Rebel News: Case of Scot Harassed by Police – Obscene Miscarriage of Justice…

From the Rebel News website…

Last week, I travelled to Edinburgh to cover a number of our Scottish Fight the Fines cases. Quite apart from anywhere else in the U.K. and even the world, Scotland has become notorious for its draconian enforcement of lockdown regulations.

You may have seen my coverage of an Edinburgh protest last week. If you did, you will be closer towards understanding how particularly bad things have become in Scotland. Once known as the land of rebels and fighting spirits, the country has sunk to new lows under the draconian rule of Nicola Sturgeon and the Scottish National Party, who seem intent on being as tough, strict and unforgiving as possible.

The past year has seen a great deal of new madness across the world. In the U.K. we have been subjected to a stream of arbitrary new rules, and even more arbitrary enforcement of these rules by the authorities. However, the case of Paddy Hogg is one of the most obscene miscarriages of justice I have covered, which is saying something.

Mr. Hogg is a member of the North Lanarkshire Council, elected to represent the ward of Cumbernauld East, just outside of Glasgow. Yet, he has been told he is no longer allowed to speak publicly about lockdown. Just take a moment to consider the implications of such an action: an elected representative of the people has been ordered not to speak on their behalf about perhaps the most pertinent issue affecting their lives.

As you will see from my video with Mr. Hogg, he is an eloquent, intelligent and informed man. He is not peddling conspiracy theories or speaking nonsense — although even if he were, this would still not justify silencing an elected representative of the people. He takes a sober, academic approach to the issue at hand. The Scottish government, led by First Minister Sturgeon, is clearly not interested in debate. They have declared dogmatically what the truth is, and nobody can challenge that — not even elected officials.

We are going to fight Mr. Hogg’s case for him. With your support, we will restore justice and his right to challenge monolithic thought and the neo-Soviet policing of wrongthink, which we are seeing creep slowly through the United Kingdom like a slow acting poison.

We are fighting cases like this all over the country. You can support Mr. Hogg and others like him at FightTheFines.co.uk.

Comment:

Another example of the police acting against innocent people is found here, where a woman in Liverpool was given a hefty fine for praying outside an abortion clinic.  It’s been utterly  astonishing to see how the police have turned against the people during these lockdowns. Does that concern you?   Or, are they “just doing their job” as, probably, the majority of the population would say, in defence? 

The Vexatious Vaccine Versus Catholic Integrity – SSPX “Lifeboat” Leaking…

Martin Blackshaw, aka blogger Athanasius, has penned another very strong correction to the Pope Francis-inspired permission for Catholics to take the abortion-tainted Covid-19 vaccines.

During the current diabolical disorientation within the Church – otherwise fondly known as the Barque of Peter – many Catholics, seeking liturgical relief, took refuge in the  “lifeboat” provided by the Society of St Pius X (SSPX).

Returning to the traditional Latin Mass and Sacraments, plus the reassurance that the Society preaches only that which is found in Catholic Tradition, has kept a lot of us afloat, this past half-century. It is, therefore, hugely disappointing and, indeed, shocking, to discover that the  “lifeboat” is leaking – that the SSPX has decided,  for example,  to go along with the Vatican line  on the Covid-19 vaccines.

Having discussed our concerns about this already here, we feel the need to return to the topic, given the ongoing confusion and unrest felt by many lay people, including those long devoted to the SSPX.  Martin  Blackshaw writes…

Background

Most of us, I’m sure, could never have imagined just one year ago that in as short a period as 12 months the global economy would be smashed to pieces, millions would be put out of work, Christians would be denied their fundamental right to the public worship of God and the vast majority of the citizens on earth would be deprived of their natural freedom and liberties. Yet, in the name of a respiratory virus, which is relatively harmless for most people, this apocalyptic scenario has come upon the human race with lightening speed.

The culture shock resulting from such a transformation of our way of life is not new to Traditional Catholics who witnessed a similar evil sweep through the universal Church following Vatican II, trampling all that had been held sacred and secure for generations, thus paving the way for the present victory of Communist totalitarianism over the nations.

Archbishop Viganò  has more than once cited this work of iniquity as a coalition effort between operatives of the “deep Church” and operatives of the “deep State”, working together to bring about a New World secular Order over which Lucifer will usurp the Kingship of Christ.

