The Reality of ‘Protect the NHS’ & ‘A Good Death’

The Reality of ‘Protect the NHS’ & ‘A Good Death’

By TLB Contributing Partner: Christina England, BA, Hons

All through the pandemic, the UK government’s slogan was, ‘Stay at Home, Protect the NHS (National Health Service), Save Lives.’ This slogan was initiated by NHS’s Chief Medical Officer, Professor Chris Whitty, to protect the NHS from becoming overwhelmed with high numbers of COVID-19 patients.

In 1948, the NHS organization was introduced to make healthcare accessible to everyone. This meant that anyone who required medical treatment was able to receive it, free of charge. It is, therefore, ludicrous to ask the sick, injured and dying to stay away from an organization designed to give them the free medical care and attention that they so desperately need, at a time when they need it the most.

History of the NHS

Historic UK, when referring to the NHS, stated that:

“The National Health Service, abbreviated to NHS, was launched by the then Minister of Health in Attlee’s post-war government, Aneurin Bevan, at the Park Hospital in Manchester. The motivation to provide a good, strong and reliable healthcare to all was finally taking its first tentative steps.

The creation of the NHS in 1948 was the product of years of hard work and a motivation from various figures who felt the current healthcare system was insufficient and needed to be revolutionised.”

In other words, the NHS is a healthcare system, a corporation, offering free medical care to anyone who requires it.

Therefore, you cannot protect it from anything.

Despite this fact, however, in the midst of a ‘so-called’ pandemic, the NHS and the government decided that it was a good idea to discourage anyone who needed the NHS from using it.

So, Who or What Were the UK Public Really Being Asked to Protect?

In January 2021, the UK government launched a press release, which stated that:

• “New TV ad fronted by the Chief Medical Officer, Professor Chris Whitty urges people to stay at home in the face of rapidly rising rate of coronavirus infections and pressures facing the NHS.

• Massive public information campaign will run across TV, radio, out of home and on social media from tonight.”

Within hours of the broadcast, bright yellow signs, urging the sick and dying to stay away from hospitals and doctors surgeries, were plastered everywhere.

Former Prime Minister Boris Johnson stated:

“Our hospitals are under more pressure than at any other time since the start of the pandemic, and infection rates across the entire country continue to soar at an alarming rate.

The vaccine has given us renewed hope in our fight against the virus but we must not be complacent. The NHS is under severe strain and we must take action to protect it, both so our doctors and nurses can continue to save lives and so they can vaccinate as many people as possible as quickly as we can.

I know the last year has taken its toll – but your compliance is now more vital than ever. So once again, I must urge everyone to stay at home, protect the NHS and save lives.” (Own emphasis)

However, if the NHS is a healthcare system, a corporation, then who or what were we really protecting? Was it the vaccination policy, or was it something far more sinister?

A Good Death

Radical’s Maajid Nawaz believes that he has the answer.

In a video titled, On Midazolam & End of Life “Care” Pathways (see this video below), dated 14 August 2022, he stated that:

“What we learned during the COVID period, and this much I think, that most of our viewers would agree with, is that the health system that we had previously assumed was there to serve us, to protect us, we were told all of a sudden, that that wasn’t the case. That rather, we, that it was our jobs to serve the health system, to protect it. And you will remember the three pronged slogan, ‘Stay at Home, Save Lives and Protect the NHS.’ Surely, it was meant to be, the NHS that was set up, to protect us. But suddenly we were expected to protect it, to serve it and the reason given was that our individual lives were outweighed by the needs of society. But the needs of society, as defined to us by our government. To the extent that, for example, people were being turned away from our hospitals because what was deemed to be the top priority, was to treat an illness, that it later transpired had an infection fatality rate, as recorded in Hansard in our parliament as 0.096% …

That is similar to the flu, and yet there were people told to stay at home and not go to the hospital, even if they had cancer, or other life threatening illnesses.”

Nawaz went on to stress that the decision to stay at home, protect the NHS and save lives was a political one, put in place to deter us from going to the hospital, even if we were dying from cancer.

