Golden Retriever

Dear oh dear Neil Oliver.

Yep

Yes Alan Farthing was made surgeon to the Queen after Jill Dando was assassinated by the State imo Jill Dando was living with Farthing at the time of her murder and only returned to her own home to pick up her mail occasionally. Farthing imo was the only person who knew her whereabouts when she was killed. Also their orginal meeting was a blind date set up by a "friend"

Many of these so called celebrities are part of the criminal gang. Naomi Campbell for sure. "You saw me at your parties, you saw me in Epstein's homes, you saw me on the plane ... you watched me be abused. You saw me" https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1283513167625281542.html

I'm not so sure. I think he is safe for the moment. Don't forget Michael Gove as a contender. He was in Washington for the Bilderberg meeting last week, which the MSM have ignored. https://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/meetings/meeting-2022/participants-2022

People need to know about these sick people. Lord Boothby was debased. Excerpts involving allegations of paedophila including politicians, Joe Meek, the Krays, Brian Epstein (Beatles manager, DJS Alan "Fluff" Freeman and Jimmy Savile Jeremy Thorpe, Lord Boothby, Tom Driberg KGB agent etc. Is there a connection here? Most were surely homosexual and the majority Jewish. "Kray biographer, John Pearson, writing in the Independent on Sunday, claimed that the Peer and MP Tom Driberg engaged in gay sex orgies with children and that Boothby had a fondness for boys defacating on him, and the Krays had a compromising photograph of Boothby and his memiors. Similarly, when Tom Driberg, a Labour MP and KGB agent who wore fishnet stockings, got involved with the Krays, telling them ‘about the houses of rich friends they could burgle in exchange for sexual favours with boys,’ again the government suppressed any police inquiry, as they didn’t want to have to cope with the damaging revelations. The media were further intimidated and silenced when Boothby and Driberg used the Krays ‘to turn anyone over who had crossed them’. The Police protected the Krays and children continued to be supplied and abused. The Krays had access to many children’s homes in London and would also have boys delivered to parties at a large flat over a music shop on the Lea Bridge Rd, North East London owned by the former Radio 1 DJ Alan ‘Fluff’ Freeman. There they would meet with show biz types and DJs including Jimmy Saville, Joe Meeks and on occasion, Beatles manager Brian Epstein. The eastern crime squad knew about the involvement of the Kray brothers and the sex parties known as ” Pink ballets ” with young boys but let them continue. At these parties, young boys, specially brought over from several children’s homes would be plied with drugs and alcohol" http://www.londontaxitrade.co.uk/paedophile-kray-twins/ Not forgetting Harry Webb was a friend of the murdered Jill Dando.

Harry Webb a devoted Zionista. Off the hook, like Greville Janner, Leon Brittain etc etc

Me too Dropping like flies. Shame it wasn't the gang inside the Cathedral

I won't be watching the Jubiliee concert. I would rather stick needles in my eyes! Diva Diana Ross who years ago was arrested at Heathrow for abusing British Airways staff. Rod Stewart who sold out years ago and was charged with punching a security guard in a US hotel because his party were refused entry, but somehow wasn't convicted even though it was all on camera. EXCLUSIVE: Rod Stewart, 75, is seen on film 'performing a Hitler salute before punching a security guard' at Florida hotel on New Year's Eve after pulling faces and dancing around staffers https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8004605/Rod-Stewart-75-seen-film-performing-salute-punching-security-guard.html And Elton John will be wheeled out again. Seen in a wheelchair and masked up a few days ago!

I really don't get it. Why do so many people revere these people.

Most would be horrified

If you look at pages 1 and 2 of this thread Twitter deleted most of Bob's cartoons, so with tenacity I'll copy them from his website.

Of course he would. Elon Musk endorses this agenda.

If you paid within two weeks, the fine was reduced to 300 euros. A friend of mine has just had her fine refunded for walking her dog more than 50 metres from her home! The police and others were truly loving their Covid powers. Bastards. "In early July 2021, Spain’s Constitutional Court ruled that the state of emergency that was declared on March 14th 2020 was unconstitutional. The emergency measures which were implemented as Covid infections took hold of Spain for the first time resulted in the country’s 47 million inhabitants being confined to their homes, which according to magistrates suspended fundamental rights. More than a million fines were handed out by Spanish police during this two-month period to people who were out in the street or travelling somewhere without a justified reason. The penalty for breaking Covid restrictions during the first lockdown went from €600 for minor offences to €30,000 for very serious offences." https://www.thelocal.es/20210726/qa-how-to-appeal-or-claim-back-fines-issued-during-spains-state-of-alarm/ https://www.theseasidegazette.com/2022/05/88525/fines-repaid/

Where is the outrage? The masses prefer not to discuss this agenda and either watch sport or soap operas. God help us all