That we are in fact living through the chastisement revealed by Our Lady in the Third Secret of Fatima is beyond question. Ours is a time largely of apostasy from God, even at the highest levels in the Church, resulting in victories for the anti-Christian forces beyond anything they, or we, could ever have imagined possible.

We know through faith of course that this time of trial will pass, as all such assaults of the devil on the Church and the world have passed. Our Lady will have the final victory and all will be restored in grace, though we know not how or when this will come about. What we do know is that matters are presently racing to a conclusion in this final battle between the serpent and she who will crush his head, so an end to it is not too far distant.

So much for the black and white of opposing forces in the present supernatural warfare, by which I mean the obvious evil and the obvious good as well as the happy outcome that those who are well disposed can see. But what about the grey areas, those danger zones which, like minefields, have to be traversed cautiously if we are to arrive safely at our destination when the war is won?

One such grey area has recently appeared before us and it threatens to wipe out a good many good souls who, in my opinion, have imprudently diverged from the safe path of the Church’s traditional and authentic moral teaching in favour of a more convenient, less arduous route only recently mapped out and offered non-authoritatively for alternative use.

I write of course about COVID-19 vaccines produced from or tested using the stem cell lines of aborted fetuses and the quite shocking position of the SSPX hierarchy in relation to their use.

If the faithful needed reminding that no particular institution in the Church is 100% safe at a time when the legitimate authorities themselves, the successors of St. Peter and the Apostles, are failing so manifestly in their duty to teach and to sanctify, it is in the SSPX position that such vaccines may be licitly taken in cases of necessity where moral alternatives are unavailable.

I first read (and re-read) this astounding and dangerously flawed guidance on the SSPX U.S. website some months back and I couldn’t believe my eyes. My Catholic conscience immediately alerted me to the falsehood before me.

I guess many other simple faithful were likewise seriously disturbed by this development, for the aforesaid website guidance was quickly taken down and replaced with a message announcing that an SSPX moral theologian was examining it, together with superiors, and would post an update soon.

Well it didn’t take long before the same guidance was back up on the website, only in a much longer text which read remarkably like sophistry.

The next I heard was that a certain Fr. Loop had been designated to present a conference on the subject to the faithful of Post Falls, Idaho – one of the largest Traditional Catholic enclaves in the U.S. I can only presume that many of the faithful remained troubled and Fr. Loop’s job was to reassure them. As far as I can tell from some comments I’ve read online, Fr. Loop failed in his task.

While this was ongoing I wrote to Fr. Fullerton, the U.S. District Superior, expressing my concern on the basis of the alternative (authentic) teaching of a number of tradition-leaning prelates whose counsel is that Catholics are not permitted to take vaccines tainted with the stem cell lines of aborted fetuses under any circumstances, given the very grave nature of the sin of abortion.

I wrote similarly to Fr. Loop, to Fr. Seligny, the SSPX moral theologian responsible for the U.S. website article and to Fr. Brucciani in the UK, who has sadly put out the same erroneous and dangerous advice. Not one of these priests granted me the courtesy of a response, which is extremely disturbing.

I did, however, receive a prompt and kind response from another SSPX superior who shall remain nameless for reasons of prudence.

Sadly, though, while evidently of upright intention, this superior is also on board with the “party line” (to use a crude term), convinced that the moral principle of “remote material co-operation” expressed in the works of St. Alphonsus may be applied in the case of grave necessity to abortion-tainted COVID vaccines.

Here is the proposition summarised in paraphrase: ‘The faithful are generally not permitted to receive abortion-tainted vaccines. However, in cases of grave necessity where moral alternatives are unavailable it is licit to receive such vaccines provided that objection is first made to the method of manufacture. This exception to the general rule, in cases of grave necessity only, amounts to “remote material co-operation”, a much lesser sin than formal co-operation.’