Why, and what was really happening in our hospitals? Why did hundreds of thousands of patients, supposedly die of COVID, when according to Nawaz, the Hansard had stated that COVID only had a fatality rate of 0.096%, a fatality rate, which is actually similar to the flu?

The answer may have been at the beginning of his video.

Right at the beginning of his video, Nawaz played a recording of an interview between Member of Parliament (MP), Dr. Luke Evans, and former Health Secretary, Matt Hancock.

Dr. Evans explained that a ‘good death,’ needed three things: it needed equipment, it needed medication and it needed the staff to administer it. He continued his interview by asking Mr. Hancock a series of questions.

He asked Mr. Hancock whether or not the NHS had enough syringe drivers to deliver the medication required to keep people comfortable when they are passing away?

Mr. Hancock replied:

“Yes, erm, right now we do.”

Dr. Evans continued:

“And the second one is, with that, the syringe drivers to deliver medication, particularly things like, Midazolam and morphine, do you have any precautions put in place so that we have enough of those medications to be delivered?”

Mr. Hancock answered:

“Yes, we do.”

This interview is of particular interest because, according to Nawaz, the Greek translation of a ‘good death’ is euthanasia.

Nawaz stated that:

“So, in that video, when you see Dr. Luke Evans, who is a conservative MP, asking former Health Secretary Matt Hancock about a ‘good death,’ you could read that, in the context of Midazolam, where the video comes, you could read that, as a question around involuntary state euthanasia. I say, could, because it depends on whether Matt Hancock, the former Health Secretary at the time, and Dr. Luke Evans, who also happens to be a conservative MP, it depends whether they knew what they were doing when they used these words.”

Nawaz continued by explaining that when given together, these drugs can cause death, if given in large quantities. They do this by repressing the respiratory system and causing the patient to have memory loss.

If this is true, then it is entirely possible that the UK government were in league with the NHS to euthanize hundreds of thousands of COVID patients behind closed doors.

It has since been widely publicized that both, Dr. Evans and Mr. Hancock knew exactly what they were saying when they used these phrases in their interview.

Dr. Evans made it perfectly clear throughout the interview that both Midazolam and morphine were required to facilitate a ‘good death.’

Could this be the real reason why the government were telling everyone to stay away from the NHS? After all, this admonition did include friends, loved ones and the families of COVID patients. Was it the government’s intention all along to keep people away from the NHS so that they could test out mass euthanasia? It is an interesting concept and one that would need to take place in secret.

The Liberty Beacon believe that mass murder was exactly their intention, as the same two drugs were used in UK care homes at the time of the pandemic.

For more information watch:

••••

••••

••••

Read more articles by Christina England

••••

About the Author: Christina England, BA Hons, Research Journalist and Author

Christina was born and educated in London, U.K. She left school to work in a children’s library, specialising in storytelling and book buying. In 1978, Christina changed her career path to dedicate her time to caring for the elderly and was awarded the title of Care Giver of the Year for her work with the elderly in 1980.

After taking an A Level in Psychology and a BTEC in Learning Support, Ms. England spent many years researching vaccines and adverse reactions. She gained a Higher National Diploma in Journalism and Media Studies in 2010 and in 2016 she gained a BA Hons degree in Literature and Humanities. She currently writes for VacTruth, Health Impact News, GreenMedInfo, The Liberty Beacon, Vaccine Impact and Medical Kidnap on immunisation safety and efficacy.

She has co-authored the book – Shaken Baby Syndrome or Vaccine Induced Encephalitis – Are Parents Being Falsely Accused? with Dr. Harold Buttram and Vaccination Policy and the UK Government: The Untold Truth with Lucija Tomljenovic PhD, which are sold on Amazon. She also compiled the book Shattered Dreams: The HPV Vaccine Exposed

Her website is Parents and Carers Against Medical Injustice

••••

Checkout TLBTalk.com:

Click Here to Visit the TLBTalk.com Site

••••

••••

Stay tuned to …

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.