Louise Hampton, who works for Care UK, posted a video on Facebook stating that the COVID call center has been “dead” since the virus first spread in January.
In the recording, Hampton flashes the certificate that NHS (National Health Service) awarded her and sarcastically reads what it says:
“This certificate certifies that Louise Hampton made a difference to patients. NHS COVID-19 Response. THANK YOU.”
She claims the call center has received no calls, and thus the certificate is a load of bollocks (load of shit.)
“We are aware of this video, which we consider to be materially inaccurate in a number of ways, and can confirm that a member of staff is subject to investigation,” a spokesperson for Care UK said.
“We expect all our colleagues and services to support the work of the NHS in giving the public the right information and support during the pandemic. Our call centres were, in fact, exceptionally busy, handling a peak of 400% more calls than usual. Our teams showed huge commitment and dedication in delivering the service, and we have rightly thanked them for the efforts they have made.”
Despite the BBC (and other news outlets) rushing to debunk her claim as a “conspiracy theory,” Hampton has received support from large numbers of people on social media, including many NHS workers.
The BBC has sought to discredit her by alleging she’s a QAnon “conspiracy theorists”; the UK-based news outlet, however, has not attempted to retrieve call logs or other evidence that would refute her claims.
QAnon adherents believe that the U.S. is controlled by a cabal of child sex trafficking, Democratic elites intent on bringing down President Trump. Followers also believe that Dr. Anthony Fauci and other elites have manufactured the coronavirus to sabotage Trump’s presidency. The group has young and old followers from different socioeconomic backgrounds, races, and ethnicities.
Blacklisted. Censored. Punished. This is what happens when you don’t show complete allegiance to liberal ideologies and movements, such as Black Lives Matter. In today’s hypersensitive political climate, people are scorned and rebuked for deviating from prevailing orthodoxies. This knee-jerk reaction to call someone a “racist” or “bigot” is intolerant because it forces people into silent submission.
The rise of social media has made it possible for citizen journalists and others (without huge platforms and power) to voice their opinions and concerns about critical issues. But now, people are hesitant to express their opinion for fear they’ll be scoffed at, or scorned by some in power. Powerful journalists, writers, and academicians are defining the boundaries when it comes to debating issues, making it clear that crossing certain boundaries can have serious consequences, such as job loss.
David Shor, Emmanuel Cafferty, and Harald Uhlig are just some of the casualties of “cancel culture.” David Shor, a data analyst and progressive, cited a research study suggesting that nonviolent protests are more effective than violent protests.
He was fired.
Emmanuel Cafferty, a truck driver, had his arm hanging from outside his truck and was cracking his knuckles. Another driver misinterpreted this as a “white supremacist” gesture since it looked like he was making an “Okay” hand sign, which has been appropriated as a symbol meaning “white power.”
Nonetheless, he was fired.
Harald Uhlig, a professor of economics and editor of the Journal of Political Economy, tweeted criticism of the BLM movement’s push to defund the police. Soon, a petition–with 500 signers–demanded his removal from the editoral board of the Journal. The University of Chicago didn’t bend under the pressure of the powerful signatories; instead, they investigated the allegation impartially and concluded that Uhlig didn’t engage in any discriminatory conduct.
He survived the mob and remains on the editorial board.
Recently, a group of prominent journalist, writers, and academicians signed a letter, published in Harper’s magazine, that ostensibly supports free speech and encourages open debate and discourse. Let’s hold the signers of the Harper’s letter accountable and ensure that they don’t demonize those with opposing viewpoints or ideologies.
Try suing over their lack of proper response, and you find the Department of Justice not encouraging federal agencies to abide by federal law, but instead using lawyers to defend the withholding of the information.
For three hours, a video claiming that student survivors of the Florida shooting were crisis actors, was the #1 “Trending” video on YouTube. The video, posted by a user named Mike M., and viewed more than 216,000 times, was hastily removed by YouTube. If you click on the link to the video now, you’ll see a black screen and the following message:
“This video has been removed for violating YouTube’s policy on harassment and bullying.”
The video, uploaded with the caption “DAVID HOGG THE ACTOR,” describes a confrontation between the lifeguard and Hogg’s friend, who put his boogey board on a trash can in Redondo beach. After his friend told the lifeguard to go away, the lifeguard was provoked and told him not to give him lip. During the confrontation, his friend is seated on the beach, and the lifeguard is standing and leaning down very close to him. Meanwhile, Hogg secretly records the incident, and later claims in a news segment that his friend felt “threatened” and “worried” by the lifeguard. When speaking on behalf of his friend, his comments are made in a monotone and robotic manner.
