Roam Ramblings

Did he have access to a missile, or is it the usual false flag scenario? https://www.naturalnews.com/2020-12-26-nashville-explosion-was-actually-a-missile-strike-att-nsa-spy-hub.html

Thanks HAARPING_On, here is my MP's response and Steph, you're right he didn't address the issue with any substance, so I sent him my response: Response from Peter Kyle MP: Dear Mr R. Edwards, Thank you for getting in touch and for sharing your concerns regarding the coronavirus vaccine becoming compulsory. This would be an unprecedented action and you have every right to ask questions about the safety of any vaccine which Public health experts must be able to answer. I am satisfied by what I have read so far about the Vaccine which is now being rolled out in our communities. I would recommend you read the full trial details for yourself here which goes further into questions of safety and efficacy: https://bit.ly/37Zf225 More broadly I am absolutely celebrating the achievement these Coronavirus vaccines represent. This year has been challenging and the vaccine being rolled out successfully is the route back to allowing us to enjoy our lives, hug our friends and see our family without fearing giving them a potentially deadly virus. There will be some people who medically cannot take this vaccine. It is important for them and the population at large that as many people take the vaccine who are able to. The job of the Government is to convince you that the vaccine is safe to take. As your elected representative, I also have a part to play in this. It should not be necessary to force people to take the vaccine mandatorily and would represent a failure in our public health messaging and ability to explain how the vaccines have been developed so fast. My Labour colleague Alex Norris MP, who is Shadow Minister for Health and Social Care, spoke at the Covid-19: vaccination Westminster Hall debate last night and set out our party’s position: “the sentiment of the petition slightly misses where we are at the moment. There is a pretty broad political consensus against compulsion, coercion or inconveniencing people into submission. I know what our position is as the Opposition, but no one studies what the Government say more closely than we do, and I have never detected a desire for mandatory vaccination in what they are saying. We all want to have confidence, and to know that the roll-out has been done through the proper process, rather than in any other way, and like other hon. Members who have spoken, I hope that business will take the same view. The Government might have a role in that, and I would be interested to know the Minister’s reflections on the contribution from the hon. Member for Wycombe. I would say gently to businesses that compulsory vaccination will almost certainly not do what they want it to do. It is therefore important to take some time and have a cool head on this issue. People’s unwillingness to take the covid-19 vaccine has a knock-on effect on vaccine hesitancy more generally. In fact, this is probably the FA cup final of vaccine hesitancy. Last year, vaccine hesitancy was in the World Health Organisation’s top 10 threats to global health—it was up there with a future pandemic. It is something that we have to address, whether it is related to covid-19 or not. In Denmark in 2013, false claims in a documentary about the human papillomavirus vaccine led to a decline in uptake of around 90% among some cohorts. Similarly, between 2014 and 2017 in Ireland, vocal attacks on the HPV vaccine from the anti-vaccine lobby led to a drop in uptake from 70% to 50%. These things matter. What we see through those developments, and through our experiences in this country, is that the best method of countering those views is through proactive, positive health-promoting campaigns. I know that is something the Government are doing, and it is very welcome—we will support them in that. It is almost certainly too early to have enough data to be able to talk about the efficiency of such things, but we want the Government to keep pushing hard on this issue. That is what our constituents want us to do—to explain and, as I say, make ourselves available to answer any questions that they have. We have had an extraordinary year fighting the virus. There is now clearly a path for us to take—a light at the end of the tunnel, or however people want to characterise it. We need to pursue it with the same vigour with which we attacked the previous year. If we do, we might just get out of this thing.” If you are interested, you can read the whole debate here: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2020-12-14/debates/782DBCA8-620D-473C-A8CB-CCB9C0F78DF5/Covid-19Vaccination If you have further questions, I would also direct you to contact the local Healthwatch team about how the vaccine will be rolled out in our area. You can find their dedicated vaccine page here https://www.healthwatchbrightonandhove.co.uk/news/2020-12-15/vaccinations-covid-19 In the meantime, please do stay safe and well, if you need help with anything else please don’t hesitate to contact me again. All the best, Peter Peter Kyle MP Labour Member of Parliament for Hove and Portslade Shadow Minister for Victims and Youth Justice My Reply to Peter Kyle MP: Dear Peter Kyle MP, Further to your response to the alleged breaches of House of Commons Code of Conduct, I submit the following. Firstly, I will begin by saying that I am extremely disappointed at your perfunctory approach to the absolutely critical scientific information that I provided you with, because it is of enormous value and importance to your constituents in making an informed decision on their health and the health of their children, especially considering the deliberate misinformation and suppression of safer and more effective Covid-19 treatments, such as Vitamin D and Ivermectin. Your first sentence, “Thank you for getting in touch and for sharing your concerns regarding the coronavirus vaccine becoming compulsory.” has no relevance to the letter I wrote you, as I never mentioned any concerns over a mandatory or compulsory vaccine. What I did voice concerns over is the use of the flawed PCR test, which has led to mass misdiagnosis through a diagnostic test with errors and inherent fallacies in the protocol that renders the PCR test useless. This has monumental and profound implications, in that it means that the Government, Public Health institutions and the Public have absolutely no idea what the infection rate of this virus is, nor how many deaths it has caused, or what level of threat it poses. What is known, is that the public is becoming increasingly aware of the real cost to life and livelihood from the lockdowns and restriction measures imposed by government, based entirely on the results produced by the scientifically flawed PCR test. I also voiced disbelief that the government did not explore the use of the more accurate and scientifically validated Sanger sequencing testing method, which would have clearly identified the real benefits and risks of Covid-19 vs Lockdown. The public have suffered beyond comprehension and now we find out that it’s all been for nothing, because we actually know nothing about the impact of this virus on human health, or even if it is responsible for the symptoms people are experiencing. Yet you and the Government insist on continuing with the scientifically flawed PCR test, in support of the corporate Pharmaceutical narrative of vaccines for everyone at any cost, while providing said corporate cartels with exemption from any liability and/or responsibility