Jump to content

Basket Case

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Basket Case

  1. 18 minutes ago, clownworld said:

    Multiquote feature


    You can multi quote by clicking on the ' + ' sign. 

    Click on as many as you want, even from different threads and sections. 



    • Like 1
  2. On 2/12/2021 at 5:36 PM, Basket Case said:

    I'm now on my laptop, so am returning to a post l messed up a few days ago.
    l was using my phone and missed the text in italics that didn't copy over correctly.

    l didn't actually want to return to the original blog page this is from as l was sulking censored and prevented from citing Dr Mike Yeadon in the comments beneath.

    Below is the post l should have done in the first place - IE - not on my bloody smart phone.

    So, Craig Murray wrote an article about Piers Corbyn getting arrested (again) for distributing a leaflet against Vaxxines.
    lt's been considered as anti-semitic as it appears to use the image of a WW2 German camp.
    Craig Murray seems to question the reaction to Corbyn, citing 'Free Speech', but then goes on to promote the Vaxxine.


    Here is the background and comment from someone who comments often below Craig Murray's blog;
    Background and experience as a Biochemist / Virologist / Gene Therapist; 

    "I have a degree in Biochemistry from Cambridge (3 years highly intensive study), a PhD in molecular virology from Glasgow (studying viruses which infect whole populations, causing cancer in a small subset of infected people and being more likely to cause disease in those with immunocompromise) and 4 years working on developing viral vectors for gene therapy. I wrote published reviews of gene therapy in learned monographs, published original research in peer-reviewed journals and passed on my technical knowledge to the next generation of students.

    In my next life, quite a bit of my work involved engaging with Universities, professors, lecturers and other researchers to determine whether their research could be turned into commercial value. That meant I did not defer to authority, I was DULY DILIGENT in determining whether or not the assertions made by very senior Professors etc stood up to rigorous professional scrutiny. Sometimes it did, sometimes it didn’t.

    First lesson to learn from that is that academics are often entirely ignorant of the patent filing space, thinking that ‘peer reviewed publication’ is all that matters. Industry of course tends not to publish nearly as much, as they prefer to obtain IP protection for their discoveries or simply retain secret know-how in-house. So you should be very careful before assigning all-knowing expertise to academics, since they often have not reviewed the patent filing space adequately.

    The second thing to understand about academics is that they are interested in ‘high impact publications’, which are arbitrarily defined by how many times they are quoted in the academic literature. That is a very very questionable basis for ‘quality’, it is a far better basis for ‘being top of the pops charts’. Getting buzzwords into the title of your paper is very important there. It’s a bit like looking at the quality of journalists..

    The third thing you should learn is quite how top-down and authoritarian the medical culture is in the West. The concept of ‘Key Opinion Leaders’ is used by Big Pharma to shape narratives; they get the KOLs on board (sometimes with financial inducements) who then pass down dictums to the sheep below. You would be amazed quite how few doctors actually think independently. I learned all about this when doing consultancy for a big pharma company.. 

    The fourth thing you should learn is how utterly lacking in objectivity the medical community is about exposing misconduct. There is no question that Peter Horby’s ‘study’ on hydroxychloroquine, deliberately designed to quash HCQ usage, was the work of an utterly corrupt and biddable tool of the pharmaceutical industry. His work was just as bad, if not worse, than that of Andrew Wakefield concerning MMR. But Wakefield was raising issues antithetical to Big Pharma interests, whereas Horby was doing their bidding. Either both or neither should have been thrown out. We all know what actually happened…..and it wasn’t Peter Horby being sacked by the University of Oxford, was it??


    So I guess I can speak with some ‘authority’ too.

    I can speak with the authority of not having to brown-nose committee members who dole out multimillion pound grant funding. No academic seeking that sort of funding can ever step out of line, even once. Career over if they do. So never consider what they say without first considering what they NEED to say… 

    I can speak with the authority of being both educated to the cutting edge of medical technology and having worked with senior business and government officials. I don’t belong to any trades union and I’m not trying to climb any greasy poles.


    I can speak with the authority of knowing how the Security Services use doctors to spy on the general population (my sister is a spook and a medical consultant to boot).

