Daring to share information, openly and transparently
The Stop5G stall was first seen on the High Street in Stroud, Gloucestershire in February 2019, and the Vax Info Hub in November 2020. They will both be replaced by the Stroud Info Hub. This will be an information sharing hub on a number of current issues that have been sidelined by the mainstream media.
When Britain declared war on Germany, the BBC radio stations were ordered to do their bit in the defence of our country. The print media too, fell into line so that, quite rightly, the country united to defend itself against totalitarian tyranny. On the day of the first lockdown, 23 March 2020, Ofcom, the UK’s communications regulatory body, instructed all broadcasters and print media, through the Coronavirus Broadcasting guidelines, not to say anything that goes against government advice. It invoked emergency powers the very first day after the World Health Organisation declared a pandemic, but also downgraded Covid-19, stating that it should no longer be considered a high consequence infectious disease (HCID). These guidelines remain in place over a year later, as I write in April 2021. If the British public understood that, for the past year or more, the government has effectively been waging a jingoistic, nationalistic propaganda war, then we might better comprehend the frustrations of those who want to question the ‘official’ mainstream narrative, but are being systematically told to shut up. The British government has used emergency powers to silence mainstream media. For over a year; there has been no rational debate outside of a single narrative dominated by fear. The question is: Is ‘war’ with a virus a rational and appropriate approach?
On 31/03/2021 Ofcom fined the Religious satellite TV channel Loveworld £125,000 for a breach of broadcasting rules for sharing ‘potentially harmful’ claims about Covid-19. The programme claimed the Covid crisis had been planned, and that the vaccines contain harmful toxins. Under normal circumstances such claims would be debated without reprisal. It is a source of national pride that, in defence of democracy, newspapers, TV and radio programmes are free to denounce, or speculate on the truth or falsity of such claims. Now, as in 1939, no one is allowed to broadcast or print anything other than the government narrative. Today the question is: If there is a debate to be had, where do we have it?
The previous four years saw unprecedented blanket coverage in the mainstream media of Brexit: every news bulletin debated whether or not to stay in the Customs Union and how to solve the border question in Northern Ireland. There was Mrs May’s solution, Jeremy Corbyns’, Nigel Farage’s; endless commentating and speculating: would we still be able to trade in the European Union? Would the NHS really have £370 million a week extra to spend? These things were debated as if Parliament had no other business.
Before that, we had a referendum in Scotland; again, and quite rightly, with endless debate on the mainstream media. Anyone with a memory longer than ten years’ duration will remember the debates over austerity measures under PM David Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne in the aftermath of the global financial collapse of 2008.
Nowadays, the Chancellor seems to have a bottomless pot of money to throw at the country. It’s almost a relief that, with echoes of 1939, PM Johnson, like a modern-day Churchill, now faces an enemy around which the country can pull together. The Brexit problem was swiftly dealt with, as if it was never a problem in the first place. What is Johnson’s solution to coronavirus? – to wisely step aside, and defer to a group of unelected scientists, mathematicians and psychologists who now direct the country’s response. How simple and easy government policy is to understand now, compared to the mess under Mrs May! Science is now in charge. What a relief!
The Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) provides scientific and technical advice to support government decision makers during emergencies. Politicians can be argued with, but a very high degree in science is required to ‘qualify’ in being able to argue with the committee that makes up SAGE. The 29 members of parliament that make up the British cabinet currently includes noone with a degree in science. The prime minister is, famously, a scholar of Greek, and Health Secretary Matt Hancock studied politics at university. If this group of scientists, collectively known as SAGE, decide through ‘consensus’ to all say the same thing, it is almost impossible to object; and if anyone tries to, the press completely ignore them and/or proceed to character-assassinate any ‘heretic’ who dares to question them. The problem of back-and-forth Politics has been solved, and politicians now dutifully and uncritically defer to ‘the science’. Everything is so much simpler when politicians aren’t arguing! But the question is: Who is pulling their strings?
The current dominant narrative carries this simple idea: wage war against the virus, because unless we defeat it, then we will ourselves be defeated; therefore inoculate the entire world. This very narrow view is being tenaciously contested elsewhere, but the purpose of this piece of writing is to look at what else is happening beyond that. Therefore the next question is: while this ‘war’ against the virus is being played out and we are all distracted by vaccines, what else is really going on?
One can only analyse the situation as it unfolds, but a cursory investigation at once reveals that the enemy is not the virus at all. There is actually a psychological war being waged against our own population. Through sleight-of-hand, the whole country has effectively been put in prison for the past 77 days (as I write) under the pretence that it is ‘for our own protection’. Everyone will soon be tagged like criminals. If introduced, the Covid Passport, in tandem with digital banking, will tighten the noose around everyone’s necks. Government surveillance will soon be able to use all-pervading facial recognition cameras, like those we have become used to at airports, to control which shop we can go to, where we can travel, who we are allowed to see, and how many people we are allowed to meet. At least some businesses are requiring their customers to conform to all these measures. But the government acts as a middleman and makes announcements day after day based on advice from SAGE. Businesses don’t want to be seen to step out of line, especially as it appears that the country is still at war, so they all comply with what they think their customers think is ‘the right thing to do’. So there you have it! Everyone is obeying rules they think they ought to be obeying and not questioning who is giving the orders! The king has no clothes! The question we must always come back to is: If all these “emergency”measures are justified, where is the pandemic?
