Bob Moran Profile picture
Some cartoons shared here have not appeared in print. Published cartoons will be specified as such.
fche Profile picture Eternally Super-Confused :-) Profile picture 8 added to My Authors
3 May
Let me make my moral position on this whole situation as clear as possible:

I believe that any government or advisory body, faced with a pandemic of a virus which appears to be dangerous, should take action to limit the harm it causes to a population.

However, ANY action taken should UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES directly cause suffering (financial, psychological or physical) or death to any person in that population, whether or not that person is at risk from said virus.
It follows that any leaders NOT imposing measures against
a virus because they are in direct conflict with that principle, cannot be blamed for injury or death attributed to the virus. It also means that death or injury caused as a direct result of ignoring that principle, CAN and SHOULD be blamed on the leaders in question.
Read 8 tweets
21 Apr
I have never been on a protest march before.

Previously, they never made sense to me. I doubted their ability to influence events and always thought there were more effective ways of opposing things you disagreed with.

This time it's different.

This time I'm marching.
Over the past year we have lived through the greatest assault on our fundamental rights and freedoms in living memory. We have seen the total abandonment of moral principles and rational thought. Absolutely none of it has been justifiable and our institutions have failed us.
Parliament, the judiciary, the media, the education system, the health service; all of the people who were supposed to protect us from something like this happening, ALL of them, have aided and abetted the country's descent into mass-psychosis and tyrannical rule.
Read 8 tweets
14 Apr

There are many issues worthy of serious debate in a civilised society. There are ethical questions and moral dilemmas for which we have no clear cut solutions; Euthanasia, abortion, welfare, foreign aid. It is perfectly acceptable to be on either side of such debates.
But there are other areas of morality and ethics which are settled. The clear cut answers exist and ought to be understood by the majority in any decent society.
Over the past year, we have found ourselves debating such issues. They've been presented as difficult moral problems.
New conundrums never faced or considered previously:

Is it ethical to intentionally let one group of people die because you have a vague hunch it might let another group of people live?

Is the life of an 85 year old worth saving as much as the life of a five year old?
Read 10 tweets
19 Mar
I have no problem with people trying to argue that lockdown was entirely justified. It's important that we have this debate to establish whether we should ever do it again.
But what you can't do is claim that the justification for lockdown is the '130,000' people who have died.
We are not at the beginning of this, debating whether or not to lockdown. We've been doing it for a whole year. We have had stricter measures, for a longer period of time, than almost any other country on Earth. And still, you claim, 130,000 people died from the virus.
This does not help your argument. It helps ours. What you need to be questioning, establishing and the asserting is how many lives have been SAVED by what we've done.
You then need to question, establish and assert how many people have been KILLED by these measures and will be
Read 5 tweets
2 Mar
A lot of people are still confused about the difference between Sars-CoV-2 (the virus) and COVID-19 (the disease), and why it matters.
Several have suggested it's just semantics. I don't think it is and I will try to explain why. (thread)
H1N1 is a respiratory virus. If you contract that virus, you will likely have mild symptoms. We refer to this as a COLD.

In rarer cases, H1N1 can lead to a more severe collection of symptoms, characterising a disease we call INFLUENZA.
SARS-CoV-2 is a respiratory virus. If you contract that virus, you will likely have mild symptoms. We refer to this as a COLD.

In rarer cases, SARS-CoV-2 can lead to a more severe collection of symptoms, characterising a disease we call COVID-19.
Read 6 tweets
24 Feb
If a government chooses not to act in response to a naturally occurring virus which spreads around the country and kills people, it should not be held accountable for those deaths. In the same way that there are many actions the government could take every year to dramatically
reduce cancer deaths but they do not. Ministers are not then blamed for all the people who have died of cancer. This principle is even more relevant when the severity of said virus is uncertain and the proposed measures are unproven. And still more relevant when it quickly
becomes clear that the measures are not having the intended effect on the virus.

