Search
Search Results

No Search Results Found

LIVE
Search
Search Results

No Search Results Found

Explore HomeNewsPodcastsBreaking NewsSocial Watch Live Infowars NetworkThe Alex Jones ShowThe War Room with Owen ShroyerThe American Journal More Banned.VideoInfowars StoreArchiveRSSDownload Our App

Terms of Service

DMCA

Advertise with us

Affiliates

Media Inquiries

About

Editors Choice

Doctor Banned For Questioning Efficacy of Masks Wins High Court Case

by Paul Joseph Watson
December 6th 2021, 5:09 am
Censorship was "clearly wrong and cannot stand."
Image Credit:
Video Screenshot
Share
Share
Fund the InfoWar. Donate Now!
Keep up to date with our latest:
Email
Sign Up Now
Have an important tip? Let us know.Email us here.

A doctor in the UK who was banned from using social media by the General Medical Council for claiming “masks do nothing” has won his case in the High Court.

Dr. Samuel White was slapped with and 18 month ban by the GMC after he posted a video to Instagram and Twitter in June questioning the efficacy of face coverings.

In the video, White said why he could no longer tolerate working in his previous roles because of the “lies” around the NHS and the government’s response to the pandemic, which were “so vast” he could no longer “stomach” them.

White also committed the ultimate sin of remarking, “masks do nothing” to stop the spread of COVID, despite this being the consensus medical opinion at the start of the pandemic before it mysteriously switched almost overnight.

The doctor also expressed concerns about the safety of vaccines and the reliability of COVID tests.

White took his case against the GMC to the High Court on the basis of his freedom of expression “to engage in medical, scientific and political debate and discussion,” White’s barrister, Francis Hoar, told a hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice.

Hoar added that White’s opinions were “supported by large bodies of scientific and medical opinion” and had been “statements of fact and opinions about pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical interventions in response to the pandemic.”

GMC’s Alexis Hearnden claimed that White’s views were not only misinformation, but posed a “risk” to the public because they didn’t align with official pronouncements.

However, the court ruled in favor of White, asserting that the tribunal which banned him from speaking had violated the 1998 Human Rights Act.

The ruling concluded that the tribunal’s decision was “an error of law and a clear misdirection,” meaning the decision was “clearly wrong and cannot stand.”

———————————————————————————————————————

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

———————————————————————————————————————

Be sure to join Alex Jones and Infowars on GETTR! Save the future and join the next Renaissance by following these NEW accounts for breaking news and exclusive information today!
FEATURED BANNED VIDEOS
In case you missed it...
Editors Choice

Editors Choice

Celebrity Chef Puts Sign Above Pub: “Unvaccinated Welcome”

posted a day ago

Editors Choice

Poll Finds Only 10% of Americans Trust Media on COVID, 30% Trust Fauci

posted 4 days ago

Editors Choice

British Government Used “Propagandistic” Fear Tactics to Scare Public Into Mass Compliance

posted 5 days ago

Editors Choice

FT Says “Anti-Vax Sentiment” in the West Being Fueled by Russia & China

posted 5 days ago

View More From Editors Choice
Terms of ServiceDMCAAdvertise with usAffiliatesMedia InquiriesAbout