1 August 2022 - 8:20 am
So far we’ve had the scientific and medical establishments “baffled” by the following things:
- The sudden increase in healthy people dropping dead
- The significant rise in all-cause mortality
- The correlation between the highest numbers of COVID-19 injectable product uptake and the highest numbers of alleged COVID-19 “cases”
- The correlation between the lowest numbers of COVID-19 injectable product uptake and the populations most “unaffected” by COVID-19
- The “never before” detected microplastics in people’s lungs now being detected in large proportions
Anyone baffled by any of these has no business being involved in any field related to public health. Of course correlation does not equal causation, but correlations are signals that should be taken seriously if there is a chance they could be connected. Not all correlations are of course, and that is the go-to argument deployed by many an armchair State Science fan, but so far we’re not seeing any actual science from the establishment sources to refute these correlations as being non-causative.
What we are seeing is an instant dismissal of the obvious, a decree rather than a scientific and objective analysis. The “abundance of caution” we were repeatedly lectured about and had forced on us regarding lockdowns, masks and crack-dealer style drug pushing has dematerialised quicker than a politicians promise. Now all these indicators are there. caution has been abandoned, just like informed consent, the right to choose, personal responsibility, common sense and so on have all been abandoned.
The BBC published an article (archive) on the 23rd July 2022 titled “Peckham flat death: Peabody sorry for not spotting dead woman”. The article describes how a 58 year old lady was dead in her flat for two and a half years before anyone noticed, apart from other residents who repeatedly sounded the alarm.
Not that anyone can be truly certain but it would appear this woman tragically died in late 2019, but it took until 2022 for the housing association (Peabody) and the Police to get around to actually noticing. Of course Peabody had applied and got granted Universal Credit on behalf of the dead woman to cover the rent that she wasn’t paying, because she was dead, and managed to do all that paperwork without actually communicating with her, because she was dead. Between them and the Police, who somehow managed to mistakenly inform Peabody that they had spoken to her and she was alive and well, which obviously they couldn’t have done, because she was dead, this horrendous neglect went on for two and a half years.
Here we have yet another elephant in the room. This situation was clearly exacerbated by the whole lockdown thing. Not that we should allow Peabody or the Police off the hook, not at all. As a social housing provider Peabody has a certain level of responsibility and duty of care regarding its tenants. The Police obviously also have a duty of care and responsibility.
Housing associations regularly award themselves with glowing reports and pats on the back at expensive events organised by the likes of TPAS. These events are run and attended by some of the least self-aware people in existence, obviously 99% of them are from the housing industry, there is virtually no outside perspective, and the entire thing is an exercise in self-congratulation, with the occasional faux-introspection interlude where someone gravely informs the audience that they need to do more. The Grenfell tragedy is often invoked when the topic of rent increases is questioned. After all, as a rent-paying tenant, you don’t want your reluctance to pay more rent for less services to lead to the next Grenfell do you? Never mind these housing associations are listed as non-profit and so they just keep creating new management jobs out of thin air to make sure there’s no money left. There was certainly no money, or care left for the woman who lay dead in her flat for over two years. But there was just enough money to pay someone to organise some free money from the Government to cover her rent.
The Police were, as they so often are, utterly derelict in their duty, compounded by the (if we are to believe this part of the story) misinformation they passed on that this woman was alive and well. There will be zero consequences, because in the article the Met Police “spokeswoman” is quoted as saying…
“The staff member who documented that incorrect information no longer works for the MPS, but had they still been employed they would have been referred to Professional Standards for unsatisfactory performance.”https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-62269703
How convenient. How are we to determine this is even true, or just another “unsatisfactory performance” with incorrect information being reported? If anything is to come from this, it might be the Police spin this to demand more powers to go around kicking doors in for no good reason. Regardless, there is no excuse for any of this.
But, it is obvious that the insane policies from the Government and Public Health quangos made this situation way worse than it needed to be. The effects of companies like housing associations happily embracing lockdown as an excuse to close offices permanently, including the public facing ones where tenants could actually speak to a person face-to-face, stopping all maintenance apart from “emergency” work, where the word “emergency” is largely defined by the whims of the housing provider, plus furloughing massive proportions of their staff, and those that were still working becoming hypochondriacs afraid to go near anyone, meant it was obvious this kind of neglect was going to happen. This reported case is likely one of the more extreme, but there are all kinds of ways this isolation and neglect will have had a profoundly harmful effect on people.
The Police were too busy enforcing COVID rules to care about tackling actual crimes, or serving and protecting the public, that being their actual job.
The BBC obviously doesn’t make mention of any of this kind of thing, nor does it cite lockdowns and other deliberately harmful policies as a contributory factor. They would use the excuse that the BBC is objective, impartial and is just reporting the facts, and to speculate on whether lockdowns contributed to this tragedy is not their place. The reality is the BBC are not impartial or objective, and regularly report more than “just the facts ma’am”. Just one example would be that most of their reporting on the alleged effectiveness of the COVID “vaccines” is speculative, and is certainly not backed up by evidence or facts, and they regularly publish pieces laden with subjective opinion. But to directly link the lockdown as one of the causative elements in this case would upset their owners, the UK Government.
The BBC is State owned propaganda. Of course they are going to ignore the herd of elephants in the room, their job is to convince the public to ignore them too.