Juxtaposed to this proposition we have the joint letter of Cardinal Pujats, Archbishops Peta and Lenga and bishops Strickland and Schneider, reminding us of the authentic moral teaching of the Church. Here are a few excerpts of that letter which can be read in full here 

In the case of vaccines made from the cell lines of aborted human fetuses, we see a clear contradiction between the Catholic doctrine to categorically, and beyond the shadow of any doubt, reject abortion in all cases as a grave moral evil that cries out to heaven for vengeance (see Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 2268, n. 2270), and the practice of regarding vaccines derived from aborted fetal cell lines as morally acceptable in exceptional cases of “urgent need” — on the grounds of remote, passive, material cooperation. To argue that such vaccines can be morally licit if there is no alternative is in itself contradictory and cannot be acceptable for Catholics…

…The theological principle of material cooperation is certainly valid and may be applied to a whole host of cases (e.g. in paying taxes, the use of products made from slave labor, and so on). However, this principle can hardly be applied to the case of vaccines made from fetal cell lines, because those who knowingly and voluntarily receive such vaccines enter into a kind of concatenation, albeit very remote, with the process of the abortion industry. The crime of abortion is so monstrous that any kind of concatenation with this crime, even a very remote one, is immoral and cannot be accepted under any circumstances by a Catholic once he has become fully aware of it. One who uses these vaccines must realize that his body is benefitting from the “fruits” (although steps removed through a series of chemical processes) of one of mankind’s greatest crimes…

…More than ever, we need the spirit of the confessors and martyrs who avoided the slightest suspicion of collaboration with the evil of their own age. The Word of God says: “Be simple as children of God without reproach in the midst of a depraved and perverse generation, in which you must shine like lights in the world” (Phil. 2, 15)…”

Bishop Athanasius Schneider reiterates the position thus In a separate LSN interview, the full transcript of which can be read, or video viewed, here 

“…I repeat, it is the most anti-pastoral and counterproductive, that in this time, exactly in this historical hour, [that] Catholics will justify their use of abortion-tainted vaccines with the theory of material remote cooperation. It is so illogical – we have to recognize this in this historical hour in which we are living…”

In yet another interview with LSN, Bishop Schneider warns:

“…some bishops, even good ones, are making a huge explanation to me in a sophistic manner, of the principle of moral cooperation only, without your will, without your consent. But this is for me as sophism which cannot be applied to this concrete case, because it is evident to simple common sense that when you know this – that this vaccine is from aborted babies – then you cannot apply this moral principle, or theory, to this concrete case. And therefore we have to be very careful not to be induced into error because of this sophistic argument, even when it comes from good, traditional priests. This is the danger, and we have to resist this…”   Read the full transcript here

Finally, in a May 8 “Appeal for the Church and the World“, signed by a number of prelates including Cardinals Gerhard Müller, Zen & Pujats, Archbishop Viganò , Bishop Schneider and other senior Churchmen as well as countless Catholic journalists, physicians, academics and associations, we find this declaration:

“…Let us also remember, as Pastors, that for Catholics it is morally unacceptable to develop or use vaccines derived from material from aborted fetuses…”  – click here to read the Appeal for the Church and the World.

Writing in reply to the aforementioned SSPX District Superior, whose identity is not important here, I upheld this authentic moral teaching of the traditional prelates and other Catholics in the following words:

“I share the view of Bishop Athanasius Schneider and the other traditional prelates in this instance, who insist that abortion is so uniquely and gravely sinful as to render the normal considerations of “necessity” and “remote material co-operation” moot. These are general moral principles that are weighed in matters pertaining to sins common to fallen human nature, not to sins that are against nature and which cry to heaven for vengeance. Hence, the “material co-operation” argument is misapplied in the case of abortion-tainted vaccines and is therefore fallacious…

…I would like to clarify that it was never my intention to contend that those who seek to benefit from these vaccines are guilty of formal co-operation in the sin of abortion itself, but rather that they are guilty of formal co-operation in the use of evil means, i.e., the immoral process of using aborted fetal cells in the production and/or testing of the vaccine. In other words, they are guilty of using an evil means in order to accomplish good–which is never allowed. I apologise if I did not make myself clear on this point in my previous communication.”

Summary…

For whatever reason, whether by simple error or for reasons of avoiding direct confrontation with this vaccine-pushing Pope and his various national hierarchies, the SSPX is seriously ill-advising the faithful for the first time in the 35-years I have been associated with it.

