Alone @ - the latest cynical Government Propaganda slogan

"All in, all together. Stay @ home - for the NHS, your family, your neighbours, your nation, the world and life itself"

I call it 'cynical' because Government policy, in insisting on people 'staying at home', is the very opposite of being 'all together'. It is in fact requiring individuals to be isolated and lonely, to remove the essential and basic psychological belief in the ability to move freely. 

Once upon a time it could only be forfeited by due process of criminal law. Now it seems it is achieved merely by edict of politicians and at the discretion of individual policemen. 

The Government has intentionally inculcated fear as a device to influence behaviour, and by all appearances it has been incredibly successful. The nation has been unnecessarily terrorised into radical changes in beliefs, behaviours and way of life. These will have lasting adverse social and health consequences, far out weighing the risks of a virus. 

By imprisoning people in their homes and cultivating an aura of anxiety and suspicion, fundamental elements of social cohesion and interdependence have been damaged, possibly for ever. This is a deeply malign and corrosive manipulation of cultural norms.

Linked to the destruction of business and economy, it will undoubtedly incur massive physical and psychological harm to innumerable numbers of people and inevitably cause many premature deaths as the statistics are in fact beginning to reveal.
Paradoxically the Times reports that admissions to NHS A&E Departments are at an all-time low that must have serious consequences for those that would otherwise have required emergency treatment.

Sinister proposals also wait in the wings in the wake of the propaganda, that campaigns like this seek to camouflage, in slogans of 'togetherness' and rainbow 'NHS love'. Will the ability to move freely, be predicated on documentation proving the individual is immune or compulsorily vaccinated (if such a thing is possible) complete with a Bill Gates chip? 

Dominic Raab has just announced another three weeks of the lock-down despite all the epidemiological and medical evidence that over 90% of deaths are elderly persons with serious life threatening conditions and that overwhelmingly those not in those categories survive infection as with regular flu. 

The necessity for the extreme and extraordinary measures have never really been explained other than a need to hype a danger out of all proportion to its true risk. Those in most danger could have been protected by special measures without blanket lock-down and ridiculous police intimidation of harmless activity. 

Even in the absence of conspiracy idealising, it is hard to explain in the absence of sinister motivation on the part of government. Which part actually was the driving force is open to conjecture but it hard to divine an exit strategy, if that is really the intention, without huge lasting social and economic damage. As usual it is the innocent that are blamed and harassed, whilst the causal criminals are totally ignored.

Meanwhile at least £600m, in addition to all the other un-quantifiable expenditure, is going on persuading us that the incarceration is for our own good. This is indeed a validation of everything Orwell predicted of a dystopian state of affairs.


https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/government-confirms-manning-gottlieb-omd-media-hire-transformative-600m-deal/1465395

Government confirms Manning Gottlieb OMD media hire with transformative £600m deal

The UK government has awarded its media-buying contract to Manning Gottlieb OMD in a four-year deal worth up to £600m that aims to "set the global standard for transparency".

"Alex Aiken, the executive director of Government Communications, who ran the statutory review, said that the new framework would benefit citizens, improve transparency in the media supply chain, especially in programmatic buying, and help to fight fake news."

https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/govt-launches-virus-ad-blitz-across-uk-newspapers-three-month-deal/1680596

Govt launches virus ad blitz across UK newspapers in three-month deal

Coverwraps and home-page takeovers encourage Brits to stay at home.

The UK government is running a multimillion-pound ad campaign across hundreds of newspapers over the next three months encouraging the nation to stay at home.

"All in, all together" kicked off today with a coverwrap and home-page takeover across all regional and national daily news brands. Weekly titles will run the ad next week.

On the front of the newspapers, the ad reads: "Stay at home for the NHS, your family, your neighbours, your nation, the world and life itself."

On the back cover, there is a rainbow – the symbol of support for key workers during the fight against the pandemic – accompanied by the copy: "Staying at home for Britain." This doubles up as a poster that readers can display in their window.

