We highlight the suspicious conduct of members of the Thatcher government in the lead-up to the Argentine invasion on 2nd April 1982 which included defence cuts in the South Atlantic area and secret approaches to the Argentine junta to discuss Falklands sovereignty and a 99-year lease back deal.
Under the spotlight also is the decision to sink the ARA Belgrano on 2nd May 1982. Numerous telegrams had been sent to London by the British Ambassador to Peru Charles Wallace as the Peruvian President’s peace proposals took shape in April. These are available for inspection at the http://www.margaretthatcher.org website.
But when details of the finalised peace plan were presented to Charles Wallace on 1st May 1982, NO FLASH TELEGRAM had been sent to the United Kingdom government. (Or that’s what we are led to believe.) There are NO telegrams from Lima to London dated 1st May 1982 held at the above website. Further to this, the UK Cabinet Office has now withdrawn access to ALL incoming telegrams sent during the war.
If Charles Wallace DID send a telegram on 1st May 1982, instead of taking minutes to arrive in London, as expected, it seems to have disappeared without trace.
Mrs Thatcher claimed during her BBC TV Nationwide interview in May 1983 that news of the peace proposals was received in outline form 17 hours later, during which time orders had been given to sink the ARA Belgrano, killing 368 Argentinian sailors.
You asked for it, so we made it. A collection of all the arguments you’ll ever need.
Kit Knightly
We get a lot of e-mails and private messages along these lines “do you have a source for X?” or “can you point me to mask studies?” or “I know I saw a graph for mortality, but I can’t find it anymore”. And we understand, it’s been a long 18 months, and there are so many statistics and numbers to try and keep straight in your head.
So, to deal with all these requests, we decided to make a bullet-pointed and sourced list for all the key points. A one-stop-shop.
Here are key facts and sources about the alleged “pandemic”, that will help you get a grasp on what has happened to the world since January 2020, and help you enlighten any of your friends who might be still trapped in the New Normal fog (click links to skip):
1. The survival rate of “Covid” is over 99%. Government medical experts went out of their way to underline, from the beginning of the pandemic, that the vast majority of the population are not in any danger from Covid.
Almost all studies on the infection-fatality ratio (IFR) of Covid have returned results between 0.04% and 0.5%. Meaning Covid’s survival rate is at least 99.5%.
*
2. There has been NO unusual excess mortality. The press has called 2020 the UK’s “deadliest year since world war two”, but this is misleading because it ignores the massive increase in the population since that time. A more reasonable statistical measure of mortality is Age-Standardised Mortality Rate (ASMR):
By this measure, 2020 isn’t even the worst year for mortality since 2000, In fact since 1943 only 9 years have been better than 2020.
Similarly, in the US the ASMR for 2020 is only at 2004 levels:
For a detailed breakdown of how Covid affected mortality across Western Europe and the US click here. What increases in mortality we have seen could be attributable to non-Covid causes [facts 7, 9 & 19].
*
3. “Covid death” counts are artificially inflated. Countries around the globe have been defining a “Covid death” as a “death by any cause within 28/30/60 days of a positive test”.
Removing any distinction between dying of Covid, and dying of something else after testing positive for Covid will naturally lead to over-counting of “Covid deaths”. British pathologist Dr John Lee was warning of this “substantial over-estimate” as early as last spring. Other mainstream sources have reported it, too.
Considering the huge percentage of “asymptomatic” Covid infections [14], the well-known prevalence of serious comorbidities [fact 4] and the potential for false-positive tests [fact 18], this renders the Covid death numbers an extremely unreliable statistic.
*
4. The vast majority of covid deaths have serious comorbidities. In March 2020, the Italian government published statistics showing 99.2% of their “Covid deaths” had at least one serious comorbidity.
These included cancer, heart disease, dementia, Alzheimer’s, kidney failure and diabetes (among others). Over 50% of them had three or more serious pre-existing conditions.
5. Average age of “Covid death” is greater than the average life expectancy. The average age of a “Covid death” in the UK is 82.5 years. In Italy it’s 86. Germany, 83. Switzerland, 86. Canada, 86. The US, 78, Australia, 82.