for product harms, making your constituents and taxpayers responsible for this burden instead. This is compelling evidence to support a further alleged breach of the Code of Conduct, namely: · INTEGRITY Holders of public office should not place themselves under any financial or other obligation to outside individuals or organisations that might influence them in the performance of their official duties. In addition, I voiced concerns over the serious potential of harm from the previously untried and novel genetically engineered Covid-19 vaccines, which should not in any way be confused with and/or attached to the previous vaccines that have contributed to the rise in hesitancy and safety concerns, which are valid given that, alongside all the evidence of harms, they are now proven to be responsible for spreading viruses, even after the wild versions have died out: “The World Health Organization says a new polio outbreak in Sudan is linked to an ongoing vaccine-sparked epidemic in Chad — a week after the U.N. health agency declared the African continent free of the wild polio virus.” LONDON (AP)”. In light of your response, my question to you as my elected representative in government is, why am I and your other constituents not being properly informed by you and the government, that there are actually not one, but three viable treatments for Covid-19; Vaccines, Ivermectin and Vitamin-D? By knowingly suppressing and/or withholding this information from your constituents and the wider public, you are depriving constituents of the right to informed consent. Your failure to address, or even acknowledge this medically and scientifically important element of my letter, in favour of telling me “The job of the Government is to convince you that the vaccine is safe to take. As your elected representative, I also have a part to play in this.” only serves to add to the credibility of the evidence in support of the alleged breaches to the House of Commons Code of Conduct. I find your statement extremely disturbing for the following reasons: As I understand it, and I strongly believe that most of your constituents and the public would agree, the job of the Government is to protect the nation from harm in this unprecedented public health emergency. It is horrifying that, according to you, this job has now been redirected to focus on convincing the public about the safety of a vaccine, which amongst other safety concerns, contains an ingredient that has already proven to be harmful to human health. You have robust scientific evidence of this, I know because I presented it to you myself in my letter. That said, if the job of the Government is to convince me that the vaccine is safe to take, then all the government has to do, is make the manufacturers liable for any harms caused by their product, and not make the taxpayer liable via the VDPS. If this novel genetically engineered vaccine is as safe as you and the Government are trying to convince us it is, then why would the government agree to indemnify the manufacturer from liability, at the manufacturer’s behest, without any public consultation and/or proper scientific debate, it simply doesn’t make any sense and is therefore non-sense. Probably the more sinister aspect of your statement, is the fact that I have already provided legitimate and robust evidence that the vaccine is the least safe, least known and has the most potential for harm, of the three viable treatments for Covid-19, yet the thought of getting this experimental vaccine injected into your constituents, still has you excited enough to state “… I am absolutely celebrating the achievement these Coronavirus vaccines represent.”, which begs the obvious question from your constituents; Why, when we have two safe, effective and affordable treatments already available? I believe you have spectacularly failed to comprehend the enormity of the information I have provided, and your refusal to address or even acknowledge the evidence, is deeply concerning and shocking beyond belief. By avoiding your responsibility to properly inform your constituents, while knowingly suppressing and/or withholding vital public health information in a public health emergency, you are once again violating the House of Commons Code of Conduct on Accountability, Integrity, Openness and Leadership. In fact, this situation has become so serious, that I would even venture to say that your actions and/or inactions in this public health emergency amount to Misconduct in Public Office. Furthermore, as you have wilfully chosen to supress and/or withhold this vital information from your constituents and the wider public, in blatant favour of a novel vaccine at any cost, it is now my duty to share this information with the public and as many of my fellow constituents as I possibly can, because making people aware of the critically important scientific evidence it contains is undeniably acting in the best interests of public health, which you as my MP are failing to do. You have publicly stated your position in favour of lockdowns and the novel and potentially harmful Covid-19 vaccines, and are actively participating in unchecked censorship and wilful suppression of open scientific debate at a time when it is needed the most … in a public health emergency. Considering that your position is diametrically opposed to the robust scientific evidence and information that I have presented to you showing how the government can prevent any further needless deaths and harms, you leave me no other option but to respectfully request that you, as my elected representative in government, refer these alleged breaches to the Committee on Standards and the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards and/or any other relevant government department for a full investigation, or inform me of the process available to me to achieve the same. Again, I trust that the timeliness of your response will take into account the seriousness of the public health emergency to which it relates and your detailed response to the evidence and concerns presented herein is of paramount importance in this national and global health emergency. Regards Mr R. J. Edwards Update: It looks like someone is finally starting to pay attention to scientific evidence and constituent concerns! “Mass testing of people without covid-19 symptoms is “not an accurate way of screening the general population,” a senior figure at the Department of Health and Social Care has said in a letter seen by The BMJ. The comments were made by James Bethell, one of England’s health ministers, in response to a letter from an MP raising concerns about blanket polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing on behalf of a constituent. In his letter Bethell stated that “swab testing people with no symptoms is not an accurate way of screening the general population, as there is a real risk of giving false reassurance.” He added, “Widespread asymptomatic testing could undermine the value of testing, as there is a risk of giving misleading results. Rather, only people with covid-19 symptoms should get tested.” British Medical Journal – 18 December 2020

I've already sent it to my MP and I'll post details of any responses as and when I get them.

Using existing legal and traditional structures of Government& Parliament, what do you think will happen if every one of the 516 MP's who voted for lockdown measures, received the following letter from at least one of their constituents? It's certainly a challenge to Government that I would like to force them to deal with, how about you? https://tlc-project.com/dearmp