(These are my views as a woman living in England, on how the culture and spirit of my country has changed over 50 years. Why the country does not feel protected or strong any more, how it has lost, and is losing it values and decency, and how we are daily losing our free speech.)
“Eli: You know what’s the good thing about no soap, you can smell a hijacker from a mile away” Movie: The Book of Eli, 2010
Some years ago, a friend sent me a clip from an SNL (Saturday Night Live) skit labelled Red Flag perfume by Chanel. It was an insightful and funny send up of the advertising industry for perfume, but in particular it depicted how people can make fools of themselves and others by attempting to use charm and trickery.
The Red Flag symbolism which is also meant to signal a warning, also reminded me of an article I once wrote called The London Red in which I exposed London red buses being used to advertise and promote LGBT rights and the counter attack by a reparative therapy organization being condemned by the then London mayor, Boris Johnson, who is now our Prime Minister.
Over the years, in my own small way, along with so many others, I have continued to raise my own Red Flags, but it also doesn’t mean to say that sometimes I haven’t fallen victim to some of the charm or the tricks that change agents and seducers can use in order to steal energy or make you subservient to their own particular motives or agenda at times.
During the Covid-19 exercise many flags have been raised which have been well researched and documented. Sometimes they are called false flags. However, all flags, both good and bad, can alert us to the very cruel way that innocent or uninformed people can be seduced, divided and conquered, and how clever advertising which also includes fear mongering and very confusing statistics, all mixed together like a very poison perfume can over-ride our sensibilities and our rational view at times. Somewhere out there is the genuine aroma, a combination of notes and a synergy labelled Truth.
One of the very first flags to be raised in relation to Covid-19, should have been why the UK Government was demonstrating reliance on the predictions of the possible mortality rate forecasted by Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College? Professor Ferguson, who before his resignation had sat on the governments Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, already had a long history of exaggerated predictions in relation to the possible outcomes of an infectious disease.
♦ In 2002, he predicted up to 50,000 people would die from Mad Cow Disease from beef. (177 died)
♦ In 2005, he predicted up to 200 million people could die from Bird flu (282 people died worldwide)
♦ In 2009, he predicted up to 65,000 UK deaths from Swine flu (457 died).
However, it was in 2001, that the Imperial College team were responsible, due to their forecasts, for the culling of 6 million cattle, pigs and sheep which cost the UK an estimated £10 billion. It is an issue which was very controversial at the time with farmers asking if the slaughter of all livestock was necessary. A full report on the Foot and Mouth disease of 2001 can be viewed in the footnotes.
Whilst some people believe that Professor Ferguson has possibly saved lives through his recommendations on the Foot and Mouth disease and our present day Covid-19, there is no scientific data that can prove lives have been saved. The question remains on why our government will still repeat that it is relying on ‘scientific data’ for its actions?
I suppose another red flag was the Prime Minister initially announcing to the public that they were to wash their hands for 20 seconds to the tune of ‘Happy Birthday’. I did find the instructions quite endearing to start with but only because of his unique personality. I think I might have been fooled. Had our previous prime minister suggested this, it would almost have certainly been a patronizing order from a parent to a child. However, the almost innocent way he encouraged this changed quite rapidly. Why?
From a rational request to wash hands with soap and water more often and more thoroughly, an incessant demand became more apparent as the days passed by.
We now have a country which is becoming paranoid about disinfecting ourselves and every single surface that we touch. Obsessive Compulsive Disorder may be on the rise. I believe we may now need a study of the effects that this has had on some of the population which will be funded by the taxpayer.
Another red flag to be raised has almost certainly been the social distancing which everyone has been expected to carry out in order to ‘save lives’. A more appropriate term would have been physical distancing. However, more importantly is how the actions from the term ‘Lockdown’ which was invented in a Californian prison system in 1973, has been so readily accepted!
In regards to the actions of a lockdown in a prison situation or a terrorist/shooter attack, lockdowns may be acceptable, but to enforce lockdowns under the possibility of a virus which may or may not harm someone based on low numbers of people who die from Covid-19 has more serious consequences and should have been questioned beforehand based on any scientific data that could have been provided which proves its effectiveness on locking down healthy people in relation to quarantining ill and vulnerable people instead. No such science was presented. No statistics were provided beforehand on the economic damage to a country.
According to some mental health research, which has pointed out the obvious, almost a quarter of adults have felt severe loneliness during the time of enforced lockdown and according to a leading psychiatrist and president of the Royal Society of Medicine Sir Simon Wessely:
“Some people will develop psychiatric conditions, mental health conditions. There will be a rise in depression. For some people, there will be specific stressors — the anxiety of either believing that you might be infecting the people you’ve been quarantined with — or been infected yourself”.
Whilst TV programming promotes happy family gatherings through the use of the latest technology, it is reported that the World Health Organization has reported they are ‘deeply troubled’ by the spike in domestic violence towards women and children during lockdown. I do not know if they are at all concerned about the abuse towards men, but the question should be why are ‘experts’ concerned after an event which should have been thought through more carefully before implementing a lockdown?
The rapid removal of many you tube interviews and face-book accounts, together with any relevant information which researchers may want to listen to or read about in order to further their knowledge on infectious diseases has raised yet another red flag.
Interviews which have included the research carried out by many eminent doctors and scientists in relation to Covid-19 have not been exempt from this attack.
Not only is there an army of companies collecting consumer behaviour and predictive analytics ever day but there are also forces deciding what you can watch or listen to on very basic information which is not obscene in any way, but only contrary to another organization’s view. This is an attack on free speech.
It has also been reported at the UK Government briefing by Defence Staff General Sir Nick Carter that the 77th Brigade has been countering misinformation online relating to Corona virus.
The 77 Brigade are a combined regular and reserve unit of the British Army. Their website states:
“77th Brigade is an agent of change; through targeted Information Activity and Outreach we contribute to the success of military objectives in support of Commanders, whilst reducing the cost in casualties and resources”.
Their website also states that they specialise in non-lethal forms of psychological warfare, using social media including face book and twitter to fight with information in response to external factors, like Russian misinformation.
Unfortunately, the mis-information that our own government has received and given out has not created any confidence that they possess the correct information.
Too many Red Flags
The conclusions that result from so many red flags too numerous to mention can sadly only result in one conclusion and outcome.
My views are that a quick return to normal and not a ‘new normal’ would be needed. However, sadly, even then there would never be the same trust. Civilizations are usually completely broken down so that they can be built up in a different way and too much damage has been done. The whole exercise has hit at the heart of every person who has smelled the dodgy synthetic perfume of deceivers. Who is who and what is what has been a game in which only God knows the outcome. We should listen to Him more.
The incentive to start afresh, to be creative individuals and independent and to provide for ourselves and our families need not be lost. Rise up, watch, wait and listen.
For we are a fragrance of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing; 2 Corinthians 2:15
© 2020 Shirley Edwards – All Rights Reserved
E-Mail Shirley Edwards: firstname.lastname@example.org