Bob Moran writes on Twitter:
There’s a very worrying and ignorant narrative trying to take hold regarding the injections. Many late-to-the-party critics of the jabs completely fail to acknowledge a fundamental truth. Because it exposes how morally reprehensible all of them are.
To their core.
Their position is that IF everything we had been told about these injections being necessary, safe and effective had been true, the situation would have been fine and their promotion of them would have been acceptable.
Only in hindsight, with revelations about how ineffective and dangerous these drugs are, do they have anything to apologise for. And only with the benefit of that knowledge should any attempt be made to stop them.
This is complete nonsense.
Let’s ignore the fact that it was BLINDINGLY obvious that these products were unnecessary, ineffective and dangerous from about January 2021 onwards. Let’s also assume that everything the manufacturers and advisory committees claimed about them had been true: They were absolutely essential to address a genuine emergency, they were as safe as could reasonably be expected, and they worked as advertised.
Absolutely none of those things would have excused anybody promoting or supporting the rollout of these drugs.
Here’s why: In 2020, governments all over The West had taken the barbaric and illegal decision to remove basic rights and freedoms from their citizens, in the name of public health policies. The implementation of these policies was understood, from the outset, by those who enacted them, to kill hundreds of thousands of people.
If they didn’t kill you, they were likely to make you poorer, devastate your mental health, destroy your business, deny you access to health care and more besides. Nobody, anywhere, was unaffected by lockdowns.
These injections were presented to the population as a CONDITION for these tyrannical, murderous, completely unnecessary restrictions on freedom being lifted. For some people, it was implied that they could lose their ability to earn a living, travel abroad, receive medical treatment or participate in free society, if they refused to take the jabs.
You cannot, ever, offer a permanent medical procedure to people under these conditions. No matter how safe or effective said procedure might be and no matter how severe the illness it is supposed to address.
The only way in which this would have been approaching ethical acceptability (again, assuming the drugs were not, in fact, designed solely to cause injury and death) is if all restrictions on freedom had been lifted prior to anyone getting a shot and absolutely no link had been established between the uptake of the drug and the future implementation of lockdown policies.
As a doctor, or politician, or broadcaster, your ONLY obligation was to state unequivocally that nobody could be offered these procedures under such coercive conditions because it totally violated fundamental medical ethics. You didn’t need to see any studies or graphs or models. You didn’t need to trawl through all the trial literature, underlining stuff with your stupid red biro. You just needed to say, “No. Not like this.”
Failure to take that position demonstrated a completely unacceptable disregard for the moral principles that should govern our approach to healthcare and the role of medical professionals and government.
Believing all the obvious lies you were told about these drugs at the beginning was not, and is not, an excuse for your endorsement of their roll out. There WAS no excuse for this.
If we fail to understand this truth, we set a very dangerous precedent for what could happen in the future. We also allow certain figures to maintain positions of authority and leadership who have demonstrated an astonishing lack of moral understanding, not to mention common sense.
You were wrong. And you weren’t wrong because you were lied to.
You were wrong because you’re incredibly bad people whose opinions and advice on all matters should now be regarded as irrelevant trash.
(Tom: While I agree wholeheartedly that their actions were 100 percent wrong, I don’t believe we should label them as bad people. People not to be trusted, people who need to be removed from their positions, people who need to be educated on human rights and corrected, but not bad.)