Money Matters: Legal Challenges Ahead For Government Over Restrictions…

A reader emailed the text of a letter which he is sending to Rishi Sunak MP, the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, today.  I have decided to withhold this reader’s name, given the sinister nature of policing in the name of Covid-19, where people are being criminalised for behaviours and actions which previously were part and parcel of life in a free country.  If you think you know the identity of the author of the letter below, please do not publish it – you may be right or you may be wrong, but things are worsening here in the UK and since we do not know what lies ahead (think Victoria, Australia)  we do not want to put any of our readers at risk of being criminalised.  Over the top, you think?  Well, hopefully,  but the signs are not good, so this is an occasion when we are all wiser to exercise prudence. 

LETTER 

Dear Mr. Sunak,

I am now six months furloughed from work with no end in sight to this Covid-19 insanity, thanks to a reckless Prime Minister who has trampled the British economy and the civil liberties of the British people underfoot in a manner that is both historically and constitutionally unprecedented.

Evidently reluctant to admit that he was misled back in March by the now-discredited Professor Neil Ferguson and his wild apocalyptic Covid “model”, Boris Johnson has decided to maintain a “plague upon us” terror narrative, quoting further scientific doomsday predictions via Matt Hancock in order to justify a continuation of totalitarian police state abuses on this country and its people.

Well I can assure you and the Prime Minister that if and when my employment is terminated as a result of this government’s appalling subjugation of parliamentary democracy and due process, I fully intend to sue in court for loss of earnings.

There is very little distinction to be made now between the governance of the UK and that of Communist China, such is the “new normal” of the  present Beijing-like dictatorship, complete with psychological terror tactics, dehumanising face coverings, increased surveillance, civilian informants and misuse of the police to enforce unconstitutional suppression of basic human freedoms.

Indeed if I am not mistaken, a policy of forced vaccination with RNA or DNA-altering concoctions is now being considered in line with existing cattle herding rules of when and where people may congregate, how many may gather at any given time, when and how they must isolate from each other, where they must stand relative to each other, etc. This is intolerable and unjustifiable behaviour on the part of any democratically-elected government.

Thankfully our judicial system remains neutral for now and continues to judge by facts rather than by propaganda.

Hence I am confident that when presented with official statistics and declarations, such as Sir Chris Whitty’s assurance on May 11 that for most people “Covid-19 is harmless”, a truth since borne out with figures showing a 0.06% death toll in the UK and a “no threat” percentage of 99.7% for the global population, objective judges up and down the land will recognise and condemn this government’s inexcusable behaviour, not least the lunacy of attempting to eradicate a virus by locking down the entire country.

You politicians appear to have forgotten that you are elected to serving office, not to ruling power. Like the police force, you exercise authority by the consent of the people for the people. It is not in your remit to assume to yourselves arbitrary powers to suspend democracy and set the country on a path of economic destruction under the pretext of a “national emergency” which evidence suggests never existed.

Had you been faced with the Spanish Flu pandemic of the early 20th century, a virus that killed over 100 million people globally, young and old, then perhaps you would have been able to justify the present draconian measures. As things stand, however, less than 1 million people are said to have died of Covid-19 around the world, the vast majority being frail elderly locked down in care homes and people with serious underlying health conditions.

To put it in even clearer context, the global death toll associated with Covid-19 amounts to barely one third of annual deaths from various causes in the U.S. Indeed a bad seasonal flu year can see global deaths reach 650,000. So what is really going on here?

Why are social media platforms like YouTube, Twitter and Facebook actively and collectively suppressing every medical and scientific expert voice raised in opposition to the Coronavirus terror narrative of the WHO, whose Secretary General is a Marxist known to have initially silenced the Covid outbreak at the behest of Beijing?

You will doubtless be aware that the U.S. Administration withdrew funding from the WHO in response to this suspicious behaviour of its Secretary General and his subsequent praising of that brutal Beijing regime’s methods of virus control, yet our UK government continues to allow this ideologically-dubious entity to direct its Covid-19 response policy, namely, the aforementioned “new normal”.

In addition to overwhelming evidence that the Covid-19 pandemic is not remotely plague-like, it can be shown that this virus has never been properly categorised in accordance with established scientific method and that testing is therefore seriously flawed resulting in massive numbers of false positives and negatives, as reported daily in the media. Is this why we’re seeing sudden surges in infection rates while acute hospital beds remain empty?

Covid-19 is not a silent assassin poised to leap from person to person in an apocalyptic mass killing spree. At worst it’s a Chinese respiratory virus whose UK death toll is exactly half that of the Asian Flu epidemic of the late 1960s. Hence these lockdowns and the 24/7 psychological terror campaign unleashed to ensure compliance with them has to stop now. This is free democratic Britain, not Communist China!

Boris Johnson was elected to office on the promise of freeing the United Kingdom from enslavement to the Socialist EU and its Brussels “Supreme Soviet”. How utterly tragic for our country that while appearing to fulfil that mandate he has simultaneously implemented a totalitarian model of governance that is terrifyingly similar to that of Beijing.

He needs to reflect on that alignment very quickly and seriously because I detect growing numbers of people in this country beginning to question the propaganda and losing patience as they see their freedom and economic future slip away from them.   Ends. 

Comments invited…    

UK: Second Lockdown Inevitable – Will The Public Continue To Obey, Or Rebel? 