    And I can speak with absolute authority about the fact that none of the Government Ministers, advisors nor media sirens have seen a single penny drop in their generous salaries since March 2020, which renders all their holier-than-thou behaviour absolutely disgusting. There are no Labour nor SNP MPs who behave any better, it’s nothing to do with Conservatives, it’s to do with being on the public sector gravy train. I am not on that gravy train and I could only join it if I committed to betraying the people I was purportedly employed to represent. 

    I am sure Mr Murray prefers grand titles like Professor, Minister, CEO and the like. It’s what the Establishment uses to establish controllable narratives.

    But if you want the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, you need people who got off the gravy train, put truth before prestige and educated themselves sufficiently to be able to use a scythe through the mangrove swamps of propaganda that the Establishment always uses to ensure that getting out to the truthful blue yonder is a feat beyond the vast majority of honest and humble souls… 

    As you can see, highly experienced and qualified but gives a scathing incite into Big Pharma and vaxxines etc...!!!  :O) 

    Here is his response to Craig Murray's blog and Craig's views on Con19 Vaxxines; 

    First he quotes a part of Craigs Blog;
    ‘As to this particular opinion of Piers Corbyn, I have no qualification that makes my view any more authoritative than yours. But it seems to me probable that the massive advances in knowledge of how vaccines work within the body at the level both of incredibly small structures and of atoms, better enable theoretical constructs to underpin the discoveries of the vaccine testing process, and thus vaccine safety can indeed be established sooner than in earlier years, when the testing of empirical effects of a vaccine proved efficacy and safety or otherwise, without knowledge of precise mechanisms being entirely essential to the process. I shall myself take the vaccine when offered and urge everybody else to do so, despite myself tending to the view that the risk of death from covid-19, other than to clearly defined vulnerable groups, is extremely small. The risk to those vulnerable groups is acute, so for their sake I hope everybody vaccinates.’

    Then he goes on to explain his own opposing view point; 
    Mr Murray, whilst what you say about scientific advances is indeed true, what is also unfortunately also true is that the technology underpinning the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, namely mRNA ‘vaccines’, is as yet a completely untested platform technology for the vaccination process. This makes their use without significant amounts of clinical trials more hazardous than, say, the Sputnik vaccines, since that vaccine uses vaccine technology that has been used several times in other vaccination systems. Every new vaccine has unknown unknowns, but the Sputnik one probably has less than the Pfizer/Moderna ones.

    Because the Pfizer/Moderna systems have not yet been through the ‘teething processes’, which may involve manufacturing challenges, unexpected responses by small subsets of people to the vaccine etc etc, there is per se a greater set of ‘known unknowns’, not to mention ‘unknown unknowns’ about that technology.

    One of the enduring lessons of the thalidomide episode 60 years ago is that something which simply was not detected during animal testing turned out to have grave effects on pregnant women’s foetuses. When tested on non-pregnant adults, thalidomide was one of the ‘safest’ drugs around. It simply didn’t have any side effects. One of the ‘assumptions’ of animal testing back then was that the compound would interact in the same way with analagous human proteins as it did with the animal ones. That is a fallacy in some cases, which the pharmaceuticals industry learned about the hard way. That can now be overcome using technology to insert the human version of a particular gene into the animals on which trials will be carried out, just to be sure that no unpleasant surprises occur when the transition from animal testing to human testing occurs.

    Now, it may very well be that the Pfizer/Moderna technology does not have any drawbacks to it. We simply don’t know yet. Until you have put it through at least 1 million people of different ages, ethnic backgrounds, sex and other genetic variables, you probably won’t know what those potential drawbacks might actually be. What you absolutely don’t want to be doing, however, is to be risking infertility to just the groups of people who don’t have any significant risk from exposure to SARS-CoV2. The 18-40 age group of both sexes have miniscule risks from the virus and so I wouldn’t be telling them to get vaccinated if they have not already completed their planned breeding. It’s not saying there is any risk, it’s saying we don’t know whether there could be, and it is simply far too important to take a chance when the risks from disease are so incredibly low. 


