Welcome to the Police State

Nigel Farage

Brexit leader Nigel Farage warned that lockdowns in the United Kingdom are pushing the country into a full-on police state, predicting that the battle to regain individual liberty will be a tougher struggle than leaving the European Union.

Mr Farage said that is unlikely that the British government will relinquish the emergency powers it has accumulated during the coronavirus crisis.

“Once the state takes power how on earth do we get those powers back? Do we have enough independently-minded MPs in Westminster to challenge the executive once we’re through this crisis to say those powers need to be returned, those liberties and freedoms need to go back to the people?”

“I’m beginning to think that the battle for our individual liberty could be an even bigger battle than the battle to get us out of the European Union,” Farage said.

For smokers, it’s been a police state for 13 years,

Peter Hitchens:

I sense that I and some others have now become the targets of a worrying wave of spite, censorship and intolerance, very like the McCarthyite frenzy in 1950s America which swept up all kinds of innocent people in what claimed to be an attack on Communism.

Smokers have been subjected to spite, censorship and intolerance for 13 years.

Nobody lifted a finger to help us.

We became non-persons.

Now it’s their turn to become non-persons too.

I hope they like it.

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Welcome to the Police State

  1. Timothy Goodacre says:

    Yes a taste of what smokers have had to endure. Their social life and community trashed since 2007. I hope they enjoy it.

  2. Fumo ergo sum says:

    “Smokers have been subjected to spite, censorship and intolerance for 13 years.”

    –> For me personally it will be ‘only’ the tenth anniversary of ‘spite, censorship and intolerance’ this year, but yet, even that is lasting far too long. I personally do not think that anybody will ever get his or her beloved liberties back unless the smoking ban has been lifted. Simply because the smoking ban has always been, and will always continue to be, the template according to which excessive social engineering will be implemented throughout society. Already back in 2011, when the last remaining bulwarks of freedom here in Belgium were forced to go ‘smoke free’, I predicted that this was the final demise of civilization and that liberal buzz words such as ‘freedom’, ‘plurality’, ‘dignity’ and ‘tolerance’ were henceforth devoid of any meaningful content. This is so, because if you cannot stand ‘a single whiff of smoke’ anywhere at any time in gatherings that have been brutally seized as ‘public spaces’, then any talk about ‘hyper diversity’ or ‘mutual respect’ becomes sheer bluff and hypocrisy.

    A ‘gradual’ reconquest of lost liberties in the context of the corona pandemic is an utterly foolish idea. Even if cafes and restaurants will ever be able to reopen, it will come along with some auxiliary rules of social engineering – such as mandatory mask wearing, social distancing, obligatory hand sanitation upon entering the premises, etc. – as has already been the case here last summer. There will always be a next threat to be faced that requires ‘urgent and prompt counteraction’ and where there is ‘no time to be lost’. So the scarce liberties that have been bequeathed upon the public could be taken back at any moment. As Frank has already correctly and repeatedly noted elsewhere on this blog, even long before the current Covid-crisis appeared: public health must be destroyed. Period. There is no way one could make a meaningful compromise with the narrow-minded and self-acclaimed experts that populate the academic faculties, hospitals, ngo’s and government bureaucracies that together constitute the Sodom and Gomorrah of ‘public health’.

    At the present moment, however, I am much worried about the covid vaccine and whether or not the state will make covid vaccination mandatory. Because in doing so (or not), public health ideology would pass a new threshold of authoritarianism and ruthlessness that even breaks the sad record of the smoking ban. Yes, as a smoker I am living as a refugee in my own country for nearly ten years. But at least it has been my own choice to prefer a life in isolation and loneliness over a life in The Matrix of the smoke free bully state. In case of mandatory covid vaccination things get grimmer because this time, if I were to refuse the state’s offer, it is actually an offer “I cannot refuse”. For I were to decline the state’s offer, the small remaining freedom I have as a citizen would be immediately seized through either imprisonment or by imposing an excessive fine in case of vaccination refusal.

    And yes, I am very reluctant to get the jab. I do not believe for a single moment that a covid vaccine, or any vaccine whatsoever, could be a safe product given the enormous pressure that has been put on the manufacturers to get the product on the market. Where is the scientific evidence that the vaccine is effective? How does one know, in such a short time span of less than a year, that the vaccine won’t generate any unintended side effects? Who is legally responsible in case of suffering, permanent trauma or injury or other adverse effects due to a defective vaccine – a question shrouded in thick clouds of uncanny mystery? Yet our governments and mainstream media keep on touting that a ‘sufficiently large degree of vaccination’ is our sole way to salvation and to the life of ‘the old normal’ (again, which I do not consider to be normal at all due to the smoking ban).

