Journalist Iain Davis recently excoriated the BBC for its hypocrisy. The corporation claims – incessantly – that its journalism is built on the highest standards of accuracy and fairness. “Trust is the foundation of the BBC. We’re independent, impartial and honest.”  Davis shows this is patently untrue.

Despite the reckless, irresponsible and partisan coverage of the “Covid 19 pandemic” Auntie Beeb will doubtless reassure the public that the  broadcaster’s  values remain sacrosanct. For instance in 2013, in the wake of the Jimmy Savile scandal the BBC Management Board said:

People expect more from the BBC. Our audiences and licence fee payers expect high standards of creativity, impartiality and distinctiveness. They expect us to behave with the utmost integrity and decency. They expect us to live up to our stated Values. They are right to do so. The people who help to make the BBC what it is – our staff, our freelancers, our managers, our leaders, our contributors, our suppliers and our partners – expect more of us too. They have the right to expect the BBC to be an organisation which behaves with the highest ethics and standards, where their talents, hard work and loyalty are matched by an experience or relationship with the BBC which is truly rewarding, fulfilling, positive and respectful. The BBC must be an organisation which lives and breathes its Values.

Two years earlier however the BBC told a tribunal that its values were really no more than a mission statement, a goal to aspire to rather than a belief.  Traducing its values in court did not prevent the corporation from continuing to promote their sanctity more publicly. In June 2013 the Director General of the BBC, Tony Hall was informed of this glaring breach of public trust and chose not to respond.

Anthony William Hall, Baron Hall of Birkenhead, CBE is a British life peer. He was Director-General of the BBC between April 2013 and August 2020. More importantly before he left the corporation he formally introduced censorship as a strategy for augmenting public trust in the BBC’s  avowed ‘gold standard’ journalism.

In a recent study Elizabeth Woodworth found that Hall’s intervention – initially aimed at the BBC’s deadliest enemy, the ‘anti-vaxxer’- became part of an international process of editorial standardization co-ordinated by the Trusted News Initiative. It has delivered unprecedented news coverage of a monopolized message:

1. The pandemic threatens the survival of all humanity
2. There is no therapy to cure the sick
3. It is necessary to confine the whole population, and
4. Delivery will come only from a vaccine.

In July 2019, before the pandemic, the UK and Canadian governments hosted the FCO Global Conference on Media Freedom, where then BBC Director-General Tony Hall announced: “Last month I convened, behind closed doors, a Trusted News Summit at the BBC, which brought together global tech platforms and publishers. The goal was to arrive at a practical set of actions we can take together, right now, to tackle the rise of misinformation and bias….I’m determined that we use that [BBC] unique reach and trusted voice to lead the way – to create a global alliance for integrity in news. We’re ready to do even more to help promote freedom and democracy worldwide.” The initial Trusted News partners in attendance were the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), Facebook, Financial Times, First Draft, Google, The Hindu, and The Wall Street Journal. This was the embryonic start of a soon-to-become global media-wide Early Warning System that would rapidly alert members to “disinformation which threatens human life or disrupts democracy during elections.

Two weeks after the WHO announced the Covid-19 pandemic on March 11, 2020, the Trusted News Initiative announced plans “to tackle harmful coronavirus disinformation.”  By then the media partners had expanded to include Twitter, Microsoft, Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, Reuters, and the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.

The TNI next agreed to engage with a new verification technology called Project Origin, led by a coalition of the BBC, CBC/Radio-Canada, Microsoft and The New York Times – with a mandate to identify non-authorized news stories for suppression. In July, 2020, Eric Horvitz, Chief Scientific Officer for Microsoft said: “We’ve forged a close relationship with the BBC and other partners on Project Origin, aimed at methods and standards for end-to-end authentication of news and information.” By the end of 2020 the BBC had identified scientific assessment of the risks posed by Covid 19 and the safety of the vaccines as a category of disinformation.

