Search Results

Andrew Bridgen re his letter to the PM regarding the Pfizer jab. https://x.com/abridgen/status/1700887503928975394?s=46&t=GoFYQXhvoEbLg7WHOdd2Bg

https://expose-news.com/2023/09/09/energy-bill-authorises-reasonable-force-to-install-smart-meters-that-allow-authorities-to-turn-customers-energy-on-and-off/ Energy Bill Authorises “Reasonable Force” to Install Smart Meters that Allow Authorities to Turn Customers’ Energy On and Off. You probably know that a massive Energy Bill is being rushed through Parliament by our fake ‘Conservative’ Government in the first two days of our parliamentarians’ return from their generous summer break. The Bill is 446 pages long and written in dense, largely-incomprehensible-to-any-normal-person legalise. Moreover, many clauses in the Energy Bill make reference to other pieces of previous legislation. So, to fully understand the Bill, you would have to read at least a thousand pages of dense legalistic gobbledegook. says David Craig author of There is No Climate Crisis, and author of the article below. Given that our MPs have just passed the Bill with a mere nine voting against it, one must assume that they have spent their summer holidays diligently reading through the Bill and other relevant legislation in order to fully understand what they were voting for. Here’s the full title of the Bill: ‘A Bill to make provision about energy production and security and the regulation of the energy market, including provision about the licensing of carbon dioxide transport and storage; about commercial arrangements for industrial carbon capture and storage and for hydrogen production; about new technology, including low-carbon heat schemes and hydrogen grid trials; about the Independent System Operator and Planner; about gas and electricity industry codes; about heat networks; about energy smart appliances and load control; about the energy performance of premises; about the resilience of the core fuel sector; about offshore energy production, including environmental protection, licensing and decommissioning; about the civil nuclear sector, including the Civil Nuclear Constabulary; and for connected purposes’ As you’ll see, this legislative monster covers an awful lot of areas – energy production, regulation of the energy market, CO2 transport and storage, carbon capture, hydrogen production, low-carbon heat schemes, hydrogen grid trials, heat networks, smart appliances, load control, energy performance of industrial and residential premises, offshore energy production and the civil nuclear sector. We must be considered fortunate in Britain to have MPs who have such a strong work ethic and such a deep understanding of all these disparate issues to be able to vote for the new Energy Bill knowing exactly what they are voting for. Life is too short for any normal person to read and to try to understand this massive abomination of almost impenetrable legalise. But here are some choice titbits which I think I understand. The Bill explains what a ‘Smart Meter’ is: “Energy smart appliance” means an appliance which is capable of adjusting the immediate or future flow of electricity into or out of itself or another appliance in response to a load control signal; and includes any software or other systems which enable or facilitate the adjustment to be made in response to the signal. So it seems that the conspiracy theorists were right yet again – a key purpose of ‘Smart Meters’ is not only to measure power usage but also to allow energy providers to control how much energy we are allowed to consume using “a load control signal”. Moreover, authorities will be allowed to use “reasonable force” to enter any homes or premises to ensure we have the approved ‘Smart Meters’ installed: Requiring persons to supply evidence of their compliance to enforcement authorities; conferring powers of entry, including by reasonable force. All electricity and gas meters have dates by which they should be replaced. From what I have read the Bill gives representatives from energy companies the power to enter any home, with police protection if required, to replace traditional meters at the end of their lives with smart meters. Again, “reasonable force” may be used. The Bill gives the Government the power to force us to have energy assessments for any premises: The Secretary of State may make regulations for any of these purposes: (a) enabling or requiring the energy usage or energy efficiency of premises to be assessed, certified and publicised; We can be fined up to £15,000 or face one year in prison for failing to meet any future energy performance levels any government imposes: Energy performance regulations may provide for the imposition of civil penalties by enforcement authorities in relation to