2024-01-26
Early in 2020, according to Professor Mark Woodhouse in his evidence to the Covid Inquiry, the BBC (no less) was reporting "misinformation". Yet it went uncorrected "throughout 2020" which surely makes it "disinformation" (as in "d" for "deliberate")?
But his declared suspicions about the real reason for this failure to report this pretty important truth to the public - that the risk of "dying from Covid" was vastly greater to the aged than to the young - had to do merely with justifying lockdown in the public mind.
This clearly marks him out as merely an amateur conspiracy theorist. A true conspiracy theorist would have recognised that if the actual impact of Covid was minimal for most of the population, then not only would lockdown never have been tolerated, nor would there have been any chance of jabbing the entire population with an untried and largely untested experimental gene therapy described as a "vaccine" in order to protect against a largely non-existent danger.
Big pharma would have been distraught - think of all the lives that would have been lost had the truth been reported to the wider public.