As such, for most of the world, the “pandemic” has had little-to-no impact on life expectancy. Contrast this with the Spanish flu, which saw a 28% drop in life expectancy in the US in just over a year. [source]
*
6. Covid mortality exactly mirrors the natural mortality curve.Statistical studies from the UK and India have shown that the curve for “Covid death” follows the curve for expected mortality almost exactly:
The small increase for some of the older age groups can be accounted for by other factors.[facts 7, 9 & 19]
*
7. There has been a massive increase in the use of “unlawful” DNRs. Watchdogs and government agencies have reported huge increases in the use of Do Not Resuscitate Orders (DNRs) over the last twenty months.
In the UK there was an “unprecdented” rise in “illegal” DNRs for disabled people, GP surgeries sent out letters to non-terminal patients recommending they sign DNR orders, whilst other doctors signed “blanket DNRs” for entire nursing homes.
A study done by Sheffield Univerisity found over one-third of all “suspected” Covid patients had a DNR attached to their file within 24 hours of hospital admission.
Blanket use of coerced or illegal DNR orders could account for any increases in mortality in 2020/21.[Facts 2 & 6]
*
PART II: LOCKDOWNS
8. Lockdowns do not prevent the spread of disease. There is little to no evidence lockdowns have any impact on limiting “Covid deaths”. If you compare regions that locked down to regions that did not, you can see no pattern at all.
“Covid deaths” in Florida (no lockdown) vs California (lockdown)
“Covid deaths” in Sweden (no lockdown) vs UK (lockdown)
*
9. Lockdowns kill people. There is strong evidence that lockdowns – through social, economic and other public health damage – are deadlier than the “virus”.
Dr David Nabarro, World Health Organization special envoy for Covid-19 described lockdowns as a “global catastrophe” in October 2020:
We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of the virus[…] it seems we may have a doubling of world poverty by next year. We may well have at least a doubling of child malnutrition […] This is a terrible, ghastly global catastrophe.”
Unemployment, poverty, suicide, alcoholism, drug use and other social/mental health crises are spiking all over the world. While missed and delayed surgeries and screenings are going to see increased mortality from heart disease, cancer et al. in the near future.
The impact of lockdown would account for the small increases in excess mortality [Facts 2 & 6]
*
10. Hospitals were never unusually over-burdened. the main argument used to defend lockdowns is that “flattening the curve” would prevent a rapid influx of cases and protect healthcare systems from collapse. But most healthcare systems were never close to collapse at all.
As part of their Covid policy, the NHS announced in Spring of 2020 that they would be “re-organizing hospital capacity in new ways to treat Covid and non-Covid patients separately” and that “as result hospitals will experience capacity pressures at lower overall occupancy rates than would previously have been the case.”
This means they removed thousands of beds. During an alleged deadly pandemic, they reduced the maximum occupancy of hospitals. Despite this, the NHS never felt pressure beyond your typical flu season, and at times actually had 4x more empty beds than normal.
11. PCR tests were not designed to diagnose illness. The Reverse-Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) test is described in the media as the “gold standard” for Covid diagnosis. But the Nobel Prize-winning inventor of the process never intended it to be used as a diagnostic tool, and said so publicly:
PCR is just a process that allows you to make a whole lot of something out of something. It doesn’t tell you that you are sick, or that the thing that you ended up with was going to hurt you or anything like that.”
*
12. PCR Tests have a history of being inaccurate and unreliable. The “gold standard” PCR tests for Covid are known to produce a lot of false-positive results, by reacting to DNA material that is not specific to Sars-Cov-2.
As early as February of 2020 experts were admitting the test was unreliable. Dr Wang Cheng, president of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences told Chinese state television “The accuracy of the tests is only 30-50%”. The Australian government’s own website claimed“There is limited evidence available to assess the accuracy and clinical utility of available COVID-19 tests.” And a Portuguese court ruled that PCR tests were “unreliable” and should not be used for diagnosis.
You can read detailed breakdowns of the failings of PCR tests here, here and here.
*
13. The CT values of the PCR tests are too high. PCR tests are run in cycles, the number of cycles you use to get your result is known as your “cycle threshold” or CT value. Kary Mullis said: “If you have to go more than 40 cycles[…]there is something seriously wrong with your PCR.”