cases falling within subsection (1)(b), (c) or (d); but the regulations may not provide for a civil penalty that exceeds £15,000. Under the totally misleading title of ‘Energy Savings Opportunity Schemes’, authorities can force any person or company to make energy savings using the threat of criminalisation for failure to comply: The Secretary of State may by regulations (“ESOS regulations”) make provision for the establishment and operation of one or more energy savings opportunity schemes. An “energy savings opportunity scheme” is a scheme under which obligations 30 are imposed on undertakings to which the scheme applies for one or more of the ESOS purposes. I could go on. But I imagine you get the picture by now. This ‘Energy Bill’ creates the means by which some puffed-up public-sector mini-dictator could gain powers to control us in ways most people would find completely unacceptable. Yet our useless MPs passed the Bill with a massive majority and the Lords are set to do the same. If there really was a ‘climate crisis’ caused by humans burning fossil fuels and threatening the existence of the human race as the BBC and others of its ilk repeatedly claim, then you might be able to argue that some of the measures in the Bill could be justified. But given that changes in atmospheric CO2 levels have little to no influence on the Earth’s temperatures, that Britain only contributes less than 1% of world CO2 output, and that developing countries like India and China each increase their CO2 output by more each year than Britain’s total CO2 emissions, we are creating a totalitarian regime which will intrude on people’s lives, restrict people’s freedoms, wreck the British economy and immiserate our country to fix a problem which doesn’t even exist and, if it did, would not be solved by our action anyway. And if you fear this horror will lead to an intrusive, oppressive police state under the Tories, imagine how this will be used and abused by Ed Miliband and the climate fanatics in the next Labour Government. David Craig is the author of There is No Climate Crisis, available as an e-book or paperback from Amazon. On the X platform.

https://expose-news.com/2023/09/10/vaccine-contracts-with-the-sa-govt-show-it-was-a-lie/ They said it was “safe and effective”; covid vaccine contracts with the South African government show it was a lie Featured image: South African President Cyril Ramaphosa receives the Johnson & Johnson covid injection in South Africa on 17 February 2021. Source: Sowetan Live In August, a South African Court ordered the National Department of Health (“NDOH”) to release covid vaccine contracts and other related documents. At the beginning of September, the first batch of documents was released. On Thursday 17 August 2023, the Pretoria High Court ruled in favour of the Health Justice Initiative’s (“HJI’s”) bid to compel the NDOH to provide access to all covid “vaccine” procurement contracts and other documents. The Court ordered that all covid vaccine contracts (“Part 1”) and negotiation-related documents (“Part 2”) must be made public within 10 court days of the Judgment. On 1 September, HJI issued a press statement saying that NDOH had handed documents for Part 1 to HJI’s legal team. NDOH has undertaken to share the remainder of the documents, Part 2, which it was ordered to disclose, and in agreement with HJI, by no later than 29 September 2023. On 5 September, HJI held a press briefing after which they uploaded the Part 1 documents to their website HERE. The Part 1 documents comprise: * COVAX Facility/Gavi Alliance – Committed Purchase Agreement (dated 11 December 2020). * Janssen Pharmaceutica – Advance Purchase Agreement (26 February 2021). * Janssen Pharmaceutica – Advance Purchase Agreement, Additional Doses (_ April 2021). * Janssen Pharmaceutica – Term Sheet (19 November 2020). * Pfizer – Manufacturing and Supply Agreement (30 March 2021). * Pfizer – Amendment to Manufacturing and Supply Agreement (4 June 2021). * Pfizer – Binding Term Sheet. * Serum Institute of India – Vaccine Purchase Agreement (18 January 2021). * Serum Institute of India – Term Sheet (7 January 2021). It is worth noting that the HJI was launched in July 2020 in South Africa “to advocate for a more inclusive, equitable public health system, locally and globally, both during and beyond the pandemic.” It was established using all the verbiage of the Globalist agenda. The founder of HJI is Fatima Hassan, a South African human rights lawyer and social justice activist. She is the former executive director of the Open Society Foundation of South Africa, founded by infamous globalist George Soros. We can safely assume that HJI is under the influence, if not the control, of the Globalists. Further reading: How the British Invented