jesuitsdidit

Great Barrington Declaration now has 580,000 signatories.

Why are they all wearing masks? Didn't see many young. All seemed a bit jaded?? Could be controlled opposition.

We are told that the Politicians are running the country so let's find out if that is true. That's why you need to bombard them with questions then we will see the holes in that argument.

BTW I have long suspected that often announcements in the Press are not actual events but 'actions' concocted in the Secret Satanic Press Office - SSPO. So if you get an announcement from the Chief of NHS Hospitals that the hospitals are almost full and that a vaccine will start to be rolled out in December the BBC then splice a little clip of him talking about a vaccine but not mentioning that the hospitals are full. In fact I'd say at least 50% of announcements never occurred in the way reported.

How do you know this?

Haven't any Lawyers or Politicians noticed this yet?

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/the-innacuracoes-in-the-sage-models/ SAGE models overestimation of deaths November 2, 2020 Daniel Howdon, Carl Heneghan The slides leaked to the BBC on estimated COVID-19 deaths, and presented at the government press conference on the 31st October, were based on different models from at least three weeks ago. This allows us to check the projections for November the 1st. The PHE/Cambridge model on this date has an estimated projection of 1,000 deaths, yet deaths are averaging just over 200 deaths for this date on the government’s staging website. We estimate the Imperial model to be projecting approximately 486 deaths on the 1st of November, LSHTM 266 deaths and Warwick 234. ...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/11/03/data-used-justify-englands-second-national-lockdown-proven-false/amp/ Data used to justify England's second national lockdown is 'proven' to be false, Prof Carl Heneghan claims Graphs presented during a Downing Street press conference suggested daily deaths could hit 4,000 next month Professor Chris Whitty and Sir Patrick Vallance have been urged to give "really clear" information to MPs about why a second lockdown is needed CREDIT: NEIL HALL/SHUTTERSTOCK Telegraph reporters 3 NOVEMBER 2020 • 10:18 AM Data presented by the Government's chief advisers to justify a second national lockdown in England has been "mathematically proven" to be incorrect, an Oxford University professor has said. Carl Heneghan, director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at the University of Oxford, said a forecast suggesting 4,000 daily deaths next month was wrong. The modelling, which was presented at a Downing Street press conference on Saturday is so outdated that it suggests daily deaths are now around 1,000 a day. In fact, the daily average for the last week is 260, with a figure of 162 on Saturday. But the 4,000 figure was presented by scientists when Boris Johnson confirmed new nationwide restrictions would be imposed from Thursday for four weeks to prevent a "medical and moral disaster" for the NHS. Prof Heneghan told the Today programme: "Mathematically it is now proven to be incorrect particularly the 4,000 estimate of deaths that would occur in December and why that is because it is already about four weeks out of date. "And actually Cambridge who are doing it the MRC (Medical Research Council) unit have already provided updates to provide lower estimates and those estimates are much closer to the truth." Prof Heneghan today urged Professor Chris Whitty and Sir Patrick Vallance to provide "really clear" information to MPs to explain why a second lockdown has been ordered when they appear in front of the Science and Technology Committee this afternoon. He said the decision to impose new blanket restrictions must be made on "actual data" and not models that are "shown to be wrong", adding the Government's three-tier system was effective in bringing down coronavirus cases. Speaking about Liverpool, where the strictest restrictions have been imposed, Prof Heneghan said cases had halved while hospital admissions had "stabilised". "You've got ... these pockets around the country where trusts like Liverpool have got into trouble with over half the patients being Covid patients," he told the BBC. "But let's look at the data, the data in Liverpool is showing cases have come down by about half, admissions have now stabilised, so, yes, there is a problem in Liverpool. "But, actually, the tier restrictions... the people in Liverpool have dropped cases from about 490 a day down to 260 a day - a significant drop "The R value is well below one in Liverpool at this moment in time."

When did that change and why? Is that compatible with Human Rights Law?