Dr Juliet Morrison, virologist at the University of California, Riverside, told the New York Times: Any test with a cycle threshold above 35 is too sensitive…I’m shocked that people would think that 40 [cycles] could represent a positive…A more reasonable cutoff would be 30 to 35″.
In the same article Dr Michael Mina, of the Harvard School of Public Health, said the limit should be 30, and the author goes on to point out that reducing the CT from 40 to 30 would have reduced “covid cases” in some states by as much as 90%.
Based on what we know about the CT values, the majority of PCR test results are at best questionable.
*
14. The World Health Organization (Twice) Admitted PCR tests produced false positives. In December 2020 WHO put out a briefing memo on the PCR process instructing labs to be wary of high CT values causing false positive results:
when specimens return a high Ct value, it means that many cycles were required to detect virus. In some circumstances, the distinction between background noise and actual presence of the target virus is difficult to ascertain.
Then, in January 2021, the WHO released another memo, this time warning that “asymptomatic” positive PCR tests should be re-tested because they might be false positives:
Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology.
*
15. The scientific basis for Covid tests is questionable. The genome of the Sars-Cov-2 virus was supposedly sequenced by Chinese scientists in December 2019, then published on January 10th 2020. Less than two weeks later, German virologists (Christian Drosten et al.) had allegedly used the genome to create assays for PCR tests.
They wrote a paper, Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR, which was submitted for publication on January 21st 2020, and then accepted on January 22nd. Meaning the paper was allegedly “peer-reviewed” in less than 24 hours. A process that typically takes weeks.
Since then, a consortium of over forty life scientists has petitioned for the withdrawal of the paper, writing a lengthy report detailing 10 major errors in the paper’s methodology.
They have also requested the release of the journal’s peer-review report, to prove the paper really did pass through the peer-review process. The journal has yet to comply.
The Corman-Drosten assays are the root of every Covid PCR test in the world. If the paper is questionable, every PCR test is also questionable.
It is literally impossible to tell the difference between an “asymptomatic case” and a false-positive test result.
*
17. There is very little evidence supporting the alleged danger of “asymptomatic transmission”. In June 2020, Dr Maria Van Kerkhove, head of the WHO’s emerging diseases and zoonosis unit, said:
From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual,”
…limited evidence to suggest the importance of [asymptomatic] transmission. The role of asymptomatic or presymptomatic influenza-infected individuals in disease transmission may have been overestimated…”
Given the known flaws of the PCR tests, many “asymptomatic cases” may be false positives.[fact 14]
*
PART V: VENTILATORS
18. Ventilation is NOT a treatment for respiratory viruses. Mechanical ventilation is not, and never has been, recommended treatment for respiratory infection of any kind. In the early days of the pandemic, many doctors came forward questioning the use of ventilators to treat “Covid”.
Writing in The Spectator, Dr Matt Strauss stated:
Ventilators do not cure any disease. They can fill your lungs with air when you find yourself unable to do so yourself. They are associated with lung diseases in the public’s consciousness, but this is not in fact their most common or most appropriate application.
German Pulmonologist Dr Thomas Voshaar, chairman of Association of Pneumatological Clinics said:
When we read the first studies and reports from China and Italy, we immediately asked ourselves why intubation was so common there. This contradicted our clinical experience with viral pneumonia.
Despite this, the WHO, CDC, ECDC and NHS all “recommended” Covid patients be ventilated instead of using non-invasive methods.
This was not a medical policy designed to best treat the patients, but rather to reduce the hypothetical spread of Covid by preventing patients from exhaling aerosol droplets.
*
19. Ventilators killed people. Putting someone on a ventilator who is suffering from influenza, pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or any other condition which restricts breathing or affects the lungs, will not alleviate any of those symptoms. In fact, it will almost certainly make it worse, and will kill many of them.
Mechanical ventilation is also damaging to the physical structure of the lungs, resulting in “ventilator-induced lung injury”, which can dramatically impact quality of life, and even result in death.
According to the “undercover nurse”, ventilators were being used so improperly in New York, they were destroying patients’ lungs:https://www.youtube.com/embed/UIDsKdeFOmQ
This policy was negligence at best, and potentially deliberate murder at worst. This misuse of ventilators could account for any increase in mortality in 2020/21 [Facts 2 & 6]
*
PART VI: MASKS
20. Masks don’t work. At least a dozen scientific studies have shown that masks do nothing to stop the spread of respiratory viruses.