Hogg and his friend get exactly the reaction they want from the lifeguard: anger and frustration. It was calculated to get news coverage, and viewership on YouTube; Hogg had the camera rolling, and recording before the confrontation even started.
Why is YouTube censoring the video for the sole purpose that the caption reads, “DAVID HOGG THE ACTOR”? The link above is a news clip of the incident; the full, unedited version of the incident is here:
And Hogg makes clear he owns the copyright to that video with a copyright disclaimer written across the clip. The comments section for both videos have people accusing Hogg of being a crisis actor.
But a clip suggesting that Hogg is a crisis actor (in its caption) isn’t all too crazy considering that apart from the sketchy recording of the lifeguard incident, we know that:
He only recently moved from California to Parkland, Florida to attend Douglas High School.
His instagram profile claims he’s a Sun Sentinel Teenlink reporter, and Student film maker.
As a high-school sophomore, he reportedly created broadcast packages and said that television news was his passion.
David’s father (Kevin Hogg) was a retired FBI agent assigned to the L.A. International Airport until 2014.
Hogg’s journalistic ambitions, along with the timing of his move to attend Douglas High, as well as his father’s career at the FBI, is raising eyebrows. Further, during the shooting incident, while hiding in the closet with classmates, he decides to start recording himself interviewing his classmates. He and the other students seem surprisingly composed given the possibility that they could be killed at any moment. Nobody is pleading for help, or sending shout-outs to loved ones. Here are some of what the students had to say:
“At this point, I don’t even want to be behind a gun.”
“We need more gun control in our country.”
“No amount of money should make it more easily accessible to get a gun.”
“I personally have rallied for gun control.”
Gun control, gun control, gun control. If you heard that clip, you would think it’s a PSA for gun control, rather than a live recording of students interviewed during a shooting.
The other strange thing about this incident is that Hogg changes his story about whether he knew the incident was a drill when he was hiding in the closet. In his recording, he talks to the camera, saying that he initially thought it was a drill, but after hearing more gunshots, knew it wasn’t. (Therefore, he knew that it wasn’t a drill before he hid in the closet.)
However, in an interview with MSNBC anchor, Stephanie Ruhle, Hogg says it wasn’t until he was in the classroom closet hiding, and checked his phone and saw news reports of the shooting, that he decided to record footage of the incident. “Once we were all in the room and started seeing the headlines, we realized this was anything but a drill,” said Hogg. Oddly, in that same interview, he mentioned that the janitor had warned them that the shooter was in the direction they were evacuating, and that they shouldn’t proceed that way. (And that’s why they hid in that classroom closet instead of evacuating.)
Did he learn that it wasn’t a drill after hearing multiple gunshots, or after checking the news in the classroom closet? Did he think the janitor was a part of the drill? (That would be surprising.) So exactly when did he know it wasn’t a drill? This is important because he says he only started recording after he knew it wasn’t a drill, so their voices would be heard in case they were killed. Maybe if MSNBC anchor, Stephanie Ruhle, had spent less time showering Hogg with praise, and more time asking about the details of the incident, we would’ve gotten a straight answer.
Then you have Hogg doing an interview with Anderson Cooper of CNN. Hogg responds to a question by Anderson Cooper, in which he’s asked how he feels about Trump Jr. liking a tweet claiming that the incident was a conspiracy perpetrated by Hogg and his father. Hogg sounds like a politician off the bat, not replying to the question, but instead saying how he’s “so sorry that people have lost their faith in America.” Eventually, he claims that he’s “not an actor in any sense, way, shape, or form.” He appears stoic throughout the interview, and periodically looks to his right (as if he’s referring to notes). At the end, he insists he isn’t anti-second amendment, and only wants people with major convictions and mental illnesses barred from buying guns.
YouTube banned a video solely because its caption claims Hogg is an actor. Hogg likes the limelight, and this can be seen with his previous recording where he set up a lifeguard in a terse exchange with his friend, and later speaks on behalf of his friend to reporters about the incident. We know that he contradicts himself about when he first learns that the shooting wasn’t a drill (and this is important because his rationale for recording was so that their voices could be heard in case they died). Further, he and his classmates in the recording seem unusually composed, and coherent in their support of gun control, given that at any moment they could be found and shot. Finally, he appears stoic and scripted in his interview with Anderson Cooper and others.
An actor? Possibly. Since the same video is on YouTube, people can go check that out, look at his background, and look at his interviews with Anderson Cooper and others, and make up their own minds.