Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…

So, now we know what it’s all about: it’s an excuse for the Government to declare war on the elderly. And the first move in that war is to imprison and isolate everyone over 70.

Whether we like it or not, we oldies are going to be locked in for our own good. (It’s always for our own good, isn’t it?) We are going to be locked in for “just” four months. But perhaps longer. Maybe permanently.

But it’s not really for our sake, is it? They don’t give a stuff if we live or die.

They would never dare tell any other group of people that they had to stay in their homes. There would be huge rows and much talk about human rights. But no one gives a damn about the elderly. We’re regarded as a useless burden. We’ve served our purpose, worked and paid taxes, and now we can fade away. We voted to leave the EU and so we must be punished. Dump the old folks on the hillsides and let them quietly die and rot.

In reality, this blatant act of age discrimination has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the disease. There are 50-year-olds with respiratory disease who would die if they got within a hundred yards of any flu infection and there are 90-year-olds who run marathons faster than anyone in the Cabinet could open a bottle of gin. They’re not locking us in to protect us. They don’t give a toss if we live or die. They are locking us in to deny us access to the NHS we paid for. They’re locking up the elderly because they can and because we’re considered a liability and a bloody nuisance. We get locked in our own homes. No visitors. No contact with the outside world. Ignored and forgotten.

They say we will get our food supplies left on our doorsteps lest we get to see a person and say “hello.” That’s nice of them. Who, pray, is going to do all the delivering? Our local supermarkets are already unable to cope with the demand for home deliveries. Volunteers? Don’t make me laugh. Most of the volunteering in Britain is done by old folk and they’re all going to be locked in.

What are we supposed to do if a delivery does come? Pop out and grab our allocated groceries off the step before they are stolen or soaked in the rain? There will probably be no plastic bags; just a loose pile of groceries sitting there, amidst the dead leaves and the dog-shit, for us to pick up and drag into our homes. Solitary joys will be provided by daytime television. If it’s anywhere near as bad as it was when I was a regular “performer” the days will drag for those who tune in. We won’t be allowed to go out to the post box. Those without phones won’t be allowed out to use the phone box. We won’t be allowed to put out our rubbish because that would mean leaving the house and venturing out into the world. If there are several people living in a house, and one of them is over 70, then they will all be locked in otherwise, the rule doesn’t make any sense. How many families will survive being locked up for months and months?

They’ve already told us oldies that we will be denied NHS care. And there won’t be any private care because the NHS has bought up all the private beds. We don’t qualify for being tested to see if we are infected because we’re too old to matter. (The testing is meaningless, by the way. Just because you test “negative” on Tuesday doesn’t mean that you won’t test “positive” on Wednesday.) Some GPs, who will be too busy filling in notifiable disease forms to waste their valuable time on patients, say they won’t visit old people. If we fall ill and collapse, then we’ll be left to die and slowly rot. I wonder if undertakers will be allowed in to collect us. I’m so glad I paid my taxes for more than half a century. The millennials, who have paid little, are the lucky but undeserving recipients of my largesse.

If we dare to step outside our homes we will doubtless be arrested. The world is full of snitches these days. The people who have cameras on their car dashboards will be eager to tell the authorities that the old woman at No. 14 has just slipped out in her slippers and hobbled home with fresh bread, a bottle of stout and a jumbo-sized packet of aspirin tablets. The poor old sod at No. 27 who takes his dog for a brief walk at 1.00 a.m. will be dobbed in too. I wonder if they’ll arrest poor Fido too.

The police don’t have time to arrest burglars or muggers but I bet they’ll find the time to arrest the rebellious old folk who venture out of doors – even if they are taking the dog for a walk or buying in a little food.

As it happens, I don’t much mind staying in. We have plenty of books and DVDs. Antoinette and I can both keep busy and amuse ourselves. But I want to stay in because I want to stay in and not because some patronising, bullying, heavy-booted fascist bastards in London tell me I have to stay in.

And I have many reasons why I will need to go out.

The shops and cafes will be closed but I need to see the dentist. I need to visit the optician. I need to visit the bank occasionally to pay in cheques and pay bills. I will, presumably, be denied access to these essential services. Murderers get to see a dentist and an optician. But not the over 70s. I shall want to buy a birthday card for my wife. And, if there are any shops still open, a present too.

Far more importantly, Antoinette (who has breast cancer) needs a mammogram soon (if the NHS has abandoned its collective impersonation of a bunch of headless chickens and is still doing mammograms). She needs to have her B12 injections. She needs to visit the physiotherapist. She has to pick up supplies of her tamoxifen. If Boris and Co think I’m letting her go to the hospital by herself, they’re pottier than I think they are.

And if we don’t drive the car then the battery will be dead and the engine will seize up.

Locking us all in our homes for the solitary sin of being old is something new.

However, in the words of the great and immortal Patrick McGoohan, I am not a prisoner or a number.