One meta-analysis published by the CDC in May 2020 found “no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks”.
Another study with over 8000 subjects found masks “did not seem to be effective against laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections nor against clinical respiratory infection.”
There are literally too many to quote them all, but you can read them: [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] Or read a summary by SPR here.
The WHO commissioned their own meta-analysis in the Lancet, but that study looked only at N95 masks and only in hospitals. [For full run down on the bad data in this study click here.]
Aside from scientific evidence, there’s plenty of real-world evidence that masks do nothing to halt the spread of disease.
For example, North Dakota and South Dakota had near-identical case figures, despite one having a mask-mandate and the other not:
21. Masks are bad for your health. Wearing a mask for long periods, wearing the same mask more than once, and other aspects of cloth masks can be bad for your health. A long study on the detrimental effects of mask-wearing was recently published by the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Dr. James Meehan reported in August 2020 he was seeing increases in bacterial pneumonia, fungal infections, facial rashes .
Masks are also known to contain plastic microfibers, which damage the lungs when inhaled and may be potentially carcinogenic.
The report goes on to warn these masks (and other medical waste) will clog sewage and irrigation systems, which will have knock on effects on public health, irrigation and agriculture.
A study from the University of Swansea found “heavy metals and plastic fibres were released when throw-away masks were submerged in water.” These materials are toxic to both people and wildlife.
*
PART VII: VACCINES
23. Covid “vaccines” are totally unprecedented. Before 2020 no successful vaccine against a human coronavirus had ever been developed. Since then we have allegedly made 20 of them in 18 months.
While traditional vaccines work by exposing the body to a weakened strain of the microorganism responsible for causing the disease, these new Covid vaccines are mRNA vaccines.
mRNA (messenger ribonucleic acid) vaccines theoretically work by injecting viral mRNA into the body, where it replicates inside your cells and encourages your body to recognise, and make antigens for, the “spike proteins” of the virus. They have been the subject of research since the 1990s, but before 2020 no mRNA vaccine was ever approved for use.
*
24. Vaccines do not confer immunity or prevent transmission. It is readily admitted that Covid “vaccines” do not confer immunity from infection and do not prevent you from passing the disease onto others. Indeed, an article in the British Medical Journal highlighted that the vaccine studies were not designed to even try and assess if the “vaccines” limited transmission.
The vaccine manufacturers themselves, upon releasing the untested mRNA gene therapies, were quite clear their product’s “efficacy” was based on “reducing the severity of symptoms”.
*
25. The vaccines were rushed and have unknown longterm effects. Vaccine development is a slow, laborious process. Usually, from development through testing and finally being approved for public use takes many years. The various vaccines for Covid were all developed and approved in less than a year. Obviously there can be no long-term safety data on chemicals which are less than a year old.
Pfizer even admit this is true in the leaked supply contract between the pharmaceutical giant, and the government of Albania:
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
26. Vaccine manufacturers have been granted legal indemnity should they cause harm. The USA’s Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP) grants immunity until at least 2024.
The UK went even further, granting permanent legal indemnity to the government, and any employees thereof, for any harm done when a patient is being treated for Covid19 or “suspected Covid19”.
Again, the leaked Albanian contract suggests that Pfizer, at least, made this indemnity a standard demand of supplying Covid vaccines:
Purchaser hereby agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Pfizer […] from and against any and all suits, claims, actions, demands, losses, damages, liabilities, settlements, penalties, fines, costs and expenses
*
PART VIII: DECEPTION & FOREKNOWLEDGE
27. The EU was preparing “vaccine passports” at least a YEAR before the pandemic began. Proposed COVID countermeasures, presented to the public as improvised emergency measures, have existed since before the emergence of the disease.
These documents were combined into the 2019 “Vaccination Roadmap”, which (among other things) established a “feasibility study” on vaccine passports to begin in 2019 and finish in 2021:
This report’s final conclusions were released to the public in September 2019, just a month before Event 201 (below).