A glance at the UK Office for National Statistics data shows the number of deaths in 2020 was below the five-year average. The average age of death was 82, which is normal. The World Health Organisation has re-packaged a common flu and called it Covid-19. The PCR test, completely unfit for purpose by its inventor’s own admission, has been used to justify all these measures.
Some 2,000 years ago in tribal Britain, a few thousand well-disciplined Romans, divided up and conquered the people. They call this system “divide et impera”. They made separate alliances and treaties with each tribe, and induced each, through a complex system of rewards, to keep an eye on the others. This technique has been used by regimes in the intervening years to control factions of different interests, who collectively might be able to oppose their rule. Now, 2000 years later, with the help of a compliant media, the “Romans” of the modern era now put a broadcasting device in everyone’s pocket, a box in the corner of everyone’s living room, and on every lamppost, a yellow and black sign telling us how to behave and what to think. They have managed to divide the population into those that believe what they see and hear from government and those that believe its a hoax. The question is: Who are the “they?”
When we first started campaigning against 5G in Stroud in early 2019, we did so in order to get the Town Council to invoke the ‘precautionary principle’, based on strong scientific evidence warning of a human and biological health crisis. Arthur Firstenberg, scientist and journalist, warned that if we continue pumping electromagnetic microwave radiation from Earth and space (940 satellites in Low Earth orbit at the last count) and from base stations, 5G monopoles, transmitters, and antennas hastily installed during the lockdown, people will start feeling the effects of radiation poisoning. Many people have pointed out that the typical symptoms of Covid 19, a dry cough, nausea, heart palpitations, and a lack of taste and smell look very similar to radiation sickness. 5G is an integral part of what’s happening today because its infrastructure enables a Surveillance Capitalist Society in which all humans will be digitally linked. The question is: Is the ‘new normal’ Orwell’s 1984 or Huxley’s Brave New World?
The Stroud 5G street stall shared information for those who wanted to know about what is being planned for the world. I have no pleasure in saying that the plan is all going perfectly: track and trace, digital banking, QR codes on mobile phones, people locked away ordering online (in fact, doing everything online) living in a digital alter reality; this was all predicted in the literature we were disseminating.
The Stop5G stall and the Vax Info Hub will both be replaced by the Stroud Info Hub. This will be an information sharing hub only. None of us are anti-technology, and we do not describe ourselves as ‘anti-vaxxers’, neither do we describe ourselves as “experts”. However, we are pro-nature, pro-natural immunity, and pro-sovereignty.
At the beginning of this pandemic in March 2020, I was flabbergasted at the government approach to this crisis: deliberately creating fear and compliance, forcing people to stay indoors, even on sunny days, denying them natural vitamin C and D. Now, a year later, the question is: Why the worldwide hysteria for a vaccine when so many other cheap cures are available?
Perhaps the answer is contained in the next question: Could this be nothing other than a global vaccine racket? Are Big Banking, Big Tech and Big Pharma in league with the World Economic Forum, Davos, and the World Health Organisation, being orchestrated by billionaires such as Bill Gates? It certainly looks that, riding on the back of a global collapsed economy, caused by the response to the coronavirus, will come the ‘Great Reset’: this will change the way we do business and completely transform the way we live our lives. Is the real agenda the same as it has always been – to divide and conquer, spread fear and propaganda, eradicate hard-won rights and freedoms, and exert the sort of patriarchal control the Romans could never have dreamed of? Are we the slaves of the system? An audacious plan such as this wouldn’t be possible without 5G. Is a very dangerous iotrogenic medical tyranny being perpetrated? It only requires a few of us to it point out and for the rest to ask the right questions. When you see it for what it is, you must stand up.
If the answer to this is yes, we must stand up, the next question would be how?
To have credibility we have to ‘practise as we preach’. There can be no changes brought about without being a living example as leaders of what one speaks about and proposes to others.
This means that when one is aware, and is critical of, the harm caused by wearing a Covid mask, one will bravely and proudly walk without a mask. When one is aware and critical of the harm caused by electromagnetic pollution, one will only use a landline telephone. When one is aware and critical of the harm caused by mass indoctrination via television, one will not have a television. When one is aware and critical of the harm caused by mass-produced chemical foods, one will buy direct from local farmers and not shop in a supermarket. When one is aware and critical of the harm caused by big banking institutions, one will keep one’s deposits in an alternative bank. When one is aware and critical of the harm caused by commercial and state energy providers, one will use small-scale renewable sources of energy.
If one has ambitions to replace a corrupted political institution – government – with a non-corrupted form of governance, one cannot be a hypocrite. One must be a living example of that which will change the world for the better. Positive outward change comes to be through enacting positive inward change. This puts a spiritual dimension right at the heart of material change. Each one of us is at a different stage along this journey.
The last question is: If the government are going to silence the media, then where do you go to get unbiassed news? We can only answer these questions as honestly as we can. We welcome you to pose your own question at the Stroud Info Hub!
contributed by Markus Blackett, April 2021