    One of the great dangers of the way vaccination programmes are reported by the media is simply equating ‘raising of antibodies’ with success. That is successful in terms of generating the response you wanted (it’s not what a natural immune response involves, since that also involves T cell activation, memory cell creation, retention and possible triggering upon challenge etc), what it does not in any way address is whether you also caused certain unwanted effects too. You don’t necessarily see those showing up in the first 7 days, maybe not even in the first 7 weeks. Only by doing long-term follow up studies do you ever find that sort of thing out. Do you think the pharma industry would do such work without government regulatons? Of course they wouldn’t. It’s just costs and no upside, just potential downside for them. However, for those taking vaccines, it is essential work to establish the long-term safety of vaccination protocols not just for this generation but for future ones too. 

    There are all kinds of wild claims out there as to what vaccines might be being used for. Some involve insertion of nano-chips into human beings without their informed consent. You know, putting a little nano-chip into the vaccine formulation and then being able to track humans at will forevermore without their knowledge nor consent. I’m not saying this is happening with these vaccines, but it is definitely the case that discussions about such programmes have taken place in the sorts of elitist get-togethers that always have contempt for democratic due process. It’s definitely the case that such technology is being developed and is of interest to Bill Gates the investor, just to mention one. 

    A more realistic worry is the historical evidence of trying to generate vaccines against Respiratory Syncitial Virus back in the 1960s. The virus is a known cause of paediatric pneumonia and a cause of death in children at a level of 200,000 per year in those under 6 months (see https://cvi.asm.org/content/23/3/186 ) The result of attempts in the 1960s to develop a vaccine caused a new syndrome to emerge, namely ‘Enhanced Respiratory Syncitial Virus Disease’. When exposed to challenge by the wild virus after having been vaccinated, a few young children died. Research on what was happening to cause such tragedies led to the understanding that what had occurred was a malfunction in the normal immune response leading to only a subset of immune response activities occurring, which led to very serious effects in the lungs.

    The relevance of RSV to coronaviruses is that RSV is also an RNA virus, it is also associated with respiratory disease. So it is somewhat similar to Coronaviruses. 


    Do we yet know whether there might be an ‘Enhanced Covid19’ response in vaccinated people if they subsequently encounter SARS-CoV2? No, we don’t. It’s not saying it will happen, it’s saying it is a known unknown to consider going forward. 


    To put it mildly, there is an awful lot we don’t yet know about SARS-CoV2 and the human immune response to it.


    There’s an awful lot we don’t yet know about how mRNA vaccines may play out in humans. 

    My current working position is that the dangers from SARS-CoV2 are highest amongst:
    1. The elderly
    2. The immunocompromised and generally unhealthy.

    Those people have a far greater risk from SARS-CoV2 than they do from any potential dangers from a relatively untested vaccine (until any new evidence changes that position), so they should get themselves vaccinated if they don’t have objections.

    However, the healthy U65s, the U50s with the exception of any unfortunates whose health status is abnormally poor and children absolutely don’t need a vaccination against a disease that will affect almost none of them. The long-term unknowns of untested technology should be considered when the downside risk of not being vaccinated is almost zero.

    I am also absolutely not in favour of the taxpayer funding Phase III clinical trials and then having to pay sky high prices so to do. If Pfizer want to cut $1bn off their R+D costs through accelerated ‘licensing’, then the price they charge for their products should be commensurately lower. They don’t have any need to put aside for litigation costs after all (as all vaccines are exempt from litigation and the taxpayer funds it). 

    If we are going to push such untried technology onto the populace then we should be pretty clear that the cost of it should not be extreme, the safety testing and follow-up has to be to our satisfaction and the ridiculous economic costs of lockdown should not be exacerbated by funding ridiculously expensive vaccines if Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, Tonic Water and plenty of other cheap as chips compounds get shown to be totally efficacious in treating the small population who actually fall ill with Covid19. 

    So, there you go, a fascinating opinion IMO  from a 'Normie' from within the Industry...
    BC :O)

    corbyn path to freedom.jpg






    This is the post I messed up first time around. 

    I revisited it on my laptop and presented it in a clearer way. 