Introduction from your PDF Written evidence from Dr Lisa Forsberg*, Dr Isra Black**, Dr Thomas Douglas*, Dr Jonathan Pugh* (COV0220) Compulsory vaccination for Covid-19 and human rights law 5 Introduction and summary We are academics working in the areas of philosophy and law, with specialisations in, inter alia, moral and political philosophy, biomedical ethics, health law, and human rights law. Our submission pertains to compulsory Covid-19 vaccination:1 a requirement on 10 individuals to undergo vaccination as a condition of release from pandemic-related restrictions on liberty, including on movement and association.2 Our evidence is forward-looking. We expect that a Covid-19 vaccine will become available in sufficient quantity to enable population-wide immunisation.3 At that stage, the Government will need to consider the means of delivery, including whether it is 15 necessary to legislate for compulsory vaccination. We consider the human rights law dimensions of compulsory vaccination by reference to the Human Rights Act 1998 and the European Convention on Human Rights. As such, our submission primarily addresses a live issue the second question in the Committee’s call for evidence: What will the impact of specific measures taken by Government to address the 20 25 30 Covid-19 pandemic be on human rights in the UK? Our evidence takes the following form: 1. A discussion of the reasons why compulsory vaccination may need to be considered; 2. An overview of relevant legal provisions; 3. An examination of the human rights law compliance of compulsory vaccination. Our analysis under 3 establishes two parity arguments: a. If Covid-19 ‘lockdown’ measures are compatible with human rights law, then it is arguable that compulsory vaccination is too (lockdown parity argument); b. If compulsory medical treatment under mental health law for personal and public protection purposes is compatible with human rights law, then it is arguable that compulsory vaccination is too (mental health parity argument). *University of Oxford; ** University of York. 1We note that there is disagreement about what compulsion means and as to whether different kinds of non-voluntary vaccination schemes are in fact compulsory schemes. This is in part a theoretical disagreement, and in part a practical one to do with the nature of state sanctions that back any scheme. See Emma Cave, ‘Voluntary vaccination: the pandemic effect’ (2017) 37(2) LS 279-304. In this submission, we take a coarse-grained or bird’s eye view of the issue, that is, we will not engage here with the detail of specific policy schema for compulsory vaccination. 2Much of our argument is applicable, mutatis mutandis, to Covid-19 prophylactic treatment. For clarity and brevity, we focus on vaccination. 3The UK Government has purchased 190m doses of three vaccine candidates, either on risk or in principle: Sarah Bosely, ‘UK secures deals for 90m doses of coronavirus vaccine’ The Guardian (20 July 2020) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/20/uk-deals-doses-coronavirus-vaccine 20/07/20. Our chief conclusion is that, as and when a vaccine becomes available at scale, the Government should give serious consideration to compulsory immunisation as a 35 means of reducing the impacts of Covid-19. There is an arguable case for the compatibility of compulsory vaccination with human rights law. 1. Vaccine hesitancy A Covid-19 vaccine promises to be the best means to mitigate the impacts of the pandemic on individuals and society. Yet sufficient voluntary uptake of a vaccine 40 cannot be guaranteed.4 Voluntary vaccine uptake may be limited by ‘vaccine hesitancy’, which the World Health Organization (WHO) describes as ‘the reluctance or refusal to vaccinate despite the availability of vaccines’.5 Vaccine hesitancy in respect of Covid19 may arise because of the influence of anti-vaccination movements, the uneven demographic distribution of Covid-19 morbidity and mortality risks,6 or the mistaken 45 belief that Covid-19 immunity has already been acquired. Should a Covid-19 vaccine become available at scale, we cannot expect sufficient voluntary uptake. It is necessary for the Government to consider a policy of compulsory vaccination, with appropriate exceptions.7 Such a policy requires an assessment of its impact on human rights

https://www.legalcheek.com/2020/10/lord-sumption-warns-of-totalitarian-society-in-latest-attack-on-lockdown-policies/amp/ Lord Sumption warns of ‘totalitarian society’ in latest attack on lockdown policies CJ McKinney 6 days ago Lockdown sceptic accuses government of setting fire to the constitution as it tries to rule by decree Lord Sumption wowed a virtual audience last night with a hard-hitting attack on the government’s coronavirus policies, accusing ministers of deliberately stoking up fear and acting with a “cavalier disregard for the limits of their legal powers”. The former Supreme Court justice warned that British society was becoming “totalitarian” and argued that the government had no power to pass lockdown regulations under the Public Health Act. Sumption has been a leading lockdown sceptic for some time but last night’s speech marked an escalation in his warnings of the dire consequences of “government by decree”. Delivering an online lecture organised by Cambridge University, Sumption warned that “the British public has not even begun to understand the seriousness of what is happening to our country”. But the 71-year-old doesn’t seem to be experiencing much tyranny himself. Introducing him, Cambridge don Sarah Worthington revealed that Sumption had recently been spotted “cycling through the vineyards in northern France” and was giving the talk from Milan via Zoom. The silk took an hour off from living it up to warn that the government setting sweeping restrictions without the involvement of a “relatively supine House of Commons” was a democratic disaster. Sumption said: Sumption’s legal argument was that lockdown laws are unlawful in their current form. He pointed to the famous case of Ex parte Simms, where the House of Lords held that “fundamental rights cannot be overridden by general or ambiguous words” in an act of parliament. The latest comments from across Legal Cheek The government has passed the main lockdown regulations under the Public Health Act 1984, which does contain a power for the government to make regulations to fight infectious diseases, but it is “couched in wholly general terms”. Relying on that act to authorise sweeping control over healthy people’s lives, Sumption said, is inconsistent with the principle of legality in Simms and so the regulations could be quashed on judicial review. But his main theme was about the dangers of meekly accepting government by decree even with a national emergency to justify it. To cheers in the YouTube comments and on Twitter, Sumption declaimed: And he said that the situation contains the “authentic ingredients of a totalitarian society” and “marks a move to a more authoritarian model of politics which will outlast the present crisis”. Sumption was delivering an annual law lecture at Cambridge, sponsored by magic circle law firm Freshfields. The text had evidently been circulated in advance, receiving blanket press coverage yesterday long before he opened his mouth. Watch Sumption’s lecture in full below: Categories: News Tags: Cambridge University, coronavirus, COVID-19, Judges, Lord Sumption, Supreme Court