It is the first time that there has been a coverwrap across all news titles at the same time.

OmniGOV, the specialist unit within Manning Gottlieb OMD that manages the Government's estimated £150m-a-year media-buying account, co-ordinated the deal.

The work was jointly created by the newspaper industry. ITV News reported that the industry had asked for £45m for the campaign but it is unclear whether the government has paid that much.

Cabinet Office minister Michael Gove said: "Newspapers are the lifeblood of our communities and we need them now more than ever. Their role as a trusted voice and their ability to reach isolated communities is especially vital at this time. With this campaign, we are both saving lives by providing essential information to the public and supporting cherished local institutions."

The move follows an extension of the lockdown across the UK as foreign secretary Dominic Raab announced yesterday (Thursday) that this will be for "at least" another three weeks.

Tracy De Groose, executive chair of Newsworks, the body representing the news industry, said: "We are working with the government throughout this crisis to deliver their important advertising messages in a way that will resonate with readers. This is an amazing first for the newspaper industry and a clear demonstration of how we can bring it altogether for a brand campaign of this scale.

"As we all know, the trusted flow of information is more important now than ever before and this partnership is a powerful endorsement of the strong relationship we have with our growing audiences across our local, regional and national news brands."

News brands have been reporting record readership numbers since the coronavirus outbreak started to take hold in the UK. However, this hasn’t been supported by increasing ad revenue, because many advertisers use tools that automatically block their campaigns from appearing against what is seen to be negative content, with terms such as "coronavirus" and "Covid-19" falling into these blacklists.

Campaign reported earlier this month that news brands could lose up to £50m if this practice continues. The industry is being backed by culture secretary Oliver Dowden, who has called on brands to "prevent an irreversible decline in news publishing".  END QUOTE.

Anthony Rêveur

April 16 at 5:51 PM

The "healed" people of the Covid19 are finally not that much. Worse, contract the virus does not guarantee any ex-post immunity.

" Beyond the hundreds of thousands of deaths that the application of this theory of collective immunity implies, it should also be considered that as knowledge of the SARScov2, is gradually discovered a virus, including features are seriously starting to worry about the world medical and scientific community. "healed" people are finally not that much. Worse, contract the virus does not guarantee any ex-post immunity.
Also in order to identify the issues of the debate on collective immunity, the current state of knowledge should be considered:

To identify some issues in the debate on collective immunity:
1. Those who think the is like a flu that we catch and who will hate us, totally under the impact of being infected. Indeed, it is seen by the medical community that the consequences of infection are far from small: liver and / or heart failure are clearly seen in cured patients, even those with mild symptoms
Los Angeles Times article: https://tinyurl.com/ru3ehgj

2. Even in patients with only mild symptoms, there are also of consequences in cured people: encephalopathy, psychosis, neuromuscular dysfunction and myelin process, which can follow the infection, revealing only after a few weeks or several months, and can be permanently affected by "healed" patients.
Thailand Medical News article (which makes reference in Asia in the scientific community): https://tinyurl.com/qr9pe2n

3. The most recent studies of concern to the global medical and scientific community reveal an emerging character of the SARSCoV2,, which is seen to address T-lymphocytes, in the same way as #HIV, which can destroy the immune system and lead to a acquired immune syndrome (AIDS), in the same way as HIV.
Today (Singapore) article: https://tinyurl.com/r8l6gwg

4. Like HIV as well, the South Korean antenna of the CDC revealed a few days ago that the is reactive in the body. It appears that, like HIV, if treatments reduce the viral load to the point of almost disappear and become undetectable, after a few weeks the virus will reappear, reactive and remultiplie in the body. People then fall sick (and often more serious than first infection). For now, the trend is for 60 pc of "healed" patients. First seen in China and South Korea, similar cases are now happening in other Asian countries but also in Europe, including in France first cases, reported by caregivers.
Newsweek article: https://tinyurl.com/v9e3teq