George Soros, Lew Rockwell, 19 June 2021 Pfizer Covid Vaccine Contract In the March 2021 manufacturing and supply agreement (“vaccine contract”) between Pfizer and NDOH, there is a paragraph that admits the safety and the efficacy of Pfizer’s covid injection were unknown: 5.1 Purchaser Acknowledgement. Purchaser acknowledges that the Vaccine and materials related to the Vaccine, and their components and constituent materials are being rapidly developed due to the emergency circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and will continue to be studied after provision of the Vaccine to Purchaser under this Agreement. Purchaser further acknowledges that the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known. Further, to the extent applicable, Purchaser acknowledges that the Product shall not be serialized. [Emphasis our own.] Manufacturing and Supply Agreement Between Pfizer Laboratories Proprietary Limited and the Government of the Republic of South Africa Acting Through the National Department of Health of South Africa ( “NDOH” ), 30 March 2021 Janssen Covid Vaccine Contract The NDOH contract with Janssen shows a similar lack of confidence in the “safety and efficacy” of its covid injection. The Janssen covid injection was developed by Janssen Vaccines in Leiden, Netherlands, and its Belgian parent company Janssen Pharmaceuticals, a subsidiary of American company Johnson & Johnson (“J&J”). The South African government signed two agreements with Janssen. The first was an ‘Advance Purchase Agreement’ dated 26 February 2021, to secure 11 million doses, followed by a second for the supply of additional doses on an unspecified date in April 2021. Additional Vaccine Volume 5.2 The Government Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that: (b) the final total dosage and administration schedule of COVID Vaccine required to protect one (I) individual against SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 has not been determined as of the Effective Date [xx April 2021] and, without prejudice to clause 5.2(c), shall be determined solely by Janssen based on data generated in ongoing clinical trials; Janssen shall be entitled to unilaterally adjust the definition of Vaccine Dose set out in this Agreement after the Effective Date based on data generated as part of its ongoing clinical trials. [pg.12] (c) Janssen provides no warranty that a Vaccine Dose will be sufficient to protect one (I) individual against COVID-19, or that the COVID Vaccine is safe or efficacious [pg.12] 13.4 … Janssen disclaims, to the fullest extent permitted by Law, all warranties … relating to the sufficiency of a single Vaccine Dose to protect one (I) individual against SARS-Co V-2/COVID-l 9 or the safety or effectiveness of the COVID Vaccine. [pg. 22] [Emphasis our own.] Advance Purchase Agreement for SARS-CoV-2/Covid-19 Vaccine (Additional Doses), Janssen Pharmacuetica JV and the Government of the Republic of South Africa Acting Through the National Department of Health (the “Government Purchaser”), April 2021 Notably, on the ‘Additional Doses’ purchase agreement’s title page is an EMEA document reference. EMEA refers to Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, a geographical grouping used by global corporations to define regional business activity. Does this mean that Janssen used the same contract for all countries in the EMEA region? Bottom of the title page for Advance Purchase Agreement for SARS-CoV-2/Covid-19 Vaccine (Additional Doses), Janssen Pharmacuetica JV and the Government of the Republic of South Africa Acting Through the National Department of Health (the “Government Purchaser”) According to Wikipedia, South Africa began its mass covid injection campaign on 17 February 2021. This is not true. It is more than a week before NDOH signed its first contract to purchase injections on 26 February. The date Wikipedia gives is, in fact, the date when the trial for Janssen’s vaccine in South Africa began. The trial participants were healthcare workers, whether they realised they were taking part in a trial or not. In the week ending 21 February, nearly 15,000 people had been injected as part of J&J’s Sisonke covid vaccine trial. By the end of the following week, 28 February, more than 71,000 healthcare workers had been injected as part of the Sisonke trial. Enrolment in the Siskone study began on 17 February 2021 and as of 12 April 2021, a total of 288,368 healthcare workers had received J&J’s Ad26.COV2.S vaccine, among whom 5898 (2%) reported adverse events. Fifty of the trial participants, in other words, healthcare workers, had serious side effects including 12 people who had allergic reactions and six who had neurologic conditions, including a case of Guillain-Barre syndrome and another