Therefore every Catholic with a sense of the faith, whose conscience automatically balks at the suggestion that we may, in circumstances of grave necessity, do evil that good may come from it, must disregard this SSPX advice along with that of other churchmen, be they Traditional or Modernist, Pope or priest, who propose the “remote material co-operation” fallacy in the case of abortion-tainted vaccines.

We are never at liberty to benefit from an evil means, not even when our lives depend on it. This is the authentic moral teaching of the Church and the faith of the martyrs, who could so easily have burned a mere grain of incense before the pagan deities to save their lives using similar argument in their minds, but who chose instead to die a cruel death rather than offend God.

Let us consider just one example of such ardent faith – the martyrdom of the early Christian St. Sophia and her three young daughters, aged 11, 10 & 9 years.

All four steadfastly refusing before the Roman emperor Hadrian to burn incense before the goddess Artemis, Hadrian proceeded to have the children horribly tortured one after the other in full view of their mother.

At length, when the children finally succumbed to the unspeakable sufferings inflicted upon them, St. Sophia was granted leave to take them for burial, the idea of the pagan emperor being that she should live with the torment in her heart.

But Our Lord had other plans. After three days of mourning her beloved children He took her from this world to enjoy eternal beatitude in heaven.

Compare this example of great faith with that of Catholics today who advise that it is licit under certain strict circumstances to use products made from or tested with the stem cells of brutally murdered little babies. Yes, it is wholly scandalous!  

 

Comment:

There will be people who attend SSPX churches who read this and become angry at the very idea that anyone should criticise the SSPX for just about anything. It’s an immature attitude, if not completely childish.

There will be comments flowing into me by email and newcomers to the blog who will languish in the moderation file, telling me to stop attending the SSPX church if I don’t like it etc. blah blah.  Martin will, needless to say, get it in the neck as well. 

So, please be assured; we fully appreciate the SSPX clergy providing us with Mass and the Sacraments.  Just as we appreciate that the Scottish Bishops are counted among the successors of the apostles.  Doesn’t mean we cannot comment on their statements or actions as we may comment on the statements and actions of other professionals. After all, priests are the most important of all professionals.

Other professionals are limited to catering for the well-being of people in this world alone, while priests are charged with the immensely more important work of preparing souls for eternity in Heaven.

So, folks, please don’t expect replies to any emails calling us names for expressing our concerns about this matter. A measured comment – absent any nasty personal remarks – submitted for publication on our blog, is a different matter. Feel free. 

Retired Supreme Court Justice: Lockdown “Thoroughly Inhumane” – You Don’t Say!

Comment: 

As this thread is launched, Boris Johnson is holding a press conference to offer his exit strategy for coming out of lockdown.  From the snippets appearing online already, this is going to be a very slow process. Politicians do not give up power easily. Nicola Sturgeon is to make her latest announcement tomorrow afternoon but she’s already told us that her focus will be on “data rather than dates” which, of course, means that she can keep moving the goalposts at will.  

Will telling these people that lockdown is inhumane move them, at all?  Will it touch them sufficiently to decide to end this misery once and for all?

I think not. What about you?  

Restrictions: Crime Against Humanity: Letter to Scottish Health Secretary…

The following letter was penned by our very own Athanasius aka Martin Blackshaw and sent to the Scottish Government Health Secretary, Jeane Freeman SNP, on 16 February, 2021. After briefly outlining some practical examples of how this past year has adversely affected families, Martin continues…

You will never be able to comprehend the mental and emotional anguish associated with such a nightmare, entirely inflicted by the present irresponsible Government.

If there is one positive aspect to be taken from this madness, however, it is that, being of independent mind, I have spent endless hours researching official outlets for all information relating to the Chinese virus dubbed “SARS-CoV-2” ­- a dubious designation given that this particular Coronavirus has never been isolated and identified by established scientific method (Koch’s Postulates) anywhere in the world, a fact confirmed recently by the Australian government in response to a Freedom of Information request.

Notwithstanding this false classification of the virus, my God-given common sense suggested to me as far back as March last year that locking down a nation in response to a viral pandemic is as futile as it is unprecedented in human history, not to mention unlawful, which is why responsible governments of the past never considered such an approach to pandemic viruses, especially one that is rated 24th in the list of global threats to health.

