Sunday, April 11, 2021
HomeCOVID-19Why we need a Covid Nuremberg Trial

Why we need a Covid Nuremberg Trial

-

THE British Medical Journal (BMJ) published an editorial last year that accused politicians and governments of ‘suppressing science’ and of making bad policy based on narrow advice from people with ‘conflicting interests’. The piece was remarkable, not just because it was by a named physician, but because the BMJ carried it at all. Even more remarkable, in these highly censored times, is that it can still be accessed.

Dr Kamran Abbasi, the journal’s executive editor, suggested that since the onset of Covid-19, politicians throughout the world had wilfully neglected international and historical experience on managing pandemics, ignored established scientific advice and their own detailed plans, and followed instead a Communist strategy that has oppressed and harmed their people. All this in a vain attempt to be seen to be controlling the spread of a dangerous novel virus which turns out to be neither novel nor particularly dangerous to healthy people under 80 years old.

In a more recent article in the BMJ, in February, Abbasi characterises the widespread political response to Covid-19 as ‘social murder’. He cites Friedrich Engels’s description of the malign impact of the political and social power of the ruling elite on the working classes in England in the 19th century. He identifies the cause as indifference to the conditions of the poorest classes that led to suffering, disease and premature death.

Abbasi suggests that many politicians exhibit a similar lack of empathy for the masses of ‘ordinary people’ and that there is little evidence of contrition from them in their handling of Covid-19.

He judges their collective actions over the past year as so egregious that they warrant an international inquiry along the lines of the Nuremberg Trials, set up to recognise and to punish those responsible for the unprecedented suffering inflicted on civilians during the Second World War.

There was little precedent for that process as international tribunals were very weak. Nowadays, despite a proliferation of human rights laws, not much has changed. One might hope that a charge of a government causing mass civil disruption, harm and death could be heard at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, which ‘investigates and, where warranted, tries individuals charged with the gravest crimes of concern to the international community: genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and the crime of aggression’. As a court of last resort, it seeks to complement, not replace, national courts.

Unfortunately, crimes against humanity, as adjudicated by the International Criminal Court, do not currently include public health. David Scheffer, a former US ambassador for war crimes, suggests, however, that the application of public health malpractice could be broadened ‘to account for the administration of public health during pandemics’. In that case, public health malpractice might become a crime against humanity. Certainly something for policy makers and medical practitioners to consider.   

Another avenue for litigation might be a public action for ‘misconduct in public office’ against not only those directly involved in Covid policy and in government, but also against those who ‘facilitated’ the impact. This is an offence confined to those who are public office holders and is committed when the office holder acts (or fails to act) in a way that constitutes a breach of the duties of that office.

The offence might arguably catch policepersons, Covid wardens, health experts and strategists, doctors, nurses, and those imposing medically untested jabs on the populace. The offence is triable only on indictment and it carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

Back to earth with a bump. Any such investigation is highly unlikely, given the stranglehold that the elites have on our lives, but if such a miracle were to occur, investigators would want to look closely at Boris Johnson, Matt Hancock,and other ministers in the Cabinet. Members of Sage, led by Professors Whitty and Vallance and their communist pals, would certainly be in the frame, as would Neil Ferguson.  

Questions would necessarily be asked about decisions to remove elderly ‘bed-blockers’ from NHS facilities into private ‘care homes’, about who issued clinical instructions not to use cheap and proven treatments, such as Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, and who decided to force experimental and unproven medical treatments on to the entire population and to deny liberty and freedom to those who resist.  

Matters of state corruption must surely be examined, looking at how many excess deaths have there really been? What happened to influenza? How many identified reporting ‘errors’ does it take before a top official resigns? How long should ‘Test and Trace’ be allowed to fail before someone steps down?

Would the police or fraud investigators be able to establish who is benefiting from vaccine development and production? How many contracts for testing kits, PPE, handwash, and hotel quarantine rooms have been awarded to cronies and family contacts of politicians?

State corruption is unquestionably on the rise, without a whimper from opposition parties, and apparently with the collusion of the media, whose practitioners conduct their ‘business’ with wilful ignorance and craven compliance. Anybody who dares to speak truth to power is a Covid or vaccine denier, a covidiot or a granny killer.

A thoroughgoing investigation would show that politicians, Big Pharma, and the global elite are all responsible for this massive opportunistic fraud; so too are supine ‘scientists’ and ‘health experts’.

No such investigation is likely. Never have so many opposing voices been suppressed as during the UK’s pandemic response, never has a government relied for advice on people whose livelihoods and future careers are so closely tied to one industry, including being funded by and holding shares in vaccine companies.

Politicians claim to follow ‘the science’; they tell voters to trust them. Both are false claims. Science is an investigative method, a way of establishing how the world works, through observation and experiment. Science is not a religion, it has no doctrinal truths, and heresy is the only way that it progresses. Politicians, those publicly paid, democratically elected poodles, are not to be trusted. This last year proves it. QED. 

- Advertisement -

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We receive no independent funding and depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.

Kate Dunlop
Kate Dunlop is a retired banker and mediator.

Sign up for The ConWom News

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.