    Still a long read though  :0)



    • Thanks 2
  3. 21 minutes ago, oddsnsods said:


    Do you still have link to your post I missed it.


    That should be more reason to cut him off imo BC.


    I'll go have a look dude. 


    He gives some 100% accurate info that no one else is sharing. 

    The Sturgeon / Salmond shitfest he reported on has got him into a whole heap of trouble. 

    And he has a unique perspective being 'in the system' at one point. 


    I totally agree that he has it 100% wrong on the virus and vaxxine.. 






  4. 15 hours ago, Mitochondrial Eve said:

    Sensational judgment in Austria: PCR test not suitable as detection of infection


    Excellent news from Austria where a court has found that the PCR test is not fit for diagnosing infections of Covid-19. Antigen tests have also been heavily criticised.


    The original article is here: https://reitschuster.de/post/sensations-urteil-in-oesterreich-pcr-test-nicht-zum-infektions-nachweis-geeignet/


    Translated to English here: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://reitschuster.de/post/sensations-urteil-in-oesterreich-pcr-test-nicht-zum-infektions-nachweis-geeignet/



    The court also went further in saying that there is no evidence that restrictive coronavirus measures are effective.


    "The judge's verdict rejects the entire corona policy in Austria, which is based on the PCR test."


    Sorry Eve but this is completely fake news. 

    I have BBC 24hr News on permanently and I haven't seen or heard anything about this.. 



    • Haha 3
  5. 21 hours ago, oddsnsods said:


    Murray talks like this but same time has no problem with passports or jabs?


    Yeah I know.. 

    Remember the long post I did a few weeks ago when his moderators wouldn't let me mention or discuss Dr Mike Yeadon in the comments section ? 

    I highlighted a post by someone in the comments section who was in the industry but called Craig Murray out on his stance. 

    Craig may well be a shill or someone who is very mistaken and under an awful lot of pressure. 

    He's waiting for a hearing on his coming sentence for being found guilty for contempt of court. 

    Shill or not, some of the information he provides is still very valuable. 


  6. Barnard Castle Revisited 


    I was pretty diffident a year ago in suggesting corrupt backhanders as a potential motive for Dominic Cummings to visit GSK in Barnard Castle, because part of me resisted the idea that even the Tories would seek to make personal profit from a pandemic. Since then, of course, we have learnt of the quarter of a billion pounds (yes, £250,000,000) given to family investment firm Ayanda Capital for PPE procurement for which Ayanda was utterly unqualified and unsuited, numerous other examples of closed bids and completely inappropriate awards. The UK seems not just to have returned to 18th century levels of corruption, but to 18th century lack of shame about it in the governing class.

    I suppose at least yesterday’s announcement by Boris Johnson that 60 million vaccine doses will be “finished” by GSK at Barnard Castle dispenses with the argument that was thrown at me by literally hundreds of trolls that the Barnard Castle facility is only some kind of large garden shed and therefore could not have been involved.

    We now know about Tory corruption in Covid procurement, which I could only surmise a year ago – and let me further commend to you last night’s Panorama on the barely functional private £27 billion (yes £27,000,000,000) test and trace system under Tory serial profiteer Dido Harding. But it does, of course, take two sides to make a corrupt deal. Surely a big company like GSK would not be involved in backhanders?

    Well, GSK were fined US $3 billion in 2012 by US regulators for fraud – yes fraud, overcharging and making false claims about medicines. In 2016 UK regulators fined GSK £37.6 million for paying bribes to generics manufacturers not to produce cheap drugs for the NHS. Let me say that again – for paying bribes to generics manufacturers not to produce cheap drugs for the NHS. Defrauding the NHS. That is the moral level we are looking at here.

    So to say that GSK are not averse to paying a bung is to put it very mildly. And to say the Tories are not averse to personal profiteering from Covid procurement is to put it very mildly. It seems like a match made in heaven. Now I do not claim this is what happened, and I have never claimed this is what happened. It is a hypothesis. But it seems a not unreasonable hypothesis. Particularly compared to Cummings’ official explanation for visiting Barnard Castle.