The World Health Organisation has recently vindicated that wisdom, declaring lockdowns to be both pointless and counterproductive following the utter failure of the initial 4-month effort which concluded in July 2020 with a destroyed global economy, countless millions of ruined lives and a virus still very much alive and spreading.

Whatever happened to that government mantra “we follow the science”? If you really did follow the science then you would know that on May 11 last year Sir Chris Whitty, England’s Chief Medical Officer, declared from Downing Street that “for most people Covid-19 is harmless”, a declaration that has since been echoed by experts the world over.

You would also know that social distancing and face coverings are science-fiction, not peer-reviewed science  fact, which explains why the virus continues to spread despite these ridiculous classroom innovations. Airborne viruses have a much longer range of inhalation than 2 metres and are not deterred by  silly open-sided face masks. Furthermore, droplets can just as easily enter the body through the eyes.

Another questionable element in this global push to impose Beijing government on the nations is PCR testing. I note that the World Health Organisation has finally downgraded this method of testing as unreliable, citing an unacceptably high number of false positives and stating that it should not be used in future to isolate asymptomatic individuals who are very likely not infected.

Of course, a good many experts said this months ago, pointing out that PCR testing was never intended for use as a diagnostic tool on human beings since it cannot distinguish between a live virus and a dead one. They further pointed out that testing is open to results manipulation depending on how many cycles are used to run samples. Interesting that the voices of these eminent scientists and medical experts were suppressed on social media!

At any rate, this unreliability of PCR testing brings me to Covid-19 mortality and the huge question mark that now hangs over accuracy in the numbering of reported dead, even though it is already relatively low as it stands in terms of global population and very small in comparison with the estimated 70 million people who die in the world every year.

Since my immediate concern is about Scottish deaths, I will restrict my observations to official Scottish Government figures. According to these, 15,000 deaths are insinuated on the government website from a population of 5.5 million, which number equates to a mere 0.27% of the Scottish population – hardly the plague upon us!

I say insinuated because nowhere on the government website is there a declaration of deaths resulting directly from Covid-19. Nor indeed are we told how many of these 15,000 deaths were of people with pre-existing serious underlying health conditions, which, as we know, accounts for most deaths.

Instead, we have the following ambiguous declaration: “6,500 have died who have tested positive for COVID-19 and 8,300 deaths were registered in Scotland where COVID-19 was mentioned on the death certificate”. Given what we now know about PCR testing it is quite possible that very few of these people died from Covid-19. Is this why the website is so strangely, perhaps legally, vague in the matter?

Just to emphasise how harmless this virus is for a majority of the world’s healthy citizens, the American Centre for Disease Control (CDC) released the following Covid survival statistics in September last year: Age 0-19 years: 99.99% – Age 20-49 years: 99.98% – Age 50-69 years: 99.5% – Age 70 & over years: 94.6%. These numbers have not altered in the five months since they were published.

English Rose

Now, given that at the height of virus infection in England last year 40% of acute NHS beds were lying empty for the first time in decades, and given that more people are at risk of dying from suspended testing and treatment for genuine life-threatening illnesses, not to mention rising suicides and the mental health impact of Covid lockdowns, I want you to tell me what this is really all about.

Official statistics and declarations do not lie and cannot be written off so easily as “conspiracy theory”. This lockdown business, the psychological manipulation via the media to ensure compliance, the mask and social distancing mandates, the surveillance, the misuse of police, the encouraging of neighbours and children to report perceived rule breakers, etc., these are all classic tactics of Communist totalitarian regimes.

In Scotland, the additional singling out of religion for particular lockdown persecution is further confirmation, if such were required, that our nation is at the mercy of a Communist government with a programme to trample the divine and natural law while suppressing Constitutional civil liberties and human rights through abuse of legislative authority. In effect, it is the realisation of G K Chesterton’s wise observation: “Abolish the God, and the government becomes the God.”

As with all such aggressive atheistic regimes, however, the present Scottish government will pass into infamy, as have historically-similar destructive  regimes whose leaders thought themselves elected to power rather than to serving office.

It is in the very nature of Communists to want to dictate, oppress and destroy because they are unhappy souls who have not the charity or wisdom of God in them. The ideology they serve, while masquerading as caring and progressive, is diabolic in origin and in governance, inevitably resulting in national servitude and misery.