*
28. A “training exercise” predicted the pandemic just weeks before it started. In October 2019 the World Economic Forum and Johns Hopkins University held Event 201. This was a training exercise based on a zoonotic coronavirus starting a worldwide pandemic. The exercise was sponsored by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and GAVI the vaccine alliance.
The exercise published its findings and recommendations in November 2019 as a “call to action”. One month later, China recorded their first case of “Covid”.
*
29. Since the beginning of 2020, the Flu has “disappeared”. In the United States, since February 2020, influenza cases have allegedly dropped by over 98%.
Meanwhile, a new disease called “Covid”, which has identical symptoms and a similar mortality rate to influenza, is apparently affecting all the people normally affected by the flu.
*
30. The elite have made fortunes during the pandemic. Since the beginning of lockdown the wealthiest people have become significantly wealthier. Forbes reported that 40 new billionaires have been created “fighting the coronavirus”, with 9 of them being vaccine manufacturers.
These are the vital facts of the pandemic, presented here as a resource to help formulate and support your arguments with friends or strangers. Thanks to all the researchers who have collated and collected this information over the last twenty months, especially Swiss Policy Research.
If you have anything you would like to see included, let us know in the comments
On 5th March 2021, the anniversary of the very first COVID19 death in the United Kingdom came and went. Let’s use this staging post to set out our stall here at Wirral In It Together, to explain what our blog has been covering over the last frantic, chaotic year, and to state where we now stand on the ebb and flow of such epic, cascading, global events.
What have we been up to?
Personally, research, research and even more research. In the century just passed, it was difficult and time-consuming even to plan, much less attempt such work. But now, with internet access, it’s become a ready avenue that’s accessible to capable, thinking, questioning citizens based in any country with internet capabilities and who find themselves needing answers or needing to inform others.
There’s no denying that a plethora of answers can now be sought, found and shared via desktop computers, laptops, tablets and phones… (Silicon Valley censorship notwithstanding).
So why not take up the opportunity? It would be foolish not to.
We should be defensive of free speech, always open-minded and naturally sceptical. Most objective researchers would sooner do all the digging for themselves than rely upon others, in particular those vested media interests, busy knocking each other out of the way to further their own controllers’ and employers’ unstated agendas. You know the sort. The lauded and celebrated influencers of the popular outlets. The smiling faces beseeching us from our screens / newspapers. Those large egos, promoting themselves as independent thinkers, until you lift the veil, and discover they’re deep in the service of the powerful, i.e. elected governments, wealthy oligarchs, billionaire proprietors and corporate lobbying groups. Those who’ll opt to be guided by very singular, and starkly different motivations to the common man.
It became clear very early on as we delved into a wide range of mainstream, social media, internet and alternative, independent news websites, that our own UK government and media were being less than honest with us – duplicitous even – as ministers repeatedly fumbled, misspoke, and contradicted each other.
As the global ‘pandemic’ broke in March 2020, SAGE, a group of handpicked, elevated, governmental scientific advisers overegged the pudding, revealing from the outset that they could not be trusted.
Meanwhile, the press / media had a cynical, watchful eye on sales / viewing figures and seemed far too keen to flaunt their own products on the back of a genuinely lethal crisis; one that’s now been adopted as a sales opportunity – to prop up a historically dubious, caught out on phone hacking, and now tanking industry.
Noticeably, here in the UK, disparate media interests have come together as one to push the establishment line. It seems there may well have been at least one unannounced, non-minuted meeting called, in some shadowy backroom, to draw up a blacklist on certain crucial subjects.
And pretty soon came the marching in lockstep, the blanket omission of awkward areas and a wholesale failure to discuss the crucial pros and cons of the descending horror. This one-way traffic approach – that is rigidly adhered to – has survived intact to this day. They’ve become stuck like shit to this particular blanket, which was frantically dragged across. In fact, there’s been absolutely no mature debate between their pages or across their airwaves. None whatsoever. You surely must have noticed?
And in keeping with the grotesque media intimacy and cobbled together faux-solidarity, the virus (SARS-COV-2) and disease (Covid19) have become highly-politicised footballs, to be kicked about and headed every which way. So, on the “dissemination of news” front, we as information-hungry citizens find ourselves becoming seriously short-changed, isolated, starved even, by our two main info providers, Government and media. It’s alarming.