    I came under massive troll attack for the suggestion last year. It was claimed that GSK Barnard Castle is not physically capable of involvement in vaccine production. That is now shown to be untrue. It was also suggested that such a deal would have been struck in the main boardroom in London. I think that is to fail to distinguish between the apparent deal and the backhander. The latter are very seldom arranged in main boardrooms.

    Anyway do read my article from last year. With the extra knowledge we have now, it has matured pretty well given the amount of derision it received from members of our professionally uncurious and unquestioning mainstream media.

    I should also mention that I received a whistleblower tip-off that Cummings had also visited the Honeyman Group while in Barnard Castle. I tried contacting them both by phone and by email and never received any response from the Honeyman Group, and have no further information to stand this up. If anyone can add anything on this I should be most interested to hear from you. 










    US Teachers Union Rep Fights For Mask Wearing Whilst Fighting To Breath.... Simply Breathtaking


    Experts Call for Mandatory Use of Victoria’s QR App to Streamline Contact Tracing


    Brisbane COVID cluster grows, but no lockdown for now


    Byron Bay Bluesfest cancelled for second year running after COVID-19 case found


    Covid 19 Operating System Injection


    Covid fightback: Shops to open until 10pm...


    PCR test's on a pigs brain


    Victoria police reveal active counter-terrorism investigation involving rightwing extremists


    Embedded Technologies: Power From the People


    The scientists harvesting energy from humans to power our wearables


    Matrix-style tech turns you into a battery!


    Tiny robots can now smuggle drugs into brain tumors


    Elon Musk Likes This EV Battery and It Costs Less


    New Horrifying Kabbalah Secrets Exposed | Know More News LIVE w/ Christopher Jon Bjerknes


    Covid fightback: Shops to open until 10pm...


    WOW Progressive Teachers.... Get A Load Of This Beauty


    Serene Blows the Whistle on Corruption and Maladministration


    Talking To Strangers


    Requiring the use of COVIDSafe




    Affadavit of Status (pdf)


    Notice of Estoppel (42 Questions)


    Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn - 200 Years Together pdf:


    "The illusion of freedom will continue for as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will take down the scenery, move the tables and chairs out of the way, then they will pull back the curtains and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater." - Frank Zappa 


    • Like 1
  8. 2 minutes ago, CAC said:

    Sheffield last year (where I had the pleasure of meeting Gareth Icke),

    Cool  :O)



    3 minutes ago, CAC said:

    but no significant force used to repel the police.

    Sheer numbers help, as seen in the London demo on the 20th.
    Even though there were more police in the area than l've ever seen anywhere before , they were still vastly outnumbered and the demonstrators easily pushed through blocks / police lines several times.



    5 minutes ago, CAC said:

    Granted, they are fighting a somewhat more serious and immediate threat,

    lndeed , their situation is immediately life threatening and hence the action / reaction..



    7 minutes ago, CAC said:

    I don't advocate violence, but we need not shy away from using force to defend ourselves and our individual and collective rights.

    Likewise. lt was good to see demonstrators at London grabbing people back from the police. No violence but just protecting other fellow demonstrators.




    • Like 1
  9. 1 hour ago, Mitochondrial Eve said:

    The following web link references 65 studies which show that masks do not work and are harmful. This may be of interest to @DarianF.









    54 minutes ago, Mitochondrial Eve said:

    This is a clip from Episode 205 of Del Bigtree's Highwire which concerns the risks of nanofibres / nanoparticles in masks which, like asbestos, can reach the lung cavity and could cause mesothelioma. Masks distributed to the public in Belgium are also suspected to be toxic due to titanium dioxide and silver nanoparticles.




    Something for @Truthspoon

    to have a look at? 

  10. 6 hours ago, CAC said:


    Have a look at the videos from Myanmar if you want to see a people with balls of steel.


    It is a rocks and sticks vs guns situation, and, despite protestors getting shot and killed, they are STILL on the streets fighting back.


    Makes me ashamed to see how feeble our protests in the UK are.


    Which demonstrations have you been to in the UK recently and what sort of behaviour did you witness ? 


  • Create New...