However, if a government TAKES ACTION - implements policies, introduces guidance, changes the law - which they know will kill people, we are talking about murder.
According to the government's own
Read 8 tweets
21 Feb
There is currently a lot of media attention on @jowhiley and the fact that her sister is in hospital with Covid-19.
I would firstly like to make clear that I hope Frances makes a full recovery. I understand very well what it is like to have a disabled family member fighting for
their life in hospital. My daughter's seizures are triggered by her having a cold and so all respiratory infections represent a real risk of death.
However, I felt that some of Jo Whiley's comments on @AndrewMarr9 today were quite misleading and I worry about them causing
unnecessary anxiety for disabled people and their families.
Jo Whiley stated that all people with a learning disability are at increased risk from Sars-CoV-2. This is not at all true.
There are many disabled people, like Frances and my daughter, with complex health conditions
Read 9 tweets
10 Feb
I understand how desperately people want to believe that all of this was necessary.

For all of the misery, heartache, sacrifice and anger to have meant something. To have saved lives. Protected the health service. Helped us deal with a dangerous new pathogen.

But it's not true.
Lockdowns are immoral and disproportionate. They kill more people and those people are younger. They wreck economies. They change societies. They alter people's psychology in dangerous ways. They are undemocratic.

And once you have set a precedent for their implementation, you
will be forever living under the threat of your government stripping you of your rights without warning or justification.

But even if they did none of those things, they don't actually do the thing they are intended to do. They do not prevent hospitalisations and deaths from
Read 8 tweets
4 Feb
Mr Blair, thank you for joining us.

I would like to ask you about the greatest crisis you faced as Prime Minister.

Indeed, the greatest crisis we have faced as a nation since the Second World War.

In the winter of 1999/2000 a huge number of people were tragically killed.
They died from a totally out of control influenza virus, letting rip across the country. The end result was a level of all-cause mortality which absolutely towers over what we saw during 2020's 'deadly pandemic'.

I can only imagine how stressful it must have been for you.
Obviously, it goes without saying that you considered a national lockdown - I mean, it's so obvious that they hashtag save lives.
And obviously, you considered mandatory face masks. I mean, the science is clear. They just work.
Read 6 tweets
8 Jan
Why is nobody bothering to distinguish between the virus and the disease anymore?

Everything is meaningless if you don't do this.

We need to know who has Covid-19.

Not who might, possibly, have fragments of the virus Sars-CoV-2, that can lead to the disease, Covid-19.
I'm not interested in how many people in hospital or anywhere else have 'Covid'.

What the hell is 'Covid'?

Be specific.

Tell us exactly how many people are dying from severe pneumonia after contracting Sars-CoV-2.

That is the definition of a Covid-19 patient.
Clearly, this has been deliberate from the start. There are a lot of people on both sides who still don't understand the difference. People who think they've 'had Covid-19' because they tested positive for Sars-CoV-2. People who think a disease can spread around a country.
Read 4 tweets
4 Jan
You claim hospitals all over the country are full to bursting with people dying of severe pneumonia.
You claim that this justifies the destruction of millions of lives, the imposition of extreme poverty, the psychological abuse of children, the shutdown of democracy, the total &
quite possibly permanent demolition of basic freedoms and rights, the separation of families and thousands of deaths from other ailments.
It is not enough to have doctors on social media assure us that the situation is what you claim. It is not enough to have politicians sharing
graphs and fear-mongering anecdotes. It is not enough to expect us to trust a health service whose neligence kills babies every single day.
Let every broadcaster send journalists and camera crews into major hospitals all over the country and SHOW US WHAT IS HAPPENING.
Read 4 tweets
31 Dec 20
Cartoon Review Of The Year (Thread)

