Miri AF

Massive missives and more

Letter to Barry Sheerman MP, 25/03/2020

Dear Barry,

Many thanks for your thoughtful and considered reply. I am very pleased that you share my concerns about the extremity of this [coronavirus] bill, and are taking steps to contain it, including - and crucially - preventing abuses of the bill.

My family and I are all in good health, thank you, and, as no residents of my household are elderly or in otherwise at-risk groups, we are not overly concerned about the risk of the virus to ourselves. We are abiding by the new rules regarding social distancing, and taking sensible precautions, such as hand-washing and taking vitamin C. 

What we (my husband and I and other members of our extended family) are very concerned about is the extremely draconian nature of the current 'lockdown', which we believe is disproportionate, and not justified by the overall threat of the virus; a position supported by many experts - please see here: https://off-guardian.org/2020/03/24/12-experts-questioning-the-coronavirus-panic/. We are concerned that, what we perceive to be a huge overreach of governmental powers, will not only be abused now, but will also not abate once this virus has been contained. 

It would have been unimaginable as little as three months ago that a first-world, democratic nation could impose what is effectively house-arrest on its citizens, with no democratic mandate to do so. This, alongside the ferocious new powers granted to government under the coronavirus bill, could easily pave the way for this government to become despotic, and I do not use the word lightly.

There are two primary concerns I harbour. Firstly, that I will be pressurised into taking a coronavirus test, without my consent. I have investigated this thoroughly, and it is clear there is no reliable test for coronavirus infection, and that false positives are rife. If a test were to return positive, whether this result is accurate or not, then the implications concern me deeply. Will I be forced into hospital, government detainment, or treatment protocols against my will? I have done the research and am confident this virus is not a significant threat to me, and so I do not wish to be tested for it, nor treated in a a hospital or other government facility for it if I do contract it. I am obeying social distancing rules and so I would not be passing it onto anyone else. But the new government powers seem to be able to force me into testings and treatments against my will - and section me under the Mental Health Act if I refuse! Clearly, this is deeply troubling indeed. Please can I seek your assurance that you and the Labour Party will work to ensure neither I nor anyone else is coerced into receiving tests or treatments we do not want. 

My second concern at this time is that when the 'lockdown' concludes, there will be introduced certain mandates to continue to participate in society, one of which will be having received a coronavirus vaccine. I have harboured grave concerns about vaccine safety for many years, and wrote to Jeremy Corbyn MP on the matter when I was resident in London and he was my MP. Sadly, no progress has been made since that time in ensuring vaccine safety testing is more rigorous, and that is more pertinent than ever where it comes to the coronavirus vaccine, which is being 'fast-tracked'. Even outspoken vaccine advocates have issued grave warnings against fast-tracking such a vaccine, as this inevitably means safety standards (already inadequate in the vaccine industry) will be compromised.  Scientists have also warned that a coronavirus vaccine carries the possibility for a phenomenon known as vaccine enhancement, whereby the virus is made worse in a vaccinated person. Please see here for more details:

Please can you give me your assurance as my MP that you will continue to uphold your constituents' rights to informed consent and bodily autonomy, as per the Montgomery ruling (https://www.themdu.com/guidance-and-advice/guides/montgomery-and-informed-consent) and Nuremberg Code (https://history.nih.gov/research/downloads/nuremberg.pdf), and that you and the Labour Party will oppose any vaccine mandates that limit or restrict people's rights to participate in civil society.

Thank you again for reply, and for your support in this matter.

Best regards,


Letter to Barry Sheerman MP, 03/04/2020

Dear Barry,

Thank you once again for your very thoughtful reply. Please allow me to express how much I appreciate your taking the time to comprehensively engage with all of my raised points. This, in my experience, is unusual for an MP, and it is very much appreciated - now more than ever. 

I do, of course, entirely appreciate how busy you must be, and I do not wish to further compound unnecessarily your workload. However, there have been developments in the press since I wrote to you last that I would feel it remiss not to bring to your attention.

The health secretary, Matt Hancock MP, is proposing the public be issued with 'immunity passports', a certificate or possibly wristband declaring their coronavirus status, and that displaying such a certificate would be a necessary requirement to rejoin society.

I hope you will share my view that this would be an abhorrent, Orwellian overreach of governmental powers, and that it should not be incumbent on private persons to make public declarations about their health in order to continue to participate in society. Furthermore, it is clear that there is still no reliable test. Mr. Hancock has suggested an antibody test will be made available, but antibody tests are not infallible (far from it), and furthermore, the presence of antibodies is not synonymous with immunity to disease. It is also not clear that these tests actually detect the specific novel virus, Covid-19, rather than simply coronaviruses in general - which, being a major cause of the common cold, almost everyone has had. Finally, antibody tests cannot distinguish between current, acute infections and past, historical ones - all they can tell you is that you have at some point been exposed to the virus. 

It is for all of these reasons that I will not be submitting to any coronavirus testing, and I most certainly will not be displaying any public information about my health, regarding coronavirus or any other infection. 

My concern is that the Coronavirus Bill will make it a legal requirement for me to do so, and that I will continue to be held a prisoner in my own home (having committed no crime, and having had no due process, trial, or defence) unless I submit, have the test, and wear the band. 

I seek your assurance that you will strenuously oppose the idea of 'immunity passports' - for coronavirus or any other infection - and that health status will continue to be the private, personal matter it has always been and should always be.