My one consolation at this time is that the SNP is presently tearing itself apart internally, another common feature of Communist regimes, and will soon hopefully disappear completely from the Scottish political landscape, though not without first having destroyed the economy and the lives of millions.

There is also the hope that one day, when this Covid fiasco is finally revealed for what it is, a good number of people will be called to account, at a Nuremburg-type hearing, for what I consider to be one of the greatest crimes ever perpetrated against humanity. Whether this happens or not is immaterial for none of us ultimately escapes the far more rigorous justice of God in eternity for our actions in this life.

I will conclude by saying that I would rather take my chances with a real deadly plague than live isolated and oppressed under the present Sturgeon dictatorship. How quickly a few weeks of lockdown “to flatten the curve” turned into a permanent police state with loss of freedom and hope for the population, mirroring life in Red China, North Korea, and the former USSR.  Ends.  

Comment:

Thank you, Martin, for writing that first class letter – it speaks for the majority, if not all of us, on this blog.  As a matter of interest, for those who may not know, Jeane Freeman was a leading member of the Communist Party in her youth and the Communist Party is listed as one of her political affiliations on her Wikipedia page.  For now, though, do you agree with Martin that we are living through “one of the greatest crimes ever perpetrated against humanity” ?

 

England: Restrictions to Ease Soon? Scotland Calling… Earth to Nicola… 

Comment: 

Looks like some temporary relief is on the horizon for our cousins south of the border, if only because – according to Steve Baker MP – Easter is a very busy time for the hospitality sector, pubs and restaurants… Er, churches tend to be pretty busy around Easter as well, coincidentally, would you believe. The Bishops must, without any hesitation, announce the re-opening of churches without consulting either Government officials or the virus. God will take care of both.

So, here we have Steve Baker MP in very optimistic mood, talking as if the English population is possibly going to have their freedoms handed back in the near future.  Really?  I wonder if they will be accepting asylum seekers from Scotland… Nicola, are you listening? 

Elsewhere on talkRADIO this morning, we heard Peter Hitchens reminding us that, having handed over our freedom, we won’t be getting it back.  He did say that there would be (as has been the case to date) some easing of restrictions, a certain amount of freedom permitted and then there will be another fear-filled reason why we need to have the restrictions imposed yet again, if not another full-blown lockdown. 

So, who do you think is closer to the truth – Peter Hitchens or Steve Baker MP?   

The Great Lockdown Debate: Who Won?

Comment: 

Mike Graham is to be congratulated on his professional chairing of the above video debate between two well-known journalists. The question for our discussion is who won the debate? That will be for you to decide, based, of course, on whether you are more convinced by Peter Hitchens’ arguments or those of Dan Hodges.  Watch out for one piece of brilliant “classic Peter” in there – but will it be sufficient to win your vote?   

Are Face-Masks Linked To Lung Cancer? 

The following information is highlighted as received in my inbox…

THAT MASK IS GIVING YOU LUNG CANCER
Article by Guy Crittenden

I happen to know a thing or two about masks and safety. Why?  Because for 25 years I was the editor of an award-winning trade magazine called HazMat Management that covered such topics as pollution prevention and compliance with health & safety laws.  We routinely published articles on masks, gloves, respirators and other forms of personal protective equipment (PPE).

Now let me tell you a few things about that mask you’re wearing. And please note that what I’m about to share was also stated in the most recent edition of Del Bigtree’s program The Highwire when two OSHA mask experts spoke to the fact that the kinds of masks people are wearing were never (never!) designed to be worn for long periods and doing so is very harmful. The blue typical mask contain Teflon and other chemicals. A Facebook friend reminds us: 1. Masks are “sterilized” with Ethylene Oxide — a known carcinogen.  Many teachers in various school boards have been experiencing significant symptoms as a direct result of the effects of this chemical.2. The masks contain (not sprayed with) PTFE which makes up Teflon along with other chemicals. I found and have posted the US patent to allow manufacturers to use PTFE as a filter in commercial masks… breathing these for extended periods can lead to lung cancer. “Don’t agree? Argue with the experts at OSHA, which is the main US agency, i.e., its Occupational Health & Safety Agency. These masks are meant to be worn only for short periods, like say if you’re sanding a table for an hour and don’t want to inhale sawdust. They don’t do anything whatsoever to stop the spread of any virus, and the emerging science of virology now understands that viruses aren’t even passed person to person. I know that sounds incredible, but it’s the case that the virus is in the air, you breath it in, there’s no way to prevent that short of living in an oxygen tent, and if you have a strong immune system you’ll be fine, and if you have a weak immune system you may have to deal with the effects of your immune system working to restore balance within your metabolism. So let’s say you don’t wear the blue packaged masks, and instead wear a homemade cloth mask — the kind people wear over and over and hang on their rearview mirror and so on. Those masks are completely useless against a virus, and are also very dangerous.  OSHA would never condone a person wearing a mask of this kind for anything more than the shortest time.