5. WHO reports that cured patients do not necessarily develop "immunity" and may again be infected and become sick again. A preliminary patient study in Shanghai found that some patients had "no detection response" while others had a very high response said Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, WHO's senior scientist on Covid-19. The question of whether patients who had a strong immune response were immune to a second infection remains unknown because of the lack of further setback.
CNBC article: https://tinyurl.com/ql77ef4

6. The application of the principle of collective immunity implies social acceptance of a share of death as the spread of the spread. Currently the death rate (number of deaths on the number of reported cases, range from 2.12 % in South Korea (lower) to 15.19 % in France (above), with a world average of 6.3 % (Germany 2.29 %, USA 4.16 %, Spain 10.22 %, Italy 12.92 %). However, this rate must be adjusted by probability taking into account non-reported cases, generally low symptoms or asymptomatic. The only reference is the "SARS" (virus responsible for the epidemic in 2002-2003 and which is 80 % genetically identical to the new coronavirus and whose lethal, after having long been estimated around 2 %, was finally set at 9.6 % after historical setback. The WHO admitted on March 5, a "likely" death rate of 3.4 % of the coronavirus coronavirus. An increase from a first estimate between 0.5 and 0.9 in January, then 1.2 in February after a first reassessment. In France, with the population being 67 million, to reach the threshold of collective immunity (70 %), this would mean 46.9 million people infected. With a death rate between WHO estimate 3.4 % and SARS 9.6 %, this would mean accepting the death of between 1,594,000 and 4,502,000 individuals. Taking the low hypothesis between 1.2 % and 2.5 % proposed by part of the scientific community on the basis of a probability calculations taking into account a black figure of cases not detected at a global level, this would be a balance sheet between 562,800 and 1,172,500 dead.

7. co-morbidity does not save "healthy" people. Those who imagine that not suffering from age, or from comorbid diseases (diabetes, liver or kidney disease, obesity, etc.) ), will only suffer from more or less nasty flu symptoms, should take into account that if people with co-morbidity are the majority in serious cases and in fatal cases, "non-conditions" are 32 % to enter into serious cases and even 43 % in deadly cases. In other words, healthy people are not spared, far from it, by the the

CONCLUSION: Group immunity is not a desirable assumption in view of the fact that the-19, far from being a simple " improved " flu, is a complex virus, with many consequences left even to patients " healed " having had few symptoms, and whose evolution revealed by the most recent studies and observations even shows a worrying development, which can copy the model of HIV.

Therefore, it would be adventurous, not to say irresponsible, to bet such a strategy against all these elements here... everyone to judge, personally I will not take the risk of being infected by This coronavirus and then contaminate my loved ones."
Bruno Lebeau-Pecheral

• Alan Washbourne Tim Veater So you are disputing the fact that this virus did not originate from China?

  • Like
  •  · Reply
  •  · 43m
• 

  Tim Veater Alan Washbourne Did or did not Alan? The initial outbreak appears to have been in Wuhan but that is a long way from proving the Chinese were responsible, although this of course is possible. The four inserts to the genome prove this was not naturally zoonotic but bio-engineered and bio-engineered to incorporate HIV homology. That in itself is very worrying. The next question to be answered who was in control of the virus at the time and was it released by accident or on purpose? Given the nature of the adaptations linked to a false explanation (that the infection came direct from animals which is impossible) circumstantially the latter appears more likely. So were the Chinese responsible, as the Americans want us to believe, or some other state, including America itself. This is where it gets interesting both from the point of view of labs and individuals. in that Anthony Fauci who is at the top of the American establishment advising Trump and government, and who cut his teeth on the AIDs epidemic in the '80's, actually is one of the named patent holders of the self same HIV insert! Make of that what you will but it is certainly a significant finding. Of course there are lots of other circumstantial indications that this pandemic, so called, was envisaged well in advance, whilst strangely claimed to be unforeseen and unprepared for, not unlike the 9/11 attacks.