with Bell’s palsy. The majority (85%) of participants experienced mild to moderate effects. In April 2021, South Africa suspended the use of J&J covid injections as a “precautionary measure” and J&J delayed its European vaccine rollout following an FDA decision to pause the jabs while blood clot cases are examined. A few days later, South Africa announced it had resumed its J&J vaccination rollout. The trial’s early safety data was reported in the New England Journal of Medicine in June 2021. The authors noted that no cases of the blood clotting condition, known as vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (“VITT”), were detected in the South African study. Although, around 28 cases had been identified in vaccinated people in other countries. However, five participants in the Sisonke study did develop blood clots – four of the five cases were linked to the vaccine, while one case was possibly linked. In June 2021, there was a delay in the South African rollout of the J&J vaccine after it was found that there was a lack of adherence to proper standards at a manufacturing plant in the United States, News24 reported. The J&J injections intended for South Africa were suspended following a US ruling that ingredients for the country’s doses may have been contaminated during production in a plant in Baltimore. The US Food and Drug Administration said on 11 June 2021 that some batches of the J&J “vaccine” were not fit to use. Did the Government Fully Inform the Public? Did the South African government fully inform the public about the lack of safety and efficacy? No. In fact, the Government did the opposite. On its website, the South African government assured the public that the injections were “safe and effective.” There is no indication of the date the webpage was uploaded or when it was last updated, however, it is clear it is before the public had been subjected to any of the injections: The first doses of the vaccine are from Johnson & Johnson as its vaccine has proved effective … The country has secured 11 million doses of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. [The ‘Advance Purchase Agreement’ with J&J is dated 26 February 2021.] Vaccines undergo rigorous trials to ensure they are safe and effective. All vaccines go through a comprehensive approval process by medical regulators to ensure that they are safe. Pharmaceutical companies hand over all laboratory studies and safety trials to validate that the vaccine does work. South Africa reached an agreement with the COVAX Facility to secure 12 million vaccine doses. This will be complemented by other vaccines that are available to South Africa through the African Union’s African Vaccine Acquisition Task Team facility. Pfizer has committed 20 million vaccine doses commencing with deliveries at the end of the first quarter. Government continues to work with various pharmaceutical companies to ensure we immunise 67 per cent of the population. COVID-19 Coronavirus vaccine, South African Government We don’t know what Part 2, the remaining documents given to HIJ, may reveal, but from the vaccine contracts alone it is apparent that the South African public was lied to. They were told the covid injections were “safe and effective” when the Government knew they had no basis to make that assertion. As of 4 September 2023, more than 39 million doses had been injected into the population – 8 million people had been injected with J&J and 14.7 million had been injected with Pfizer. The vast majority of injections were administered during the 12 months between May 2021 and April 2022. By now, there should be at least 23 million very angry South Africans.

Are YOU itching to see what Australian/NZ/UK/US etc politician / bureaucrat signed IN YOUR NAME?

a pic received on GAB & OUR response... Every 👩 (and 🧔🏻) has 3 'hormones' - Testosterone, Estrogen & Progesterone - of differing levels...THIS is 1 reason why Soya Protein (which is in every processed item) affects some people more than others. As we ALL have differing levels of the 3 hormones, an Estrogen Pill (which is the standard 1 they provide ladies) will NOT WORK as effectively as is claimed for 👩👩 who have LOW PROGESTERONE (as its giving 👩🏻 more hormones that we already have),thus, WE KEEP GETTING PREGNANT WHILE ON THE PILL. The Aust Government didn't include a Prog. pill on the PBS until approx the late 1990's. In fact, some Dr's have told Mrs B that they had requested a Prog. pill be placed on the PBS 4 YRS & it had been REJECTED ....4 YRS, but VIAGRA was accepted immediately. 🤨 And all U need is a blood test 2 check which 1 U need. What is the reality of the FACTS ABOVE...WOMEN'S BODIES & MEN'S SPERM have been the unwitting surplus economy for some Dr's & the organ/food industry 4 YEARS.