Daily Mail England's second lockdown in the gloomy TV briefing announcing the lockdown Saturday night, insisting they were misleading with one 'proven to be incorrect'. One, which suggested there could be up to 4,000 deaths per day by December, was 'mathematically incorrect' and should not have been used, he claimed. Sir Patrick Vallance and Professor Chris Whitty have come under fire for gloomy slides they presented in the press conference at the weekend, and will be grilled by MPs on Parliament's science committee this afternoon to justify the evidence for another national lockdown.

Farage is there to lead the Resistance away from the Target.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8907339/How-No10s-experts-shamelessly-manipulated-data-terrify-England-locking-down.html Calling the Boffins' bluff: How No10's experts manipulated data and drew biased conclusions to 'terrify' England into locking down, writes ROSS CLARK By Ross Clark for the Daily Mail22:49, 02 Nov 2020 , updated 23:22, 02 Nov 2020 3.2kshares 756 comments It was the Halloween horror no one had been expecting: a series of mind-boggling graphs and charts presented at Saturday's Downing Street press conference that purported to show the Covid-19 pandemic was out of control and a second national lockdown was needed. ADVERTISEMENT But do the graphs and charts really support this? ROSS CLARK find outs ...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8908503/Was-lockdown-sold-LIE-Oxford-scientist-says-4-000-deaths-graph-NOT-used.html More proof England's lockdown was premature? Top researchers say R rate has dropped to 1 as Oxford expert claims Covid infections are 'flatlining' and the '4,000 deaths' graph used to justify restrictions has 'proven to be incorrect' By Stephen Matthews Health Editor and Connor Boyd Assistant Health Editor and Sam Blanchard Senior Health Reporter and James Gant For Mailonline08:06, 03 Nov 2020 , updated 14:17, 03 Nov 2020 2.7kshares 4.3k comments King's College London said cases were now 'plateauing' and there was a 'slight fall' in infections across UK Oxford's Carl Heneghan said told how coronavirus hospital admissions, cases and 'in effect' deaths in retreat It comes as Sir Patrick Vallance and Prof Chris Whitty face questions from MPs over the 4,000 deaths figure Meanwhile Britain yesterday recorded its lowest number of daily coronavirus infections in fortnight - 18,950

According to Lord Sumption the powers that the Government has taken for itself may not be lawful Quote Lockdowns and other Government-imposed Covid curbs contain all the ingredients of totalitarianism, a former Supreme Court judge warns. Orders to remain at home and rafts of new laws to restrict what people can do amount to a ‘breathtaking’ infringement of democratic rights, advises Lord Sumption. He has repeatedly warned that ministers have been exceeding their rightful powers but these criticisms are his strongest yet. He told the Cambridge Law Faculty that the use of coercion to try to quell the pandemic is unprecedented in British history, even in wartime, and that it runs against basic freedoms. Lord Sumption accused ministers of using the police to suppress opposition to their policies, of creating new criminal offences without the legal right to do so, and of grabbing unconstitutional powers by issuing misleading guidance.

Agreed Same as mass non-compliance with mask wearing Same as mass non-compliance with testing.

If you are wondering what you can do to help I suggest you contact your MP. I posted in this thread yesterday about 10-15 suggestions for letters you could write to your MP. We know they are duplicitous but we need to be able to prove it.

Does lockdown mean protests not allowed?

Do you think the test could be part 1 of a Binary Bioweapon? There was a PDF on this recently. Started in the 1990s

Interesting article Australia https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2020/09/01/victorian-mps-vile-abuse/

The North is less cynical/more naive and tends to assume that the Government is truthful.

They can't give you a generic reply if you ask their opinion of Lord Sumption's comments.

Masks cause reinfection eg bacterial pneumonia Social Distancing reduces ability to catch and deal with cross-infection which is necessary for immunity Hand gel (hydrogel) contains toxins - possibly stroking agents. So HANDS FACE SPACE is in fact a triple hit.

If we can prove incompetence then we can question their right to do what they are doing.