    At present moment, the government here in Belgium luckily is not intending to make the covid vaccine mandatory – at least not for ‘the general population’ and not at the present moment; Especially the latter is an important caveat. This is because I do not trust the public health authorities at all. And even lesser our cheating class of lying and bullying politicians. I still recall that as late as 2009 not a single politician pledged to impose a full-blown smoking ban on all alleged “public spaces”. Then there came 2011…

    Since the machinery and demagoguery of public health can only thrive on a succession of ever-looming (of course fully imaginary) threats, my own guess is that despite current reassurances to the contrary, getting the vaccine might ultimately be something ‘mandatory’ to do by the end of the year, as the preparedness amongst the general population to get jabbed might seem be dwindling. It is just a guess of course, and I hope that I am mistaken. What is the take on the issue of your government(s) at present? I somewhere heard that Australia – how unforeseen!… – is already toying with the idea of making the covid vaccine compulsory for the general population. Yet, the official stance – even in Australia – seems to be that there won’t be generally mandatory vaccination programme. Perhaps Mark Jarrett can expound a bit further on these issues?

    Et ceterum censeo salutem publica delendam esse.

    • Mark Jarratt says:

      Yes the CV19 measures are ever changing here in Australia, significant evidence of poor planning, and kneejerk panic, combined with political claims by “our saviours”. Compulsory vaccination would be illiberal although airlines such as Qantas have proposed preventing travel by the “unclean”. The official diktats change daily, and the Commonwealth government has mostly been missing in action…

      • Ripper says:

        There is no knee jerks, poor planning or panic, they know exactly what they are doing and its all going to plan. Their consistent lying tells me this. Its not so much the governments, though they are the ones ultimately responsible, but the array of so called ‘expert scientists’ that make up the policies for the governments to implement.

        I’m in the UK – guess who I saw on TV last week, calling for more draconian measures? None other than Linda Bauld, a member of Sage… Remember her Frank? Dick Puddlecote and Chris Snowdon do…

        • Rose says:

          I’m sure we all do.

          Mind you, Linda Bauld did have the good grace to admit that something “weird” was happening when smokers didn’t die in lumps as predicted.

          “What we normally see with other respiratory conditions is that smokers are very badly affected – that is what you would expect.
          For some weird reason that is not the case with Covid and we don’t understand it. The data from multiple countries shows smokers are under-represented in case numbers, and they are also under-represented in the numbers of people who go into hospital with Covid.

          But when they are in hospital, even though they are in smaller numbers, they’re much more likely to die or to have bad outcomes.”
          https://www.ed.ac.uk/edinburgh-friends/supplements/meet-behavioural-scientist-guiding-through-covid19

          Nitric oxide dosed in short bursts at high concentrations may protect against Covid 19
          Abstract

          “It has long been suggested that NO may inhibit an early stage in viral replication. Furthermore, in vitro tests have shown that NO inhibits the replication cycle of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus. Despite smoking being listed as a risk factor to contract Covid-19, only a low proportion of the smokers suffered from SARS-corona infection in China 2003, and from Covid-19 in China, Europe and the US.

          We hypothesize, that the intermittent bursts of high NO concentration in cigarette smoke may be a mechanism in protecting against the virus. Mainstream smoke from cigarettes contains NO at peak concentrations of between about 250 ppm and 1350 ppm in each puff as compared to medicinal use of no more than 80 to a maximum of 160 ppm.”
          https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1089860320301610#bib16

          Linda Bauld
          “But when they are in hospital, even though they are in smaller numbers, they’re much more likely to die or to have bad outcomes.”

          Perhaps that’s because you stop them inhaling the nitric oxide as soon as they set foot on the premises?

        • DP says:

          Dear Rose
          @ January 11, 2021 at 5:58 pm

          It will be somewhat ironic if they discover that public ‘health’ advice is actually killing people. I doubt that that will concern them overmuch, because their intention is good. Killing us softly with their tough love.

          Hello Hell, here we come.

          DP

        • Rose says:

          Check the amount of patents on Inhaled Nitric Oxide delivery products that came out in 2020, DP

      • Fumo ergo sum says:

        “Compulsory vaccination would be illiberal.” Indeed it would be the most illiberal thing to do. But would your, if any, government really care whether or not the measures they impose are ‘liberal’ or not? I do not think so. Even though they will always deny it.

    • Joe L. says:

      Where is the scientific evidence that the vaccine is effective?

