read that this time it was to pass more residential areas to get a message to broader spectrum. However on leaving Parliament Sq it proceeded on its familiar well sheep trodden route (not south of the river as I had hoped). A few sub groups did try to splinter into Soho and as you mention were drummed back into line. Finally it was when walking in leafy Bayswater heading west along Hyde Park that I realised that this had a predestined destination. I bailed in Notting Hill and imbibed ale but cannot say I was surprised to hear of the trap.
    I must say though that the majority of fellow strollers were very pleasant and very unlikely to be aware they were on a preordained mission.