Lord Sumption: Only Permanent Lockdown Will Work (That’s The Plan)…

Former Supreme Court judge Lord Jonathan Sumption has criticised the government’s approach to the coronavirus pandemic, saying it has employed fear as a means to justify its actions. Speaking with talkRADIO’s Julia Hartley-Brewer, he warned that Downing Street could hold on to its emergency powers after there is no need for them: “The problem is that fear is the main pillar of every authoritarian government. Fear has been skilfully and I fear deliberately employed throughout this crisis.” (From the Introduction to the above video on talkRadio’s YouTube Platform). 

__________________________________________________

Comment:

I really can’t improve on some of the comments posted over at YouTube, underneath the above video… Which of the following points do you find most compelling? 

Banned from, going out, protesting, freedom of speech, seeing family, living our lives…. This is Tyranny…

The cases are fake and so are the polls. Absolutely treasonous government. Covid 1984. Dystopian future becoming a dystopian present

The soldiers of the past must be spinning in their graves at how easily the British public have rolled over and surrendered their hard-fought freedom, we’re a disgrace to these brave men and women.

Lockdown Boris and co in prison. No to forced tests and vaccines.

When you takeaway people’s jobs and you leave them with no money to pay their bills and feed their children and then they lose their homes trust me COVID-19 will be the least of your worries. 

“Tyranny” strikes me as being a compelling  summary of what is going on, but then so does “Dystopia” – what we are experiencing is the very opposite of “Utopia”, that’s for sure;  the commentator who makes the point about the British solders also resonates – I’ve even seen Government ministers having the sheer nerve to wear a poppy this month despite betraying everything that it is meant to represent. 

Share your own thoughts about the interview. Especially say (1) whether or not you agree with Lord Sumption’s answer to that key question: will we ever get our freedoms back?  And (2) answer this question: where is the religious equivalent of Lord Sumption? Obviously, and scandalously, Pope Francis is never going to fight for our personal and religious freedoms but is there no bishop anywhere in the UK who shares Lord Sumption’s concerns? If not, we need to explore why not… again!   

England: Cardinal Nichols Bows To State Control Again – Churches Closed…

LONDON, November 5, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – As another lockdown is implemented across England, banning public worship and only allowing private prayer in churches, Cardinal Vincent Nichols has issued a letter urging Catholics to be obedient to the restrictions. 

The Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales (CBCEW) had previously issued a letter some days ago, demanding that the government provide the evidence for justifying closing churches for public worship. 

A number of bishops also penned their own letters to MPs and government ministers, requesting evidence for the ban on Mass and warning of causing discord. Perhaps surprisingly, many MPs also raised the matter in Parliament, warning of the precedent set by such an attack on religious liberty, without any evidence presented to justify the measures. 

After the new law was approved in parliament, Cardinal Nichols of the Archdiocese of Westminster issued a second letter, urging Catholics to obey the new measures.

“Despite profound misgivings, it is important that we, as responsible citizens, observe these Regulations, which have the force of law,” he said.

Nichols then cited Scripture in his argument, seeking to point out the virtue of obedience to the law: “Remind them to be obedient to the officials in authority; to be ready to do good at every opportunity. (Titus 3:1).”   Click here to read entire report…

Comment:

That there is absolutely no need to close churches has been confirmed by Dumb & Dumber themselves – here’s what they have said on the matter, as reported in the above Lifesitenews report:   One day before Cardinal Nichols released his second letter, Professor Chris Whitty and Sir Patrick Vallance, the U.K.’s chief medical officer and chief scientific adviser, testified before a parliamentary committee that there were no scientific grounds for closing churches.

Both Whitty and Vallance are members of the Scientific Advisory Group in Emergencies (SAGE), which has provided the basis for much of the U.K government’s policies in dealing with COVID-19.

Vallance stated, “We haven’t got good evidence on the exact value of each intervention on ‘R’. We produced a paper suggesting what that might be in different areas, but really said, ‘Look, this is not an exact science at all.’ And therefore I’m afraid it’s a rather blunt instrument.” 

Questioned further about rates of transmission in churches specifically, Vallance added, “I don’t think we have good data to answer that with any degree of certainty.”

Whitty sought to defend their decision by suggesting that people might “congregate outside and do things which do lead to transmission,” but added that this was “anecdotal” and not “scientific fact.”   Ends. 

“No scientific grounds for closing churches” – so why are they being closed?   

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.