I will take Antoinette to her hospital appointments if hospitals are open. I will go to the dentist if dentists are open. I will do what needs to be done. I will decide for myself how I will live my life.

What are they going to do if we all ignored the law?

There’s a problem the bastards haven’t thought of.

What will they do with their prisoners? Shackle them? Put them in prison? Fit them with those ankle bracelets used for criminals and terrorists?

We can’t go to court if we’re arrested and charged because we aren’t allowed to leave our homes.

The World Health Organisation estimates that the number of people dying from “seasonal influenza” each year is between 290,000 and 650,000.

It’s worth repeating: in a bad year, well over half a million people die from the flu. In one bad winter month, the death toll from flu could approach 100,000.

That’s not the number who get it. That’s the number who die from it.

And the infection which is the cause of our global crisis?

Well, today (the 16^th March) the official figure is that just over 6,500 people have died of it since the first diagnosis was made. It’s difficult to know when that was. Some authorities claim that it was last November. Others say it was January. But if we are cautious and say that the disease didn’t start killing people until a month ago, then the disease has, in that time, killed 6,500 people. That’s the global figure – which includes China. In a bad year, the flu would (at this time of the year) have killed more than ten times as many people. I’m just providing the facts.

Some authorities claim that the “ordinary” flu is easier to catch.

And the USA’s Centres for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that up to 45 million people a year catch the flu. The new disease will have to accelerate at quite a pace to get anywhere near that figure.

A reader of my website telephoned the Department of Health in London and asked if they could tell him, “how many people are dying of flu at this time.” They couldn’t. And they would only reply if the query were offered as an official freedom of information request. That is astonishing. It seems that the Government doesn’t have figures for the number of people with the flu but it can provide almost hourly figures for the number with a much less common infection. Maybe the figures for the number dying of flu are mixed in with the number dying of the new disease. After all, very few people are being tested, the symptoms of the two diseases are pretty well identical and a doctor writing a death certificate is quite likely to put down the new disease rather than “influenza” because the new disorder is notifiable and he/she has been influenced by the media hysteria.

As I pointed out on March 2^nd, the mortality figures for the new disease are also probably distorted because statisticians and journalists divide the number of deaths into the number of recorded cases to find the death rate. But these figures are worthless because the number of people who actually have the infection (and merely deal with their symptoms at home) is inevitably far, far higher than the number who have reported to their doctor and far higher than the number who have tested positive. It is worth pointing out that the NHS is now only testing people who are actually in hospital (and, by definition, very ill) and has apparently banned private testing. (I only know this because top professional football clubs were complaining that they weren’t allowed to get their players tested privately.) All this enables the authorities to do pretty much what they like with the figures.

Many, many years ago I pointed out that the mortality figures for AIDS were being distorted because deaths from tuberculosis and a whole host of other diseases were being included in the official AIDS figures. The authorities needed the figures to be higher to justify the scaremongering and the vast amounts of money that had been spent on the disease. It seems to me that the same thing is happening now. Who will ever know the difference?

Italy is often quoted as the worst country in Europe for getting and dying of the new disease. But far fewer people have died in Italy of it than would have died of the flu in a fairly normal year. And that doesn’t allow for the fact that many of the alleged deaths were probably flu deaths. Incidentally, it has been said that the “crisis” in Italy is now so bad that doctors are saying they can no longer treat the over 80s – whatever is wrong with them. Golly, isn’t that a surprise? This is exactly what has been said in Britain – though the cut-off age is lower.

According to leaked NHS figures, the new disease will put eight million Britons into hospital and 80% of the nation will become infected. Who the hell made up these figures? You might as well claim that it will kill 90% of all citizens whose names begin with A. It’s meaningless drivel. The newspapers are reporting this nonsense as though it were real.

Some of the rules being introduced are stark raving bonkers. So, footballers have been told not to shake hands before a game. But they then run around hugging and holding one another.

So far, all the people who have died of the new disease in the UK had underlying health issues. The youngest to date was 59 – rather proving my argument that it is nonsensical to lock up the over 70s. If the Government wants to lock people into their homes, then it should lock in those who have underlying health issues – whatever their age. The fact that the Government has selected the over 70s for locking in rather proves the point that this is all about isolating, dehumanising and marginalising the elderly.

My conclusion is that the “crisis” is being used to get people used to the idea that the elderly cannot be treated. Governments around the world can no longer afford to pay pensions. It is well known that ageing populations are a real threat to the economies of a number of countries. Was the “crisis” designed to enable governments to get rid of the elderly? Or are governments merely taking opportunistic advantage of the infection to marginalise old folk?