Woodworth notes:

The TNI reports Covid-19 health policy from the world’s major public health agencies, including the World Health Organization (WHO), the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the US National Institutes of Health (NIH).This policy is passed down through national and state governments, who convey it to the public via their media and websites, along with local case reports (based on the questionable PCR test) and deaths. Unfortunately, this top-down leadership has at best been illogical and inconsistent, and at worst corrupted by the vast profits of the vaccine industry.

The TNI has effectively suppressed scientific and rational public debate about the pandemic and possible public health responses. Investigation of the origin of the SARS -COV-2 virus is off-limits. Prophylactic and early treatment using a range of safe, inexpensive and readily available drugs and substances has been discredited. This has paved the way for Emergency Use Authorisation for the vaccines which can only be granted in the absence of such alternative treatments.

The expert views of hundreds of eminent health professionals have been banned. The record number of serious post-vaccine adverse events and deaths are not reported or investigated by the mainstream media. Considerations of natural immunity are taboo. Pushing highly profitable but failing experimental vaccines, extending vaccination to children and touting vaccine passports which serve no beneficial health purpose is endorsed as impartial journalism. Although the role of co-morbidities is central, no public service health advice is offered.

TNI Director Jessica Cecil explained why this censorship is necessary at the Trust In News Conference,’ in April, 2021:

First, those pushing disinformation are learning from us – the established news organisations. Increasingly, their content is highly produced. We have relied on our own high production values being one of the ways audiences know they can trust us: we can’t rely on that implicit signifier to our audiences any longer. Anti-vax content often uses interviews with people who have medical degrees for instance. And there is frequently a grain of truth to what is claimed. That makes untangling the true from the false harder…”

Ms Cecil is Head of Business Management at the BBC.

Meanwhile, Project Origin is the engineering approach spearheaded by the BBC, Microsoft, CBC/Radio-Canada and the New York Times to detecting the provenance of media and fighting deep fakes. The ambition is to make it a global standard used everywhere. This is a work in progress – but the role of the BBC has never been more important.

A more plausible explanation is that the massive scale of the Covid deception requires a dedicated high-tech unit to ensure the official narrative is not threatened by competent journalism. Iain Davis illustrates the issue in his investigation into the surge of deaths in nursing homes following  the lockdown imposed in Britain in March 2020.

A year later a number of mainstream media (MSM) articles have emerged confirming, what appears to have been, a policy that would inevitably maximise the risks to the most vulnerable. As usual, the possibility of deliberate policy intent is never broached in any of these MSM pieces. Their reports uncritically cite statements by politicians and consistently assume that these policies were mistakes and promote the notion that lessons need to be learned. Speaking in June 2020 about the high risk discharge of 25,000 vulnerable patients into care setting, where they received neither medical care nor adequate social care, the former Health Secretary and chairman of the Health Select Committee, Jeremy Hunt, was unquestioningly reported as saying: “It seems extraordinary that no one appeared to consider the clinical risk to care homes despite widespread knowledge that the virus could be carried asymptomatically” Leaving aside the clear scientific proof that there is no such thing as asymptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the evidence suggests that these were neither mistakes nor failures. Yet all we see from the mainstream media is a free pass for the politicians and a blanket refusal to ever question their deceitful statements.

For Davis it is unconscionable to simply ignore what appears to have been a deliberate and illegal government policy of large scale euthanasia in the UK. He highlights the following facts:

• During an allegedly unprecedented health crisis the UK government using section 14 of the Coronavirus Act removed the NHS duty to assess a patient’s health status (and conditions) before discharging them from hospital.
• The UK Government with the NHS set out its plans on the 17th March 2020 to free up NHS capacity – which existed in abundance- via rapid discharge into the community and reducing planned care. Vulnerable patients were discharged into care homes without assessing their “eligibility for healthcare.”
• On 19th March 2020 the HCID group of Public Health England and the Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) unanimously agreed to downgrade COVID 19, from a High Consequence Infectious Disease, due to low mortality. On the same day the government issued instructions to the NHS that they must discharge as many patients as possible.
• On 2nd April 2020 the NHS combined this with instructions that care home residents should not be conveyed to hospital. On the 6th April they issued guidance to GP’s which stated all patients should be triaged remotely.
• Once the vulnerable were trapped in abandoned care homes, which were knowingly understaffed, the remaining, unprotected staff were then left to deal with both their own safety fears and the mounting mortality. The government decided this was an opportune moment to suspend all safety inspections in both hospital and care settings.
• The widespread use of Hospital Trust gagging orders (non disclosure agreements) was also in place. Doctors who did speak out were disciplined or sacked. At the same time, Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) notices were being attached to vulnerable people’s care plans, often without their consent or even their knowledge.
• In March 2020 the NHS purchased the equivalent of two years worth of supply of the potentially life-ending medication midazolam. French suppliers were then given regulatory approval by the MHRA to sell additional stock to the NHS. This was then distributed for out of hospital use in the community.
• In 2020 the NHS treatment guidelines for COVID 19 patients, who were deemed to be “agitated,” was start with Morphine 20mg and Midazolam 20mg, precisely the mechanical syringe used at Gosport War Memorial. Police are still investigating an estimated 15,000 deaths that occurred at the hospital between 1987 and 2001. An inquiry has already found that at least 456 people’s lives were “shortened” through the unwarranted use of unnecessary medication.
• There are numerous reasons to suspect that the huge increase in midazolam ordered by the NHS, with the full knowledge of the government, was intended for this purpose.

In June 2020 Davis estimated that between 34 000 and 56 000 people could have died as a result of the lockdown. He suggests a thorough, truly independent investigation and prosecutions for malfeasance in office wherever it is identified.

One of the consequences of the war on dissident scientists is the fear of publishing under your real name. Hence “The PCR Disaster, Evolution and Genesis of the Drosten Test’ appears under the nom-de-plume, Illa. A free down load is available.

The “Corman-Drosten” scientific paper, “Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR”,  published by “Eurosurveillance” on 23 January 2020 provided a test for SARS-CoV-2 enabling cases to be detected and tracked worldwide. This enabled Worldometer on 2 August 2021 to report a total of just under 220 million cases, of which more than 196 million have recovered, and 4,5 million deaths.

An effort to have the paper retracted has been unsuccessful but has the merit of drawing attention to the document on which the SARS-COV-2 pandemic has been founded. Victor Corman and Christian Drosten are associate editors on Eurosurveillance’s editorial board, a fact they may account for how the paper was peer-reviewed and published in the space of 24 hours. A third co-author of the paper Olfert Landt is the founder of TIB Molbiol, a bio-tech company that produces diagnostic test kits.

The Illa tome critically exposes a murky financial and scientific history that began with the sale of PCR patents by Californian bio-tech company Cetus to pharmaceutical giant Roche for $300 million in 1992. Roche
expanded the potential uses of the technology by licensing it in
paternity testing and infectious disease diagnostics. This
is how PCR entered AIDS research in the 1990s and, by extension,
clinical virology, a development that Kary Mullis, the inventor of PCR, regarded as an abuse of the technology.

In 2020 long-time collaborators Drosten and Landt found a way to use the PCR test to resolve a problem that had scuppered all previous attempts to peddle pandemics – a rapidly declining number of victims. Remarkably, without a virus to hand, they got the WHO to ignore guidelines and sanction a 45 cycle threshold protocol for PCR amplification guaranteed to provide positives; and to change the definition of the disease to  ensure these positives would be regarded as cases.

In 2003 (SARS 1)…an epidemiological link was required and there were no test-positives without symptoms, because symptomless people were not tested. So only a very small group of people were eligible for a test, and without symptomless test-positives, no asymptomatic transmission could then be construed. In 2020, on the other hand, there are no corresponding preconditions for testing, so now everybody is a potential PCR candidate, possibly even several times. Moreover, it is now the positive test alone that makes one a case by definition, with matching, mismatching, missing, unknown symptoms…Presumably, the current pandemic would have been over long ago if the WHO definition of 2003 with its completely different emphasis was still in place.

Instead it appears that gratuitously vaccinating children in the UK is next on the agenda.