I'm just a cartoonist. What the hell do I know?
Read 38 tweets
22 Dec 20
1. Many people are saying they will not spend Christmas with family because it "just isn't worth the risk".
But how likely is it, given everything we now know, that a person without symptoms will pass the virus to somebody else, with fatal consequences?
2. First of all, given that you have no symptoms, what are the chances that you are infected with Sars CoV-2? The ONS estimates this to be 1 in 115, or 0.87%…
3. Now, imagining you are infected, but you don’t have any symptoms, what is the probability that you will infect somebody else with Sars CoV-2? Recent studies show this is around 0.7%…
Read 14 tweets
20 Dec 20
Some new pencil sketches available on my website:
Read 4 tweets
20 Dec 20
2. First of all, given that you have no symptoms, what are the chances that you are infected with Sars CoV-2? The ONS estimates this to be 1 in 115, or 0.87%…
3. Now, imagining you are infected, but you don’t have any symptoms, what is the probability that you will infect somebody else with Sars CoV-2? Recent studies show this is around 0.7%…
4. If we multiply the probability of these two events, we can calculate the likelihood of you a) being infected & b) passing that infection on without symptoms. This gives a figure of 0.006%
Read 12 tweets
19 Dec 20
I have sold a lot of original artwork this year and I'm very grateful and flattered that people want my work on their walls. There are still quite a few available to buy on my website:
Here is a thread of some of them...
Original for sale here:
Original for sale here:
Read 18 tweets
13 Dec 20
Those of us who are opposed to lockdowns, masks, tiers etc are often labelled conspiracy theorists, deniers and nutcases. The truth is, in order to believe that lockdowns are having any positive effect, you need to believe a whole range of completely mad things. Here are just 2:
1. That the virus was in the UK in November 2019 - this has been confirmed - and had already spread around the country and was killing people. BUT it stopped. It decided to wait. Even though Christmas was happening and families were travelling all over the country hugging and
kissing, the virus said, "No. Hold on. Stop killing people. Stop spreading. We haven't even been given a name yet. Let's wait until the world leaders start announcing us on the news and putting measures in place to 'control' us and THEN.. then we'll really get to work."
Read 8 tweets
9 Dec 20
We're not doing any of this because a lot of people were going to catch a cold. We're not destroying our economies and societies because a tiny number of people felt tired for a few months after a cough. We aren't allowing babies and children to die because a new strain
of coronavirus is at large. We were told, in no uncertain terms, that this new virus CAUSES a brand new, deadly disease called Covid-19, the like of which we had never seen before. A disease so horrific that doctors were having emotional breakdowns after treating it. That is what
all of this is based on. The reasoning behind a global reaction which may well lead to the permanent destruction of all the things that make life a worthwhile experience.
In nine months of being immersed in this swamp of information, I have still not found an explanation of what
Read 9 tweets
8 Dec 20
I'm extremely grateful for all the support I'm receiving regarding my being excluded from taking part in this year's cartoon awards. I think it's important that people understand the situation so I will try to explain...
Firstly, @EllwoodAtfield have sponsored the event for several years now and have transformed it into quite a grand affair. However, they do not have any involvement in which cartoonists are included or how the awards are decided. All of that is controlled by one man, Tim Benson.
Benson, @Cartoon4sale, runs the Political Cartoon Gallery in Putney and started these awards many years ago. I have known him for more than ten years. A lot of people find him extremely difficult and I have often found myself defending him to others in the past. We always seemed
Read 8 tweets
7 Dec 20
It's increasingly difficult for me NOT to be convinced that this is what has happened:
There was a new strain of cold. Because it was new, it spread quickly. However, it was so similar to pre-existing types of cold that at least 50% of people were already immune. Like many other cold viruses, it led to some old and vulnerable people getting pneumonia and dying.
THIS HAPPENS ALL THE TIME. It's a shame. It's very difficult to prevent, particularly in hospitals. But there's nothing new about it. Alas, somebody, somewhere, realised that if they renamed pneumonia as 'Covid-19' & described it as a new & deadly disease, everyone would go mad.
Read 6 tweets
6 Dec 20
Nothing about any of this, from the very beginning, has seemed as though we were heading in a direction that led to a point at which our lives would be given back to us. Nothing about it has ever felt temporary. None of the logic, the moral justification, 'the science' has made
any sense unless it represents a permanent and radical overturning of the way we have lived previously. The idea that the advent of a vaccine would herald a return to normal has kept a lot of people going. But what have you actually heard, since the announcement, to suggest
that's what's going to happen? I've heard nothing but indications that the vaccine is simply going to mark the final nail in the coffin of our civil liberties. Even if the rules are lifted, it won't make a lot of difference if people's psychology has been permanently altered.
Read 6 tweets