With my best wishes in these difficult times,


Letter to Barry Sheerman MP, 30/05/2020

Dear Barry,

I hope you remain well in these tumultuous times. There have been many developments in the weeks since I wrote to you last, and, as the coronavirus crisis quickly escalates, a situation which is being used to systematically erase our rights and freedoms, I felt I must write to you again.

The concerns I raised in my last letter of 3rd April. 2020 – that it would become incumbent on me to make public declarations about my private health status in order to continue to participate in society - have only intensified, with the introduction of the NHS tracking app, and the new “contact tracing” programme.

These services do not hinge on the informed consent of participants, but rather, to quote a recent Forbes magazine article: “Contact-tracing is not an opt-in Bluetooth app that might register your proximity to an infected person, under a very limited set of circumstances, including that you’re both fully running the app. No, contact tracing is a manually-intensive, surveillance-heavy, privacy-intrusive process where a combination of brute-force measures and meticulous attention to detail, under the purview of well-trained operatives, roots out the spread of infection.” - https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2020/05/22/contact-tracing-apple-google-coronavirus-security-update-android-iphone/?fbclid=IwAR0xyht-0YqqJGMs77d8gUb10pCdDjHOPtPjotj74NzFsrt-P0nb4aX-C0k#431b6ac81d59

Having worked in telephone-based roles for a number of years myself (including at [name redacted] here in Huddersfield, a position I have lost as a result of the current situation), I know how tightly guarded people’s personal information is, and that an organisation may not utilise personal information that has not been expressly and consensually obtained. Furthermore, if a person is contacted by an organisation and requests clarification on where that organisation obtained their details, the organisation is legally obliged to tell them.

Therefore, I fail to see how the NHS “contact tracing” programme is operating within the confines of the law. Rather, it appears this programme has plunged every citizen in the UK into a kangaroo court, whereby they may, at any time, be ordered into house-arrest by a complete stranger on the end of a telephone, having committed no crime, with no right to appeal, and on the say-so of an unidentified person, who is not required to provide a single scrap of evidence that their claims of “contact” are true. As the “accusing party” remains unidentified, the person being contacted is rendered completely unable to confirm or deny the claims of contact. This is a farce, and blatantly wide open to misuse and abuse. In addition, the conditions which qualify for “close contact” seem to have been invented entirely out of whole cloth, and I have yet to see a single piece of credible evidence that being around a person with a positive COVID-19 test for 15+ minutes, as opposed to any other time frame, is uniquely dangerous. If it is, then why do we need to “socially distance” from people we pass for only a matter of seconds on the street? The other qualifications for “close contact” appear equally arbitrary and inconsistent.

This house-arrest – which Matt Hancock has clarified will only be voluntary if you comply, and if you don’t, will be mandatory – is for a cold virus which has an extremely high recovery rate, and is effectively no threat at all to people under 40 with no comorbidities, such as myself.  In addition, I have never signed any binding agreement with the government stating that my health is their responsibility, and nor has any other person in this country, so I do not recognise the authority our supposed democratic government has to impose this on its citizens at all. I reject the legitimacy of the “lockdown” in its entirety, as have many pre-eminent experts (whose testimonies I alerted you to in an earlier correspondence), and of course, the modelling by Imperial College upon which it was based has been rendered completely invalid.

If a person is concerned about their health, and feels self-isolation is the best measure to protect themselves, then they should be supported to do that. There was and is absolutely no justification at all for forcing it on the rest of us.  

It is my contention that the coronavirus is being ruthlessly exploited by the British government, and by governments around the world, to create authoritarian technocracies where such concepts as rights, freedoms, and privacies are abolished, and we exist in a state of perpetual tyranny, where the government can dismantle our lives and throw us into house-arrest any time it pleases. Once under house-arrest, a person is only entitled to SSP, which is £95 per week. This could quickly and easily decimate a family’s finances, especially if an individual is repeatedly identified as a “close contact” of a COVID-positive person, which is entirely within the realms of possibility. If we do not comply with house-arrest, the unprecedented powers granted to the government under the Coronavirus Act allows it to forcibly quarantine us in its own facilities, where it can non-consensually administer any “treatments” it feels are appropriate, or section us under the Mental Health Act for an “initial” period of six months.

This situation is a profound outrage, and an insult to the rights and autonomy of every person in this country, as well as to the memories of our ancestors, who risked - and often lost - their lives, to allow us to live in a free country.  They did not die so our governments could imprison us in our homes on the pretext of protecting us from a cold virus; they died to ensure our freedom.

I would like to register that I do not consent to any of these freedom-curtailing or privacy-invading measures, and, should an NHS contact tracer contact me, I will be taking their details and reporting them to the Data Commissioner, which is what I have been advised to do by a lawyer.

Please can you ensure the government is aware that large swathes of the British population do not recognise the legitimacy of the current measures and that we do not consent to them. Many of us are of the view that the government and its agents are acting illegally. You may be aware that the businessman Simon Dolan is in the process of taking the government to trial for illegally imposing "lockdown", whilst a campaign is currently underway to have the Coronavirus Act rendered null and void, as it is allegedly based on falsehoods. 


Please can I seek your assurance that you will do everything in your power as a representative of the British people to ensure this country remains a free one, and that we do not descend into an inescapable Orwellian dystopia.

Yours sincerely,


Oops! This site has expired.

If you are the site owner, please renew your premium subscription or contact support.