Re-breathing your own viral debris is dangerous to health, and the oxygen deprivation children suffer wearing such masks all day will certainly cause brain damage.  I’m not making this up.

Again, you might say, well, Guy you’re not a doctor. True, but I did edit that magazine for 25 years. That’s a long time and many articles on masks and PPE.  I’ve attended numerous OH&S conferences and listened to experts discussing these matters. You may hear people saying that surgeons and nurses wear masks like this all day.  –  No they don’t. They’re trained in the proper use of masks, which is to wear them in the OR, then dispose of the mask when they leave that room.  Are you aware that operating rooms are actually supplied extra oxygen, to compensate for the reduction in oxygen flow from mask wearing?

To my mind, it’s criminal (not hyperbole) to force children to wear masks all day. Setting aside the very real psychological effects, we’re going to have a generation of brain damaged children. Ever heard the expression, “Not enough oxygen at birth?” That’s a joke at the expense of a mentally challenged person, but that’s literally what we’re doing.And we’re told it’s to “keep us safe”! We’re told this by doctors who actually don’t know about PPE and laypeople who have no clue.

So, you can choose to believe me or not, but I was the editor for a quarter century of a magazine that had a strong occupational health and safety mandate, and I can tell you that the mask wearing currently mandated by governments and private businesses offers no health benefit whatsoever, in no way protects you or anyone else from any virus, and actually does you damage beyond wearing it for a few minutes. Got that? Good. Now please share this message and get the conversation going with parents, who must end this masking of children immediately. This is a very serious matter. And related to that, let me just state this doesn’t end for me when the lockdown ends or the masking ends.

No, this ends for me when every politician and bureaucrat who inflicted this travesty, this crime against humanity, on the population of Canada (and other affected countries) is in the dock, and faces their misdeeds in a court of law.

And as for those of you who have put masks on young children, I will have a long memory on that score. A very long memory.

END NOTE: The CDC and WHO have acknowledged that asymptomatic people do not spread the virus, so the case for masks for such people is moot in the first place.   To read above article at source, click here

Comments invited…    

IS talkRADIO “The Home Of Free Speech”? Just Ask Peter Hitchens… 

Comment:

The censored segment in the Mike Graham/Peter Hitchens interview is very significant.  Peter Hitchens isn’t saying anything that has not been said on this blog many times. So, what do the executives at talkRADIO know that the rest of us have not been told? Guesses welcome…  

Having lived in the Soviet Union – and he makes frequent references to the fact – Peter seems to be more aware than just about anyone else in the world of journalism/media that what is going on right now in the UK has led us into living life as populations do under Communist dictatorships. 

If only we could find an informed and committed Catholic journalist who would speak up in the same confident way,  with the ability to concisely explain the 1917 Fatima apparitions, including the later prophecy revealed by the Fatima seer, Sr Lucia; in an interview with American Historian Professor William Thomas Walsh in 1946,  Sr Lucia said that every country in the world would be overtaken by Communism, reinforcing the earlier warnings that Communism would spread unless the Pope & Bishops consecrate Russia to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart.  Russia, the first nation to publicly disown the very existence of God in its governance, has to be given back to God, and until that happens in the manner prescribed at Fatima, the world (and Church) will continue in turmoil. 

So, please… is there a Catholic journalist in the house? 

Is UK In Permanent Lockdown? Is The New Normal Already Here… To Stay?

