PAPERS LARGELY IGNORE INQUIRY EVIDENCE OVER COVID JAB HARMS
Staggering, blatant censorship of victims calls editors' motives into question
By Oliver May
EVIDENCE of Covid jab deaths and harms given to the Covid Inquiry has been ignored by most of the mainstream print media.
The BBC also chose not to report the evidence. It did, however, believe that far more newsworthy was the fact that care home residents are now being given the Covid booster, publishing this story on its website a day before the Inquiry heard about multiple jab deaths and injuries.
Speaking on Twitter about his attendance at the Covid Inquiry on Wednesday, Alex Mitchell, who lost his leg following complications from a Covid jab, said he felt it was a force for good. And at least on the surface, it was. He wrote: “It was a very emotional day for us all and tears freely flowed from many. First time I actually felt like we were being listened to and acknowledged.”
Except they were not.
As far as the print media were concerned, this is all the ‘acknowledgment’ victims of the jab received:
Express: 3 paragraphs [99 words]. Page 6
Telegraph: 10 paragraphs [371 words]. Page 6
Mirror: Did not cover
Guardian: Did not cover
Times: Did not cover
Sun: Did not cover
Independent: Did not cover
i: Did not cover
This despite thousands of words and pages of newsprint given up for previous submissions to the Covid Inquiry:
It is now harder than ever to argue that there is not an agenda driven by print media hierarchy and the UK Government on what it can and cannot publish.
Consider that every national newspaper on Thursday carried a large NHS advert about the signs of a heart attack:
And that the i newspaper, instead of reporting from the Inquiry, decided that a better story came from Greenland:
And The Sun, despite having no room it seems for news from the Inquiry, did manage to carve out some space for the earth-shattering revelation of a shortage of pizza dough:
Consider also that the sinister C40 Cities agenda which, as previously reported by News Uncut, has set what is calls ambitious targets for 2030 including no private car ownership, no meat or dairy consumption, only three pieces of new clothing per person per year and one short-haul flight per person every three years, has still not seen the light of day in the mainstream print press, despite a wealth of evidence being passed to at least one national daily.
Speaking at its preliminary hearing, Anna Morris KC, who represents three groups — the Vaccine Injured and Bereaved (VIB) UK, Scottish Vaccine Injury Group and UK CV Family — hinted that there was some hierarchical agenda to silence voices from the official Government mantra.
Morris said: “The Covid vaccine injured and bereaved have been marginalised in the past three years, struggling to have their voices and experiences heard, having gone from being fit and healthy people, leading full and active lives, to being disabled and dependent on benefits.
“They have suffered additional trauma due to the lack of medical, psychological and financial support available. These are not people who are dealing witha sore arm or flu-like symptoms, these are people who have had a stroke, a heart attack or lost a limb, people whose bodies are full of clots, people who have had debilitating migraines almost every single day for up to three years, and people who now have allergic reactions to everything they consume, even water, and young women who had hoped to become mothers but whose periods have stopped completely.
“These are not the normal side effects anybody would reasonable expect from a pharmaceutical product. These are people who have lost their livelihoods, their friends and, in some cases, their families.
“In addition, the vaccine injured and bereaved can’t process their trauma because they’re fighting every step of the way for recognition, validation, care and support. They can’t express or record their experiences without being misunderstood, misrepresented or used for somebody else’s agenda.”
She added: “The vaccine injured and bereaved have spent the past three years, both individually and as a collective, asking for help from this country’s medical professionals, mainstream media and members of parliament. They have been met with standard responses that promote the vaccine and that completely fail to address the needs of the injured and bereaved.
“An analogy can be drawn with listening to someone who has been in a serious car accident and then telling them about all the benefits of cars and then how many people haven’t been killed by cars. No other medical condition or injury is treated in this way.”
Morris also told the Inquiry that current ‘official’ figures for those who have been accepted for jab damage payments from the ‘inadequate’ compensation scheme are likely to be far higher.
She said: “What is required is both radical and urgent. It [the vaccine compensation scheme] is no longer fit for purpose.
“As of July of this year, the scheme has received a total of 6,399 claims of which 2,352 have been notified of an outcome.
“Over 500 of those claims have been waiting for more than 12 months with 166 of them waiting for over 18 months waiting to receive an outcome. 96 per cent of those claims have been refused.
“Many have been turned down on causation despite having evidence from multiple consultants that their injuries started following vaccination.
“My Lady [Lady Hallett], you have also indicated that you intend to look at post-marketing surveillance of the vaccine, such as the Yellow Card monitoring and reporting system. The reality is that, despite the presence of this system, we still have no idea how many people have actually had an adverse reaction to the Covid-19 vaccine.
“For example, according to figures updated in April 2023, 53.8 million people in the UK had the first dose of the Covid vaccine and 50.7m people had the second.
“Those numbers are reported up until September of last year. That leaves just over 3m people, or six per cent of the UK population, who stopped after the first dose.
“That is clearly six per cent of the population who did not come forward for the second part of what was clearly marketed as a two-part vaccine and, my Lady, you should be concerned about the reasons why that six per cent did not take the second dose.
“One reason may have been that they did not feel able to have the second dose because of how unwell the first dose made them feel.
“So in our submission the Inquiry should, as a matter of urgency, investigate firstly the effectiveness o the passive reporting system, such as the Yellow Card scheme and, secondly, any other ways to determine exactly how many people have been impacted by an adverse reaction.”
And she added: “There is a particular significance to these Module 4 hearings taking place in the autumn. Those were present are concerned that, given the reported return of Covid-19 variants and the discussion in government and the media of a winter vaccine roll-out, that their experiences will once again be censored and ignored as they don’t fit with the government narrative around vaccines.”
And she was right.
I’m not surprised by the MSM lack of clarity on Covid deaths as & injuries. It’s a real sin for those people who are no longer here because of MSM & Others like NHS for NOT TELLING THE TRUTH!
Occasionally you might here some rare admission by say the BBC. That said those who admit such things open themselves up for responsibility. The guilty thing is is to continue the deadly narrative in the hope that people don’t see them. Well, we do.
Someday the dead will have their say ⚖️👈🏻👍👊🏻
Completely and utterly heart breaking. That they have been unheard and ignored for so long adds hugely to their suffering. It is disgraceful. My husband was injured by his second injection with nerve damage in his arm and shoulder and is completely ignored by his doctor. But his injury is minor compared to what these people have suffered. I wonder how many other people there are like my husband who have not reported anything and whose doctors have not reported anything. I dread to think what the true figures would be.