‘His finest Hour’ – or ‘His final overreach’?


On this, the tenth day of February 2021, one year after the covid outbreak, it’s surprising but not unexpected that the writers, reporters and editors in ‘Our MSM’ focus on one covid item rather than another, namely Hancock’s latest travel quarantine ban. After all, travelling has been one of their main occupations during the cove year. More on that below. There’s another important bit of covid news which seems to have sunk without a trace.

Let’s look at that first – it’s about the WHO report on the origin of the covid virus. A WHO delegation had finally been permitted to visit Beijing and has published their findings. You may be relieved to hear that yes, it was a natural virus and wasn’t created in a lab – if you accept that China has been telling the truth. You won’t find any actual report in this morning’s MSM. There are two comment pieces only which are still around, one in the DT (paywalled link), one in the DM (link) where I found something which I didn’t know. It explains a lot though:

“That predecessor [of Ghebreyesus] was a Chinese national, Margaret Chan, who ran the WHO from 2006 to 2017. She now has a key role in the Communist regime, on the People’s Political Consultative Conference. China’s investment in time and money has paid off. Since the earliest days of the Covid-19 outbreak, it has used the WHO as a glove puppet.” (link)

Not only do we know that Ghebreyesus, the current WHO chief, got his job with the help of China – we now can draw our own conclusions on why the WHO reported on the WuFlu origin as they did. Well, that’s alright then – we won’t need to worry our pretty, empty heads with thoughts on the whys and wherefores of that WuFlu! 

Instead, let’s relish the outcry in ‘Our MSM’ over “Hancock’s latest”: ten years in jail for lying! Yes, it’s jail time if one lies about where one has been on holidays! This is the punishment for trying to avoid spending ten days in ‘Hotel Quarantine’ when returning from ‘red list countries’:

“Matt Hancock said new restrictions for travellers arriving in Britain would be applied from Monday. Anyone from 33 “red list” countries who lies about where they have travelled from will be prosecuted and face a maximum sentence of ten years. Those who try to avoid quarantine could be fined £10,000.” (link, paywalled)

In a rush to be seen to be ‘tough on covid – tough on the causes of covid’, Labour jumped in with both feet:

“Labour called for an extension of the ban, presently focused on 33 “red list” countries, to all nations reporting cases of strains from South Africa and Brazil.” (link, paywalled)

It remained for Lord Sumption to point out some very uncomfortable truths about “Hancock’s latest”. Writing in the DT, he firstly lays into dear Matt in no uncertain terms (my emphasis): 

“Mr Hancock’s connection with reality, which has been getting looser for some time, has finally snapped. To enforce his hotel quarantine rules and keep out unwelcome mutations of the Covid-19 virus, there are to be sentences of up to ten years in jail for failing to disclose that you have been to a ‘red list’ country. Ten years is the maximum sentence for threats to kill, non-fatal poisoning or indecent assault. Does Mr Hancock really think that non-disclosure of a visit to Portugal is worse than the large number of violent firearms offences or sexual offences involving minors, for which the maximum is seven years?” (paywalled link)

Just so – and Lord Sumption makes it clear that this isn’t about letting the WFH crowd get away with their ‘getaway’ holiday plans when he writes next:

“The hotel quarantine rules are a form of imprisonment in solitary confinement. They are brutal, inhumane and disproportionate. They are economically extremely destructive. They are also of limited value because the virus is already endemic in the UK and spontaneously mutates all the time. Unwelcome mutations are just as likely to originate in the UK. The so-called Kent variant probably did. So did several cases of the South African variant. At the moment, we are probably a net exporter of mutant viruses.” (paywalled link)

Indeed so. Apparently Lord Sumption understands better that viruses mutate all the time than the covid emperor himself. The next legal points he makes are hugely important (my emphasis):

“Penal policy seeks to match the sentence to the gravity of the crime. When policy-makers impose savage and disproportionate sentences, it is usually because the rule in question is not widely respected and breaches are hard to detect. They reckon that if they can only catch ten per cent of offenders, they need to impose spectacular penalties on them so as to deter the other ninety per cent. This technique is arbitrary and unfair. It also tends to discredit the law. There is something wrong with a law that is so little respected and so difficult to enforce that this kind of thing is necessary.” (paywalled link)

The last point is not only important in regard to Hancock’s latest policy – it is important because it also serves to denounce the mindset of Labour who actually demand ‘more of this thing’. Forget that some Tory MPs are upset about this – it’s too late.