      There is none, because the currently available COVID-19 “vaccinations” are not actually vaccinations, by traditional definition. They contain no dead or inactivated SARS-CoV-2 virus (the bigger question is, “why not?”). Instead, they contain laboratory-manufactured Messenger RNA (mRNA), which hijacks your cells and causes them to generate a “spike protein” which is supposedly similar to that found in SARS-CoV-2. Your immune system will then recognize the spike proteins as “foreign” (very strange, because they are generated by your own cells), and will create antibodies against them. The claim is that if you eventually contract SARS-CoV-2 after receiving one of these injections, your symptoms will be less severe because your immune system will be better prepared to create antibodies against it. This is completely novel and has never been done before in immunology.

      The vaccine manufacturers themselves openly admit that these “vaccines” will not prevent you from contracting SARS-CoV-2. You can still contract the virus and still become contagious. So these “vaccines” will not be a reason to bring an end to the lockdowns, mask mandates and “social distancing.” So why are they pushing them so hard? I don’t know, but it’s very unsettling.

      Who is legally responsible in case of suffering, permanent trauma or injury or other adverse effects due to a defective vaccine – a question shrouded in thick clouds of uncanny mystery?

      I know who will not be held legally responsible (at least here in the US)–the vaccine manufacturers:

      You can’t sue Pfizer or Moderna if you have severe Covid vaccine side effects. The government likely won’t compensate you for damages either

  3. Fumo ergo sum says:

    Thanks RdM and Joe L. for the enlightening comments and article hyperlinks.

    With regard to legal responsibility, European countries, including Belgium, fortunately tend to cleave to the old classical liberal precept that he (whether a natural or an artificial person) inflicting a loss upon someone else is held responsible and therefore ought to compensate the one suffering the loss. Now with regard to product liability in particular, the following conditions have to be fulfilled in order to obtain a valid claim against a manufacturer:

    1) There has to be an observable damage or loss on the part of the claimant
    2) There has to be an deficiency in the product causing the damage
    3) There has to obtain a causal link between the damage and the product’s deficiency

    Now, obviously the first two conditions are always quite easy to demonstrate; the third point is often much harder. In case of litigation against vaccine manufacturers such as Pfizer, this means that a plaintiff suffering adverse effects has to prove that these effects are due to the vaccine, hence, that other possible causes can be excluded. As times goes by, the task of proving this causal link becomes of course increasingly difficult. Yet, some side effects – e.g. a disease of the autoimmune system – may eventually become only apparent after five years or so. How would such a case be dealt with before court? This is really a very open question.

    Moreover, there are some exclusion grounds in which a manufacturer can waive his responsibility . One of these exclusion grounds can be invoked if “based on the state of affairs of scientific and/or technological knowledge at the time when the product has been brought into the commercial circuit, the manufacturer demonstrates that the existence of the deficiency could impossibly have been detected.” So I am rather afraid that not quite a few vaccine manufacturers will attempt to circumvent their legal responsibility, exactly by invoking this exclusion ground. From a possible courtroom hearing somewhere in 2024 or 2025: “How could we ever have known back in 2020 that our vaccines could have produced such devastating side effects? We were being put under pressure to get the vaccine launched as soon as possible…” Like Pontius Pilatus, they will probably wash their hands in innocence, leaving the deprived and the victimized bruised behind in the cold…

    Of course, it may also be the case that the government – perhaps even the European Union – will step in and assume responsibility instead. It seems that such a deal has already been closed with Britain’s vaccine manufacturer AstraZeneca (see https://www.fr24news.com/a/2020/09/exclusive-astrazeneca-gets-partial-immunity-in-low-cost-vaccine-deal-with-eu.html ). If deals such as these were to extend to other competing manufacturers, we are in for very bad times. Because the vaccine producers then pass the cash register at the European taxpayers’ expenses two times: first upon cashing in when the orders have been delivered throughout this year 2021, and a second time when due responsibilities are mandated to either the European Commission and/or the individual European member states.

  4. RdM says:

    Thanks!

    I might have included this from 17 Nov 2020
    https://www.sott.net/article/444486-Stamping-on-the-anti-vaxxers

    For example, the Labour Party in the UK is now calling for emergency ‘anti-vaccine’ laws:

    Maybe more, say re masks, from 20 Apr 2020

    https://www.sott.net/article/434796-The-Science-is-Conclusive-Masks-and-Respirators-do-NOT-Prevent-Transmission-of-Viruses

    One can well read beyond that of course!
    Maybe we already had heard or knew of some of it.

    Best Regards!

  5. RdM says:

    COVID-19, ACE2, Nicotinic Receptors And The Cholinergic Anti-Inflammatory And Cognitive-Improving Pathway

    https://www.sott.net/article/432852-COVID-19-ACE2-Nicotinic-Receptors-And-The-Cholinergic-Anti-Inflammatory-And-Cognitive-Improving-Pathway

    19 Apr 2020

    Rose was on to this some time ago of course;-})

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.