From Spiked Online…

Brendan O’Neill
Editor of Spiked

This lockdown feels different to the first one. Everyone can sense it. It feels greyer, more dispiriting. The sunny weather of the April / May lockdown has been replaced by rain and the occasional snowstorm, robbing even our ‘daily’ walk of its tiny promise of pleasure. The social solidarity of the first lockdown has been usurped by a concerted emphasis on the necessity of atomisation. Back in March, April, May, we set up local WhatsApp groups and pulled together to shop and care for isolated neighbours. This time round if you go outside you’ll be greeted by ghoulish public-health posters featuring elderly people in oxygen masks and the reprimanding line: ‘Look her in the eyes and tell her you never twist the rules.’ First time round we were assistants to the elderly; this time round we’re their potential killers.

The first lockdown felt novel; this one – the third – feels onerous. The first encouraged us to remove ourselves from society but to still think and behave as members of society: sign up to be an NHS volunteer, deliver medicines to the old, phone a mate and check he’s okay. This one discourages all forms of social connection. This is best summed up by the instruction from the Department of Health’s propaganda wing: ‘Act like you’ve got it.’ That is, assume you are diseased, assume you will sicken others. Who would knock on an elderly neighbour’s door to see if she needs anything if they believed, or assumed, that they were carriers of a virus that has a high fatality rate among the old? In the first lockdown I received messages every hour from local volunteers asking if someone could do some shopping, drop off some drugs, give somebody a phone call. This time, nothing.

Then there’s the most striking difference – the absence of anticipation. In the first lockdown there was always a buzz, building after a while to a palpable sense of national expectancy, about a return to normality. Remember the cheers and memes when we found out the date pubs would reopen? Lockdown was seen as a temporary measure, and more importantly an unusual measure. Aside from a few comfortably off green types who loved the lack of airplanes and the disappearance of greedy shoppers, and some millennial socialists who fantasised that having the government pay everyone’s wages was akin to revolution, most people viewed lockdown as a thing that would end, not a way of life. The baleful impact of lockdown was partially alleviated by a shared desire for a return to the crowded, shoulder-rubbing, maskless days of old. Never had the word ‘normal’ seemed so thrilling. ‘Back to normal’ was the moral glue of a necessarily atomised people. Now, perhaps most tragically of all, that seems to have disappeared, too. 

Of course many people still crave a return to normality. But in the public sphere of commentary and politics, talk of opening up, of planning for the thrusting of society back into normalcy, is actively discouraged and even frowned upon. There can be no going back, some say. Ask the government for a timeframe for the restoration of normality and you’ll be branded a ‘Covid denier’ who wants to rush things to a potentially catastrophic degree. ‘We are not at the beginning of the end of this pandemic’, says Yale sociologist Nicholas Christakis, ‘we’re just at the end of the beginning’.

The ‘dream of going back to normal’ is a ‘huge distraction’, says a writer for the Guardian. The inescapable Devi Sridhar, the public-health academic whose voice of doom is enthusiastically coveted by the media, speaks to us as if we are patients on a therapist’s couch – ‘it is perfectly normal to grieve for our lost normality, but denial needs to be followed by acceptance’, she has counselled. This idea of ‘denial’ – the favoured slur of lockdown elites who want to frustrate discussion about life and liberty after Covid – was taken up by the New Statesman, too. The blather about going ‘back to normal’ is just a way of denying reality, says one of its columnists. Which isn’t surprising – ‘denial… is a natural dysfunction’. ‘It is a hard truth to swallow, but: there won’t be a return to “normal”’, says a writer for the Atlantic.     Click here to read entire article at source…

Comment:

There’s only one way to object to the “lockdown is here to stay” mentality and that is not to comply. There IS no other way.  If you disagree, share your strategy, because I’m fresh out of ideas…   

It seems to me that if everyone opened up businesses – and churches – and we all went about our daily lives as we did before China sent us this less-than-deadly virus, there really isn’t anything the Governments of the UK could do, except bring in the military to round us up and take us to the re-education camps… and thus they would be revealing their true colours, making clear their real agenda.  Then we would know that this is not about a virus at all.  Not at all.  And is this not what we have been saying from the get-go?  

At that point, we could surrender our freedom freely (so to speak) – we would know officially that the game was up.  Until then, we need to stop the childish obedience and start living our lives fully again. Yes? No?