September 4, 2020
With acknowledgements to Truthseeker and davidicke.com
The figure on the right is Piers Corbyn, age 73, the elder brother of former British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn. Feared and mocked by the mainstream media for his politically incorrect views, Piers Corbyn has been vilified as “a dangerous conspiracy theorist”.
Here is what Wikipedia says about him:
Corbyn was fined £10,000 for organising an anti-lockdown rally in Trafalgar Square, London. Consequently, Corbyn appeared on [the ITV show] “Good Morning Britain” to debate the fine.
During the debate, Corbyn propagated various conspiracy theories about COVID-19. He stated that those who have been claimed to have died from COVID-19 could have died from “something else”, adding that it is a “psychological operation to close down the economy in the interests of mega-corporations“ and claimed that modern vaccines make people more ill.
Dr Hilary Jones [the man pictured above on the left] called Corbyn’s claims “dangerous“.
Needless to say, Corbyn is an ardent anti-vaccination campaigner and claims that the the new vaccines, unlike the old ones, are toxic and could cause serious health problems. He is also against mandatory mask-wearing.
Here is a video clip from the heated debate in which Corbyn is constantly interrupted by his TV interviewers Piers Morgan and Susanna Reid so that he cannot get a word in edgewise. A former TV weather forecaster, Corbyn has an MSc degree in astrophysics and is therefore entitled to call himself an “information scientist”. He does not believe in global warming but argues that the earth is actually cooling down. Hotter weather in recent years has hot nothing to do with CO2, he says, but has been caused by increased sunspot activity.
All this has nothing to with Covid-19, however.
We mention this only in passing so that you may understand that Corbyn is regarded with fear and loathing by the mainstream as a dangerous conspiracy theorist. He comes from the same school of thought as David Icke and is closely associated with Icke’s movement.
Here is an angry comment from a reader on the YouTube video you are about to see:
Oh, dear . . . They invite Piers Corbyn to explain himself [on breakfast time TV]. He is clearly able to do that very substantively. So they shout him down. They insult him.
At one point, the woman with Piers Morgan [Susanna Reid] wants to end the interview. Why? Because Corbyn managed to get in almost a whole statement that they had not meant to let in. Then their medical ‘expert’ [Dr Hilary Jones, above left in picture] behaves in exactly the same way: Shout down Corbyn; insult him; jeer. Don’t let him finish anything he begins to say. This medical ‘expert’ had no intention of engaging with Piers Corbyn’s own expertise — he [Corbyn] is a well qualified scientist. Shame.
In contrast with this interviewer team intent only on jeering, Piers Corbyn remained dignified and determined to deliver what would have amounted to public education, had they let him deliver it. Well done, Mr Corbyn! Thank you.
— Sophie Johnson, commenter on Truthseeker
The opening comment on the site, by one Peter Gar, is equally scathing: “97 percent of people are idiots, and the wearing of a disease spreading mask proves it, but the 3 percent are geniuses. Of course Dr Hilary is either a con artist fraudster or a retard.”
In the interests of fairness, it needs to be pointed out that Dr Hilary Jones, who is ridiculed by the above commenters as a retarded pseudo-expert, is in fact a qualified medical doctor, whereas Piers Corbyn, who once introduced himself as “Dr Piers Corbyn” on a TV program, was not entitled to do so.
He [Piers Corbyn] featured in a Channel 4 documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle in 2007. A scientifically reviewed complaint to Ofcom noted that he was introduced as “Dr Piers Corbyn, Climate Forecaster”, despite not having a doctorate nor any qualification specifically in climate science or environmental science. (See here)
Watch this video and decide for yourself whose side you are on: the TV interviewers or the interviewee. This is not just a question of the interviewers constantly interrupting the interviewee. It’s also a question of the interviewee constantly interrupting the interviewers. Both sides, it seems to me, are equally to blame for not letting the other side speak.