It's Almost as if Martin Neil is trying to water down the truth about the Diamond Princess
Martin Neil is a “Professor of computer science and statistics at Queen Mary, University of London. UK,” according to his Substack bio. He published a “duh” article on the Diamond Princess today. “It is almost as if there was no virus spreading.”
He found an old interview of Prof Michael Levitt in early 2020 and summarized it.
A summary transcript (non-verbatim) is very revealing: …
Outside Wuhan-Hubei the fatality rate is 0.2% similar to flu
High rate, 20%, infected on Diamond Princess cruise ship. Yet fatality rate was 2% in Wuhan. Why was there such a big difference? The new DNA PCR testing.
Two people in their 80s died on the Diamond Princess cruise ship, one death on ship of pneumonia. Probably bacterial given the propensity of the elderly to develop secondary post-viral bacterial infections.
Neil is projecting the notion that the elderly on the Diamond Princess were not murdered. They were just old, and it was flu season. It must have just been bacterial pnuemonia, not COVID. Actually it was probably whatever Michael Callahan did to them. Callahan’s role was to commit murder to fit the narrative of a virus that mainly killed elderly.
As I’ve said before, the patients on the Diamond Princess did not begin to develop symptoms and die (February 18-19) until Michael Callahan arrived (February 14). Callahan, under contract to Robert Kadlec, had left Wuhan Central Hospital not long before, where coincidentally, elderly were dying at high rates.
This article is one of the most viewed ones I have written.
You may think I’m overreacting a bit to the reporting of Martin Neil. Allow me to provide some history here that doesn’t set well with me. There is a point of contention between myself and Jessica Hockett over the term “murder.” Neil and Hockett have co-authored articles together.
Previously in Substack comments I had questioned Hockett’s lack of reporting or mention of deaths caused by Remdesivir. She said there was no data on that. I asked if she would like to review any case studies on Remdesivir homicides as presented by their families, because the truth is painfully clear when you do enough of that. She would not. I asked a family member whose father was a victim of Remdesivir to speak to Jessica. She did. Jessicia would not reply to her.
Recently Jessica asked me if I understood one of her articles about “no pandemic,” after I made the point again about hospital homicides in the comments section of her “no pandemic” article. So I finally had to tell her my concerns about her omission of hospital homicides in her analysis. She said I was misrepresenting her and PANDA.
So I asked her to provide a reference to where she or PANDA had spoken about the role of hospital homicides. She could not, of course, because they did not do it. Still, she would not admit that she was the one who had mispresented my comment, and that I had not misrepresented the content of her article.
She used the term “mass euthanasia iatrogenocide” in her reply, which sounds like a version of “mass formation psychosis” to me, exactly like I told her in the first place. This term seems to admit a mass medical death event, but it was nobody’s fault.
We finally got to the heart of the disagreement. Hockett said: “We disagree on the sufficiency & applicabability of the word “murder.” I agreed that we certainly do agree on the sufficiency and applicabability of the word “murder.”
This is why I am calling out Martin Neil for his “the flu did it, not COVID” style reporting on the Diamond Princess. My problem is that these reporters omit relevant facts that suggest criminal intent.
Like I told Jessica, the ties between “PANDA” and “DRASTIC” are a bit suspicious to me. JJ Couey is one of the original founders of DRASTIC, which was devoted to researching the “Lab Leak” origins of COVID. Couey now says that he understands that the debate between “Lab Leak” and “Natural Spillover” was a false debate designed to distract from the truth that there was no viral Pandemic.
I said the same thing about DRASTIC long ago on Twitter before I was banned.
I wrote one on the false debate myself. So I give Coeuy all the credit in the world for telling it like it is on the false nature of the debate.
But you know what they say, “Fool me once, shame on you..” Now that I see them saying that there was no Pandemic, but refusing to take a stand against hospital homicides or report relevant evidence against the guilty, I will continue to call them out and question them until they do so.
Charles Wright
He who is convinced against his will is of the same opinion still? Or is it a much darker obfuscation?
Mistakes were not made! 🙎🏻🙇🏻