Comment: 

In the highly likely event of another full-scale national lockdown (which is sure to include Scotland), will the people continue to comply unquestioningly?  Will it dawn on anyone that no Government can eradicate a virus – otherwise, thousands would not die from the flu every winter… Will it dawn on anyone?

But here’s the key point for consideration.  The previous lockdown was sold to us as being of very short duration – and look at us now.  Is this second, highly likely lockdown (despite the thin protestations that this is not what anyone in Government wants to happen) likely to only last for the proposed two weeks?  Really?  Or is that as likely as the Government handing back its “emergency” powers when the “emergency” has passed.  No question mark there, because that’s a rhetorical question.  Share your thoughts.

Contrived Coronavirus Crisis: Has UK Population Drifted into a Police State?

Police forces are planning their own contact tracing system over concerns the government’s test and trace scheme could place officers in danger, Sky News has learned.

Under the plans, police officers who test positive for COVID-19 would not give their contacts to NHS contact tracers, but would instead inform their police force who would take over contact tracing to identify anyone at risk of catching the virus.

The plans, which are being developed by the Police Federation and the National Police Chiefs’ Council, could see police forces take over all contact tracing for police officers and staff, according to a source close to the matter…   

Public health experts said the news raised questions about the entire test and trace system, which is being run by a collection of private companies overseen by PHE. [Public Health England]. 

“Contact tracing systems are based on trust,” said Allyson Pollock, director of Newcastle University’s Institute of Health and Society. “This tells you that the police don’t trust the system and don’t believe data will not be shared more widely, not just with the call handlers but the whole system.

“I think the public needs to be asking very serious questions about this.”   Source – Sky News

Comment: 

The key “serious question” here is, clearly – have we, by being so compliant with the lockdown regulations, drifted into accepting a full blown police state?  Is this latest development in the contrived [check the statistics] Coronavirus “crisis” merely evidence that we are now, effectively, living in a police state?   While, at this stage, this is supposedly about the police tracing people with whom they have been in contact – a restricted level of contact tracing – it’s not difficult to see how easily this could be extended. If contact tracing is already in the hands of private companies, as revealed above, what’s to prevent the current limited police powers being extended?  These days, anything is possible.  I mean, who would have imagined just six months ago, that the entire countries of the UK (and, indeed, the entire world) would be forced to live under the current lockdown restrictions, with the loss of our civil and religious freedoms?  

In which case, the concept of being suspected of a crime being the prerequisite  to “becoming known to the police” would be a thing of the past.  We’d just need to have been ill or physically in the presence of someone who had the virus.  If we accept this without a murmur, we can say “goodbye” permanently to our freedom to practice our religion.

And it’s all very well Allyson Pollock saying the public needs to be asking very serious questions about this – but how? Who do we ask? We can’t organise meetings due to the lockdown rules, we have been silenced and required to obey the State.  There is no dissent from the “new normal” permitted because the news broadcasters have become an arm of the State. Even in supermarkets we have to obey rules designed to keep communication with others at a minimum  – “stand here until the person in front moves forward” … It’s all very sinister.

So, share your thoughts – have we drifted into a full-blown police state?   

Are We Morally Bound To Obey Coronavirus Restrictions / Laws? 

Comment:

The Catechism of the Catholic Church on the duty of citizens towards the authorities in civil society:

The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” “We must obey God rather than men”:
When citizens are under the oppression of a public authority which oversteps its competence, they should still not refuse to give or to do what is objectively demanded of them by the common good; but it is legitimate for them to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens against the abuse of this authority within the limits of the natural law and the Law of the Gospel.
  (# 2242)

The question here, therefore, is this:  are the Governments of the UK overstepping their authority by requiring us to accept some very serious restrictions on our personal liberty, in the name of “saving lives” – when by all accounts, the majority of those who become infected with Covid-19 recover from it? A relative of mine believes he had the virus back in January;  he was sure it was simply flu, but because it was the worst-ever flu attack he’d ever experienced, he decided to visit his doctor.  He said the doctor asked him “a strange question” – had he been in China recently!  The answer was “no” and that is where that conversation ended.  This relative – who is very elderly, in his 80s – made a full recovery.  

There is concern, therefore, that perhaps the lockdown restrictions are not only unnecessary (who quarantines the healthy?) but also too stringently enforced. The full force of the law…Really?  People stopped in the street, or pulled over in their car by the police, and asked to explain why they are outside of their home, destination etc.  Do we have to answer? Should we pay any fines imposed?  Is this a conscience issue, or would we be doing wrong to flout the State?  

Peter Hitchens On Loss of Our Liberty – A Lonely, Sane Voice in the Madness …

Comment:

Peter is considered a rebel by his peers in the media.  He is certainly a voice crying in the wilderness.   

Is his voice one with which you find yourself agreeing?  Or are you with the majority who believe (according to the polls and anecdotal evidence) that the Government measures are necessary – and a good thing? 

And what about his comments regarding social pressure e.g.  to wear face masks or be prohibited from entering shops? Will you continue to obey the State or will you join Peter and rebel? 

What about his predictions of a financially painful future, where we will all – rich and not so well off – be poorer, in order to pay for these measures? 

His remarks about those who were threatening to take the Government to court over Brexit but are not saying a word about the Government crackdown on our civil liberties now, resonated with me – what about you?  As did his rebuke to the churchmen who disappeared off the scene faster than the cowardly apostles in that first Holy Week. 

Peter admits that everything he says about this situation may be wrong – what do  you think: IS he wrong?