In my sixth diary (‘The Game’s Afoot’) I pointed out that Governments everywhere have been trying to kill off the elderly for years. Don’t believe me? What about the Liverpool Care Pathway which originated in Britain? That was the murderers’ charter, which allowed doctors and nurses to withhold food, water and essential treatment from patients who are over 65 and who are, therefore, regarded as an expensive nuisance. The Liverpool Care Pathway was then replaced by something called Sustainable Development Goals (which originated with the United Nations). Sustainable Development Goals allow the NHS to discriminate against anyone over the age of 70 on the grounds that people who die when they are over 70 cannot be said to have died “prematurely” and so will not count when the nation’s healthcare is being assessed. The Government loves this new rule because it gives the State permission to get rid of citizens who are of pensionable age and, therefore, regarded by society’s accountants as a “burden.” It is hardly surprising, I suppose, that this officially sponsored disdain for the elderly has trickled through into our courts. If you mug a 40-year-old, you are likely to go to prison for a good length of time. But if you mug and kill an 80-year-old, you will be unlucky if you go to prison for more than a few months. The lives of the elderly do not count for much.

There have to be priorities within the health service. There isn’t enough money for everything but although there is plenty of cash for cosmetic surgery and gender reassignment programmes, the NHS has little money for treating macular degeneration – which causes blindness in old people. The elderly are discriminated against without anyone seeming to notice or care. Successive British governments seem to have decided that the elderly are surplus to requirements. Pensions are kept pitifully small. (The UK’s State pension is the worst in any developed economy.) Energy prices have been allowed to soar so that subsidies can be given to climate change programmes with the result that tens of thousands of older people die of the cold because they can’t afford to eat and to keep warm.

I find myself toying with all sorts of strange scenarios. Nothing now seems impossible.

In a couple of months’ time, will campaigners use the “crisis” as an excuse to demand a rerun of the EU referendum – on the grounds that the elderly who voted for Brexit are now safely locked up in their homes and unable to get out to the polling stations?

Impossible?

Wouldn’t you have thought it impossible that the Government would order all citizens over the age of 70 to stay in their homes for four months because of a new infection which is killing less people than the flu?

Nothing now seems impossible.

One main aim seems to be to demonise, marginalise and dehumanise the elderly so that governments have an excuse to stop providing health care for the over 70s.

The young who seem to welcome the idea of the elderly being deprived of medical care might like to reflect on two thoughts. First, they may one day be old themselves. Second, the age for cutting off medical services will get younger and younger – as the pension age gets older and older. Today’s 20-year-olds may well find that they are ineligible for medical care when they hit 50.

Foolishly, on the 18^th March I recorded a YouTube video to provide some facts about the “crisis.” It was a huge mistake. I did not monetise my YouTube channel because the video was made purely to try to offer another view of the alleged “crisis.” I did not promote the video or use it to advertise or promote anything other than my website – which is free and carries no advertisements.

After just one day, the video had received over 100,000 views. But when the Government changed a few things (they reduced the quarantine for the elderly to three months, they did what I had suggested and told those with chronic illnesses to stay indoors and they told those who had cold symptoms to stay indoors for 14 days instead of 7 days) I took down the original video and recorded a new one with the correct details. I believe that accuracy is always important when offering criticism or a review.

But that was another huge mistake.

Unknown to me, the original video had been taken by people who had put my video (in its entirety) up on their own websites. I had recorded the video as a public service, not wanting to make any money out of it, but these people were clearly cashing in and a number of them had used my video to attract advertising. Both Antoinette and I were horrified. I have for decades refused to accept adverts or sponsorship of any kind, so I was appalled to see that my work was now festooned with all sorts of adverts.

Antoinette and I spent almost an entire day trying to persuade these people to take down my video. I very politely pointed out that the video they were showing was now out-of-date and an embarrassment to me and to them. I even told them that if they took down the out-of-date video, then they could put up the new video which I had recorded.

Worse still, when checking these sites, we found that I had been the object of a massive amount of personal abuse.

My sole aim had been to provide a voice of cautious reason in an increasingly hysterical world. But I was accused of trying to grab my five minutes of fame (I was moderately famous a few decades ago and that was more than enough) and I was accused of being a “quack” (a clear libel since I am not). I was abused and criticised for just about everything imaginable.

My wife Antoinette, who was helping (without success) to try to control the thefts, was horrified by what she read. We both immediately decided that we would never again read any comments put on the bottom of a video.

I am sad that good intentions brought such a harvest of abuse. It seems that offering an alternative view is no longer acceptable and attracts a strange mixture of oppressive intolerance and belligerent playground rudeness.

Note: The above is taken from ‘Coming Apocalypse’ by Vernon Coleman which was published in April 2020. To publish the book I had to remove the word covid from the text. To purchase a copy CLICK HERE.

While previously it was a hobby culminating in writing articles for Wikipedia (until things made a drastic and undeniable turn in 2020) and a few books for private consumption, since March 2020 I have become a full-time researcher and writer in reaction to the global takeover that came into full view with the introduction of covid-19. For most of my life, I have tried to raise awareness that a small group of people planned to take over the world for their own benefit. There was no way I was going to sit back quietly and simply let them do it once they made their final move.