Were you alarmed also to learn that both the British Broadcasting Corporation and the World Health Organisation were in receipt of outlandish levels of funding from United States billionaire Bill Gates? We were. So we asked ourselves: “Why would a powerful US citizen be confidently ploughing many, MANY millions of his own precious financial stockpiles into these two foreign outfits? Why would any genuine philanthropist squander so much of his money hand over fist? And to what end?
Soon, an answer materialised. As time moved on, and as we gazed upon the bizarre behaviour and newly skewed output of both organisations, the penny dropped. Gates had been attempting to bribe and manipulate the grateful recipients of his cash, to twist their arms, their behaviour and their output in the hope of influencing governmental health policy. He was seeking to alter the UK national broadcaster’s highly influential platform to suit his own agenda – an agenda which primarily featured the promotion of Covid19 vaccines – so that the fruits of his labour would ultimately shine and grow fat on the tree.
As you probably know, it’s on the record that Gates personally stands to make a rather cool $20 billion if he’s ultimately successful in injecting the entire global population. So it’s an investment placed with a watchful eye on future dividends.
To say ‘there are strings attached to (soon to be divorced) Bill and Melinda Gates’ donations’ now ranks as one of the most colossal understatements of all time.
When you learn also that national governments and their public health services the world over are now at the beck and call of the Bill Gates-captured WHO, and find themselves railroaded, with their health policies heavily influenced by the man, it makes a bizarre kind of sense. Because national health policies are now drip-fed, dictated centrally, from on high and not – as you’d expect – processed through any even-handed, correctly scrutinised democratic framework. So we stand here, horrified to report that yes, the WHO’s largest private funder by far – Bill Gates – currently appears to be succeeding hands down.
The excellent Dr Joseph Mercola has been updating us on the Gates funding situation, and here’s an image from one of the doctor’s articles:
The sprawling, trawling, global net of Mr Bill Gates has been cast wider than many people think. Here’s former Pfizer Vice-president and Chief Scientist Mike Yeadon on Gates’ funding of a one time impartial but now captured and capitulated UK public regulatory body:
And Gates’ malign money manipulation doesn’t stop there. When a conflict was contrived and set up between accomplished scientist Christopher Exley, the man behind 300+ peer-reviewed papers across a career of 40 years on the deleterious impact of aluminium – including within vaccines – and his university employer, there was only going to be one winner:
COVID-19 exists and it’s a deadly disease. The older you are, the more co-morbidities you suffer from, the greater the risk to your survival. We are not “Covid deniers” – or at least not the connotative, weaponised version of it. We’re not even sure what this ‘denier’ term means.
TV, radio and newspaper news bringers will pepper and weaponise their stories with ‘Covid-denier’ and other pejorative phrases (“Anti-vaxxer”, “tin-foil hat wearer”) with the aim of dividing people and stirring up anger and resentment in the hearts of the less capable, more impressionable, drip-fed, conditioned normie hordes. But noticeably, there’s never any helpful definition provided, to explain what these terms mean and where they’re derived from.
The problem with hurling vague accusations whilst deliberately making careful omissions, avoiding public debate and withholding crucial information is … when someone asks a question like, “Has any qualified scientist isolated and purified the SARS-COV-2 virus in accordance with Koch’s Postulates?” – which may arise naturally after they’ve been doing some broad ranging, independent research – the questioner can end up being rounded upon and become unfairly and inaccurately smeared as a “Covid denier”.
The current answer to the above question after almost a year of this global pandemic is “No, nobody seems to have isolated and purified the SARS-COV-2 virus”.
So the natural question which results from this is:“Why not?”
Another obvious query would be: “How do we successfully vaccinate billions of people against a virus when we don’t have all the information to hand?”
And some more:
“Why were death certificates being tampered with by doctors?
Why was ‘Died from COVID-19‘ being added, often fraudulently, as the cause of death?”
There’s no smoke without fire and very early on, even the global mainstream media produced numerous accounts where people had tragically died of COVID-19, yet in reality, they had not. It was a heart attack or a brain haemorrhage or an illness that had nothing to do with COVID-19.