https://www.westernjournal.com/scientist-publicly-admits-omitting-full-truth-climate-wildfires-causes-publication-says-typical/ Scientist Publicly Admits to Omitting 'Full Truth' of Climate Wildfires Causes for Publication – Says It's Typical A home burns as the Camp Fire moves through the area on November 8, 2018, in Paradise, California. Are both mainstream research and establishment media purposely misleading the public about wildfires’ root causes? A climate researcher appears to have affirmed this by exposing a “reward” system in prestigious research journals like Nature and the mainstream media’s handling of wildfire stories. Patrick Brown, an adjunct faculty member at Johns Hopkins University and co-director of the Climate and Energy Team at the Breakthrough Institute, shed light on the behind-the-scenes dynamics of high-profile scientific journals and their preference for research that aligns with certain pre-approved narratives. In an article in The Free Press titled “I Left Out the Full Truth to Get My Climate Change Paper Published,” Brown alleged that “high-profile journals” and the mainstream media deliberately misled the public by emphasizing climate change as the primary factor behind wildfires while downplaying other crucial influences. “I am a climate scientist. And while climate change is an important factor affecting wildfires over many parts of the world, it isn’t close to the only factor that deserves our sole focus,” Brown said, questioning the media’s obsession with attributing recent wildfires primarily to climate change. He said that this selective publication process encourages scientists to craft research that reinforces the “mainstream” perspective, even if it means omitting or downplaying alternative factors influencing wildfires. Brown’s admission stems from his involvement in a recent study co-authored by him that attributed wildfires in California solely to climate change. This study, published in the prestigious scientific journal Nature, garnered significant attention, especially after Brown, the lead author of the study, published the Free Press article criticizing the publication practices. Brown took to X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, admitting that their research omitted other potential causes of wildfires, such as “changes in human ignition patterns and changes in land use and vegetation/fuels.” According to Brown, the decision to exclusively focus on the impact of climate change was driven by the desire to have the research published in a “high-impact journal.” He said, “This research looked at the effect of warming in isolation, but that warming is just one of many important influences on wildfires.” In his article, Brown bluntly highlights the incentive mechanism that rewards scientists for fitting their research into a “simple storyline.” He said that editors at esteemed journals prefer climate papers that align with “certain preapproved narratives—even when those narratives come at the expense of broader knowledge for society.” “Put simply, I’ve found that there is a formula for success for publishing climate change research in the most prestigious and widely-read scientific journals,” Brown posted on X, adding that including other “relevant factors” as the cause of wildfires unfortunately “makes the research less useful.” Additionally, Brown pointed out several tactics used in climate change fearmongering, The Blaze reported. These include downplaying meaningful actions that could “counter the impact of climate change,” focusing on sensational “metrics” at the expense of relevance or actionable information, and assessing climate change magnitude “over centuries” while ignoring technological and societal changes. Nature responded on Thursday, denying any preferred narrative and highlighting recent articles that contradict Brown’s claims, The Mercury News reported. Editor-in-Chief Magdalena Skipper said they are assessing Brown’s actions, which they find reflect poor research practices and do not align with their journal’s standards. “When it comes to science, Nature does not have a preferred narrative,” Skipper said. Skipper also mentioned that peer reviewers had raised questions about missing variables in Brown’s study, but the authors opposed their inclusion, a point disputed by Brown on social media. Co-author Steven J. Davis, a UC Irvine Earth science professor, expressed surprise at Brown’s comments, saying, “we don’t know whether a different paper would have been rejected.” Co-author Craig Clements, head of San Jose State’s wildfire research center, also praised the study for its robust scientific work, including cutting-edge techniques like AI models. “I recognize journals such as Nature, one of the most respected science publications in the world, have rigorous editorial processes and appreciate the fact that they saw the value of the important science that this study advances,” Clements said, according to the Mercury News. Contrary to the recent studies published in research journals, reports from authorities have indicated that human ignition and even arson were the actual causes of a number of recent wildfires. In Louisiana, authorities reported that the largest wildfire in the state was intentionally ignited in August, with a $2,000 reward offered for information leading to the arrest and conviction of those responsible. Moreover, state authorities reported that a 37-year-old individual was arrested Aug. 26 for making threats to ignite a significant fire during a burn ban. In California, a former sociology and criminology professor faced charges for allegedly setting four wildfires in national forests as part of an “arson spree” during the summer of 2021, The New York Times reported.