I signed and received this email this morning. Basically the UK Government is happy to had over its sovereignty to the WHO GANG regarding so called pandemics The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Do not sign any WHO Pandemic Treaty unless it is approved via public referendum”. Government responded: To protect lives, the economy and future generations from future pandemics, the UK government supports a new legally-binding instrument to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. COVID-19 has demonstrated that no-one is safe until we are all safe, and that effective global cooperation is needed to better protect the UK and other countries around the world from the detrimental health, social and economic impacts of pandemics and other health threats. The UK supports a new international legally-binding instrument as part of a cooperative and comprehensive approach to pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. At a World Health Assembly Special Session in late 2021, the 194 countries of the World Health Organization (WHO) agreed to launch a process to draft and negotiate a new instrument, through the auspices of WHO, to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. The negotiating process will be led by member states, including the UK. The instrument aims to improve how the world prevents, better prepares for, and responds to future disease outbreaks of pandemic potential at national, regional and global level. It would complement the existing international instruments which the UK has already agreed, such as the International Health Regulations. It would promote greater collective action and accountability. A treaty is an international agreement concluded between States or with international organisations in written form and governed by international law. The UK is party to a large number of multilateral treaties, including many through the United Nations (UN) and its specialised agencies such as the WHO. These instruments reflect obligations states have agreed to enter into to further common goals. The current target date for agreeing the text of the new instrument is at the World Health Assembly in May 2024. Over the next two years the UK aims to work towards building a consensus on how the global community can better prevent, prepare for, and respond to future pandemics and will actively shape, develop and negotiate the text. The new instrument would only be adopted by the World Health Assembly if the text achieves a two-thirds vote of the Health Assembly (Article 19 of the WHO Constitution). The Health Assembly is made up of representatives of WHO Member States. Once adopted, the instrument would only become binding on the UK if and when the UK accepts (ratifies) it in accordance with its constitutional process. In the UK this requires the treaty to be laid before Parliament for a period of 21 sitting days before the Government can ratify it on behalf of the UK. The Government always carefully considers whether domestic legislation will be required to implement the UK’s international obligations when negotiating a treaty. Not every treaty requires implementing legislation and it is too early to say if that would apply here. However, in all circumstances, the UK’s ability to exercise its sovereignty would remain unchanged and the UK would remain in control of any future domestic decisions about national restrictions or other measures. If changes to UK law were considered necessary or appropriate to reflect obligations under the treaty, proposals for domestic legislation would go through the usual Parliamentary process and the UK would not ratify the treaty until domestic measures, agreed by Parliament, were in place. This process of ratification allows scrutiny by elected representatives of both the treaty and any appropriate domestic legislation in accordance with the UK’s constitutional arrangements. The Government does not consider a referendum is necessary, appropriate or in keeping with precedent for such an agreement. Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office

I signed and received this email this morning. Basically the UK Government is happy to had over its sovereignty to the WHO GANG regarding so called pandemics The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Do not sign any WHO Pandemic Treaty unless it is approved via public referendum”. Government responded: To protect lives, the economy and future generations from future pandemics, the UK government supports a new legally-binding instrument to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. COVID-19 has demonstrated that no-one is safe until we are all safe, and that effective global cooperation is needed to better protect the UK and other countries around the world from the detrimental health, social and economic impacts of pandemics and other health threats. The UK supports a new international legally-binding instrument as part of a cooperative and comprehensive approach to pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. At a World Health Assembly Special Session in late 2021, the 194 countries of the World Health Organization (WHO) agreed to launch a process to draft and negotiate a new instrument, through the auspices of WHO, to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. The negotiating process will be led by member states, including the UK. The instrument aims to improve how the world prevents, better prepares for, and responds to future disease outbreaks of pandemic potential at national, regional and global level. It would complement the existing international instruments which the UK has already agreed, such as the International Health Regulations. It would promote greater collective action and accountability. A treaty is an international agreement concluded between States or with international organisations in written form and governed by international law. The UK is party to a large number of multilateral treaties, including many through the United Nations (UN) and its specialised agencies such as the WHO. These instruments reflect obligations states have agreed to enter into to further common goals. The current target date for agreeing the text of the new instrument is at the World Health Assembly in May 2024. Over the next two years the UK aims to work towards building a consensus on how the global community can better prevent, prepare for, and respond to future pandemics and will actively shape, develop and negotiate the text. The new instrument would only be adopted by the World Health Assembly if the text achieves a two-thirds vote of the Health Assembly (Article 19 of the WHO Constitution). The Health Assembly is made up of representatives of WHO Member States. Once adopted, the instrument would only become binding on the UK if and when the UK accepts (ratifies) it in accordance with its constitutional process. In the UK this requires the treaty to be laid before Parliament for a period of 21 sitting days before the Government can ratify it on behalf of the UK. The Government always carefully considers whether domestic legislation will be required to implement the UK’s international obligations when negotiating a treaty. Not every treaty requires implementing legislation and it is too early to say if that would apply here. However, in all circumstances, the UK’s ability to exercise its sovereignty would remain unchanged and the UK would remain in control of any future domestic decisions about national restrictions or other measures. If changes to UK law were considered necessary or appropriate to reflect obligations under the treaty, proposals for domestic legislation would go through the usual Parliamentary process and the UK would not ratify the treaty until domestic measures, agreed by Parliament, were in place. This process of ratification allows scrutiny by elected representatives of both the treaty and any appropriate domestic legislation in accordance with the UK’s constitutional arrangements. The Government does not consider a referendum is necessary, appropriate or in keeping with precedent for such an agreement. Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office

Hallejuah! Unelected old moderators choosing unelected new moderators reminds me of the undemocratic EU Commission.

Who Picks Mods, How Does It Work? Has the title of this thread been addressed. I don't think so. @lake