It eventually emerged that physicians in a growing number of countries were being motivated by a perverse financial incentive – likely to be influenced by Gates – to record the cause of these deaths as COVID-19, done to basically enrich themselves, whilst boosting the COVID-19 death statistics. Generally speaking, human beings – even top professionals – are to varying degrees weak, frightened, greedy, opportunistic, and when they were granted an easy chance to make a few quid / dollars / euros, with little risk of being found out, much less prosecuted, they ploughed full steam ahead.
And to finish, the following nine links explain the situation here very well indeed:
What’s happening now?Here’s an additional, tenth link that appeared today:
Here’s the very latest update on the highly-conflicted, global funding interests of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. It is now seen to be even further openly influencing the ‘regulatory’ performance of the United Kingdom’s Chief Regulatory body and to be pushing Covid-19 ‘vaccines’ into the arms and on into the bloodstreams of our children, where they’re not needed and they’re proving to be dangerous. Our children are born with evolutionary built-up, naturally occurring, historical, developing defences against all seven coronaviruses, as were we, a global population of 7+ billion people.
US software tycoon and non-medic Bill Gates plans to profit heavily – into the many billions of dollars – through large shareholdings in experimental, unapproved, now out of date gene therapies labelled ‘vaccines’, has gained emergency use authorisation by proven, repeat-offending criminal concern Pfizer, and also Moderna and BioNtech. Millions of serious, adverse events and thousands of deaths are occurring right now, and they continue, unacknowledged by the media, governments and criminal manufacturers. But how will our vulnerable, developing children cope with any unforeseen, long-term adverse effects and the likely threats to their health?
The medical, Hippocratic Oath to *DO NO HARM* is being willingly trashed by captured, retained, reckless, high-salaried doctors and medical authorities the world over, whose parent pharmaceuticals lobby is now controlling world governments and has secured itself legal immunity from prosecution.
THE CREW – A group of four unhappy friends; two couples on a boating holiday, but with marital problems. Collectively they are the middle-class, spoon-fed, trusting British public. Here, they’re a naïve sitting duck, waiting to be occupied, infected and their lives taken over by a deadly virus. As the action unfolds, they can each be seen in terms of differing public attitudes towards dangerous circumstances:
KEITH TAYLOR – Essentially a ‘conventional sceptic’. His own man. Secure in himself and his own destiny, but mistrustful of others and extremely self-unaware. He’s likely to be a pillar of his local community and a Tory voter.
The controlling partner of a novelty goods factory, Keith is the dominant mover, shaker and engine of the company through sheer force of personality. Here on holiday, what he views as his workplace ‘leadership skills’ are transferred across from head of the company to ‘skipper of the boat’, a dominant role which is self-taught from a manual. He’s supremely confident until the virus appears, and his amateur skippering “business” is quickly closed down. Upon registering the threat, Keith instantly sees a rival and begins harbouring a deep mistrust. His misgivings intensify as time goes on, but soon he is usurped as leader and brought under the virus’s control through its skilful, ‘democratic’ manipulation of his wife and friends.
JUNE TAYLOR – Keith’s wife. Here under duress, but a firm fan of the virus. She has no concerns at all, seeing it not as a threat but as attractive, deeply alluring and a powerful entity which needs to be accommodated, respected and understood. June is the only member of the crew who is defensive and sympathetic towards it. Her admiration – and later lust for it – causes her to cheat on her husband when he’s away at the factory. Right from the start of the outbreak, June is a staunch believer, and as time passes, she surrenders all resistance and becomes willingly ensnared and infected, with no hope of being rescued, much less cured.
ALISTAIR “I seem to be marooned” WINGATE – A would-be believer, but can never make his mind up. He would only grant his approval of the virus for an easy life, or at least until he can escape back home. Alistair is an equal partner at the factory but with very little control compared to Keith. He is racked by extreme self-doubt and beset with low confidence. Throughout his time on the boat, Alistair is weak, hesitant and easily dominated. He is quietly resentful and suspicious of the virus. How much of that mistrust is through genuine doubt and how much through his own inadequacy never becomes clear. At one point, Alistair is relaxing on the side of the boat, staring into the water. Reaching down quickly, he expertly catches a small fish in his bare hand and releases it, hinting there may be hidden depths, and much more to Alistair than meets the eye.