Then A Mass Die-Off.....

https://cen.acs.org/pharmaceuticals/gene-therapy/mRNA-loaded-lipid-nanoparticles-reprogram-cells/101/web/2023/08 Some blood cells in individuals affected by sickle cell disease have a pinched shape due to a mutation in a gene that makes hemoglobin. ____________________________________________________________________________________________ A team of researchers has used lipid nanoparticles loaded with mRNA—the starring technology in some COVID-19 vaccines—to noninvasively and selectively trigger cell death in living mice’s blood stem cells. And in a second experiment, they used the nanoparticle system to remove a sickle cell–producing gene in human cells (Science 2023; DOI: 10.1126/science.ade6967). Several therapies that involve modifying blood cell precursors in the bone marrow called hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) already exist. But they involve extracting the HSCs, manipulating them in a sterile environment, and returning them to the body—a cumbersome and expensive process. And often, before receiving the modified HSCs, people must go through a regimen of toxic chemotherapy to kill off the ones already in the bone marrow. The new advance involves a single injection and uses antibodies to target the payload to its intended destination. And it makes its cellular or genetic modifications directly in the body without the need for cell extraction. The researchers developed two payloads: one that edited a mutation for sickle cell disease, and another that selectively killed HSCs, which would eliminate the need for chemotherapy before HSC transplantion. If the therapies can be successfully adapted to people, this approach “will actually make gene therapy affordable, not only to our patients but also to our health care system,” says Hamideh Parhiz, a biotechnologist at the University of Pennsylvania, who co-led the research. The researchers designed the lipid nanoparticles to target HSCs using an antibody that binds to the protein CD117, which is commonly found on these cells’ surface. After confirming that the nanoparticles were breaking through into about half of blood cells, they loaded the antibody-coated nanoparticles with an mRNA encoding a protein that induces cell death. Although the nanoparticles killed HSCs, the researchers discovered some off-target effects, so they added tiny bits of noncoding RNA that kept the protein from killing other cells. “That’s when we got success,” Parhiz says. In another experiment, the researchers stuffed their nanoparticles with an mRNA sequence that produces a gene editor when it enters the cell. The editor targets a mutation in hemoglobin causing sickle cell disease. The researchers tested the gene-editing nanoparticles on cells grown from samples taken from people with the disease. Reversing the mutation resulted in more than 95% of blood cells taking on a typical round shape rather than the sickle-like appearance characteristic of the disease. Parhiz and her colleagues are working on fine-tuning the approach and testing it further in animals to get a better understanding of how efficiently it edits intended genes and how well it targets HSCs. The study is “an impressive advance,” says David R. Liu, a chemist and gene editing expert at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. Though many steps remain before clinical testing, he says, the approach “could lay a foundation for the much broader availability of programmable therapeutic gene editing to treat a variety of genetic blood disorders, which would represent a major breakthrough for patients.” ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Editor's Comment: But let's not kid ourselves that the psychopaths are doing this for our well being.

Azerbaijan mobilises troops to the Armenian border. Moscow summons Armenian Ambassador and expresses dissatisfaction effectively withdrawing support for the Armenian Government. Iran deploys troops onto border with Azerbaijan. US military deploys troops to Armenia for "exercises". Armenian intelligence claim they have just foiled a coup d'état attempt on the Prime Minister Pashinyan. Turkey declares that it will intervene to support Azerbaijan against Iran. Convoys of Iranian tanks & artillery spotted deploying to the Azerbaijanian border. ❗️The Armenian Government has boldly criticized Russia's "absolute indifference" to Azerbaijani "aggression" against Armenia and an ungrateful Prime Minister Pashinyan has expressed regret over his country's near-total dependence on Moscow for its security as a "strategic mistake." ⚡️To spite Russia, Armenia announced that it would be sending aid to Ukraine for the first time since the conflict began. 💥Russia is unlikely to help Armenia in case of military escalation with Azerbaijan, in particular since Moscow is now directly speaking of Karabakhi Armenians' need to accept Baku's rule over the disputed territory.