This is the fruit of a year of Fear & Hysteria in ‘Our MSM’. It is in line with some covid-and-lockdown ideologues on SAGE and ‘Our Sacred Cow’ who want to achieve ‘Zero Covid’. Well, why not: “we” also want to achieve ‘Zero Carbon’, so what’s the problem? The lemmings – that’s us – have already shown they’ll obey  anything!  Lockdown Sceptics has a segment on that ‘endeavour’ in their Newsletter this morning (link). 

Returning to Labour: there’s another ‘thing’ they’re really upset about. It’s about the fact that Hancock ‘took cash’ from the Institute of Economic Affairs – a ‘orrible right-wing Think Tank, to be denounced by all proper-thinking Labourites, especially since it is ‘anti-NHS’, as The Times cries in their headline above their report:

“Matt Hancock is under pressure to return donations from a think tank that criticised the NHS as “nothing special” and unworthy of the “adulation” it has received during the pandemic. […] An IEA report to be published today said the idea that the NHS has done exceptionally well during challenging circumstances was “a false narrative”.” (link, paywalled)

Oh dear! This is a more refined version of the ‘cancel culture’: demand past donations be returned for something published well after that fact. Interestingly, it’s the DT which has some rather juicy bits of information. First, there’s this quote from the IEA:

“There is no rational basis for the adulation the NHS is currently receiving, and no reason to be ‘grateful’ for the fact that we have it,” argued Kristian Niemietz, the think tank’s head of Health and Welfare. “It should go without saying that if the UK did not have the NHS, it would not have no healthcare system. It would have a different healthcare system,” he wrote.” (paywalled link)

Who could argue with that – except Labourites. It’s as if Labour cannot bear to have anything or anyone touch “Our NHS” because, looking back over the decades since it was created by Aneurin Bevan (never mind that he relied on and used strategy papers developed by Tory ministers during WWII), this is the one and only achievement they can still desperately nail to their political mast. So it comes as no surprise when we next read:

“Angela Rayner, Labour’s deputy leader, said the report was “disgusting”, adding: “Matt Hancock must condemn this report and return the money he has taken from the Chair of the IEA who attack our NHS staff and want to privatise and sell off our country’s greatest institution”. (paywalled link)

However, the DT gives us this beautiful example for Labour hypocrisy, putting their virtue-signalling into perspective:

“Ms Rayner and Sir Keir Starmer, the Labour leader, themselves received more than £100,000 in leadership donations from a hedge fund manager whose fund holds investments in US private healthcare firms. Both received money from Martin Taylor, whose firm Crake Asset Management has investments in three US healthcare and insurance firms, one of which runs the Harley Street Clinic and the Portland Hospital in London.” (paywalled link)

Need anything more be said about Labour and the two kneelers at their top? I think not! There are two other ‘health care’ developments in ‘Our Sacred Cow’ which are of no concern to Ms Rayner or indeed Labour when they can virtue-signal so virtuously.

One is that NHS chiefs told BJ that “we” must live with waiting lists longer than a year because ‘covid!”. There are now nearly 200,000 patients waiting for over a year, compared to just over 1,600 before the outbreak (link, paywalled). Don’t’ expect Labour to criticise that!

And then, finally, there’s the latest from the Brighton and Sussex NHS Trust. They’ve had time to do this, despite covid: “Midwives have been told to say “chestfeeding” instead of “breastfeeding” and to replace the term “mother” with “mother or birthing parent” as part of moves to be more trans-friendly.” (link, paywalled). Will midwives now be called ‘birthing-parent-persons’?

Madness reigns supreme – in ‘Our NHS’, in Labour, in the covid empire, in ‘Our MSM’. Meanwhile let me suggest that Lord Sumption’s remarks deserve a wide audience because he describes in exemplary fashion the ongoing destruction of our society by the covid emperors, aided and abetted by Labour. 

Is it too much to hope that ‘Hancock’s latest’ is the overreach which breaks the back of that famous camel?




Photo by UK Prime Minister

Print Friendly, PDF & Email