EMMA WINGATE – Alistair’s wife. Like her husband, she is undemanding, accepting and always prepared to make allowances for other people. Although happy to live in the shadow of Keith and June, she is more self-possessed, composed and tranquil of mind than her husband. Emma is first seen clutching a first aid box and spends the whole time on the boat wearing a lifejacket, a sure sign of her concern over the wisdom of being on this holiday at all. She knows the virus is very real, is quietly petrified of it and takes her own precautions against it. But even Emma’s guard goes down eventually and it becomes clear that given enough time, she seems destined to become infected, controlled and completely dominated, just like June.
VINCE GRANT – The virus and killer disease. A dishonest and disruptive outsider. Charismatic, clever, imperious and manipulative. Very early on, the virus ‘comes to the rescue’ of the marooned boat and its crew. Its vigilant eye soon sees an opportunity to take control, flourish and spread its malign influence among new ‘friends’. Reasonable at first, it invokes mutual trust and co-operation, asking them to work with it. It reassures them that all will be well if everyone performs a different function and keeps things ship shape. If they agree and accept these terms, its broad-ranging boats / river expertise will steer them through.
FLEUR – The vaccine, which comes onto the scene a long time after the initial virus / disease. As regards salvation and a cure for the crew, it quickly becomes clear that all is lost. The vaccine is just another arm of what has now morphed into an ominous threat to public health. As a past conquest of the virus, it’s ‘joined at the hip’, staying close, following barked orders and working under the insidious control of its master. So the vaccine brings absolutely no support or optimism, and no remedy to the spreading malaise. As a treatment, it’s totally ineffective, and it couldn’t hope to repair the damage to public confidence nor ease the disruption caused to everyone’s lives.
Initially, the crew / public are required to place their trust in the virus. As time goes on however, their collective belief wavers as the situation deteriorates. As Skipper, the virus quickly ‘mutates’, becoming ever more menacing as the sinister aspects to its character emerge. Ultimately, the contagion becomes completely uncontrollable, inflicting damage and looming large over everyone. The threat it carries is all-consuming, blighting lives and exposing a group of defenceless land lubbers – cast adrift in unfamiliar surroundings – to their fate. In the end, the virus, disease and vaccine assume total dominance, and become a direct threat to the survival of Alistair, Emma and June.
Until finally, Alistair “We seem to have lost a bit of the camararderie of the river” Wingate comes to their rescue…
And finally, for us, there’s no doubt about it, Alistair was given the funniest lines by Mr Ayckbourn…!
With the move to Just in Time supply which has brought this about being only the surface problem.
Most households try to be sensible and go for long term deals in which supply is provided at a set price over say one or two years. Problem is, suppliers across both the EU and UK energy markets have to rely on what is referred to as the ‘spot market’ as a direct result of deliberate political choices made by the EU and the UK.
This has seen massive price rises for future – a month or two hence – supply contracts with spot market prices in October 2021 600% higher than a year previous and one 24 hour period in which UK wholesale prices rose 37%. Subsequent price rises reached over $2,000 per 1,000 cubic meters.
This has implications beyond household energy bills with knock on effects on food prices and supply chains.
Any competent research will demonstrate that all existing contracts for gas from Eurasia have been honoured to the letter. It’s just that Europe and the UK have not been doing the sensible thing and renewing those contracts on the usual longer term basis. Preferring to gaslight citizens by blaming the Russians.
The reality is that these political decisions are being made to satisfy US geo-political and commercial goals. Forcing compliant EU and UK politicians into decisions which deny cheap and stable gas prices from Eurasia in favour of more expensive LNG supplies from the US and its corporate lobbyists.
LNG that is produced by fracking. A situation in which so called ‘Greens’ in the ruling German Government prefer expensive fracked energy from the US to anything coming from Eurasia.
Next time you’re struggling to pay your energy bills just remember, this is down to UK and EU politicians of all parties doing the bidding of their US handlers at the expense of their own citizens.
That’s some efficient censorship. I am uploading to another platform and will update the article I just sent out with a new video link. The interview was really moving!
It is the first time I was censored so quickly. Wow, wow, wow.
Wirral In It Together 
