Anti-Covid vaccine discussion— proposed laws
The Party Formerly Known As Labour is pushing for a law to prevent anyone discussing online and negatively the anti-Covid vaccines currently under development.
Things have slid so fast in Britain that such a measure seems almost normal; to have an “urgent” law passed (at present only proposed, and only by Labour) which would have the sole aim of stifling or gagging discussion and views on a contentious bit of public policy.
One can see where the idea came from. Keir Starmer is married to a Jewish woman, a property lawyer, and their children are being brought up as Jewish. The “holocaust” narrative is protected from debate, analysis, or questioning in much of Western and Central Europe by means of “holocaust” “denial” laws, meaning that anyone questioning even part of that narrative faces prosecution.
Such laws can be compared to the religious heresy laws which were in force in much of Catholic Europe in the late Middle Ages and Renaissance eras.
It is natural for Keir Starmer, a former Director of Public Prosecutions, to see repressive law, or police and other punitive action, as the answer to a perceived problem of public belief in, or compliance with, government requirements. He believes in repression.
This kneejerk reaction, to ban any expression of dissent, is very much a sign of the times.
The conventional political wisdom is to think that, now that Labour is supposedly less “extreme” after the departure of Corbyn, the party is more “electable”. Perhaps, in Britain’s rigged binary system, which posits a “choice” between two “major parties”. Also, we have a government which exhibits incompetence and muddle exceeding even that of the previous decade. However, I would not put much money on Labour. It is still a party wedded to mass immigration, political correctness etc, still replete with black MPs, still full of petty would-be dictators such as Yvette Cooper and Rachel Reeves (both members of Labour Friends of Israel, incidentally).
While we are on the subject of System politics, consider the transnational element in the ZOG/NWO set-up. For example, Yvette Cooper went to work for then Presidential nominee Bill Clinton in Arkansas in 1992, after having left university but after a brief time also working as a researcher for the then Shadow Chancellor, John Smith. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yvette_Cooper#Early_life_and_education.
Another case: the present New Zealand Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, worked for the Labour Party in London sometime around 2002 as a Special Adviser (paid £50,000-£100,000 p.a.), before she returned to NZ politics.
Trump needs to extend Presidential pardon to all social-national or allied prisoners doing time in Federal prisons. Stick it to “antifa” and other swine!
Yes. Better-connected people in the Soviet Union had better hospitals. I met someone once who had been operated on in the Botkin Clinic [https://www.lonelyplanet.com/russia/moscow/information/botkin-hospital/a/poi-inf/1044137/360429; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Botkin], which at that time (1980s) was considered one of the best, outside of the Kremlin Clinic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Clinical_Hospital, which still exists today:
A Soviet-era poetic line about the Kremlin Clinic read, “The floors parquet, the doctors OK“, meaning politically-vetted (it rhymes in Russian): полы паркетные, врачи анкетные.
Again, yes. When my local GP (a nice fellow) was on paternity leave last year or the year before, he was replaced for the duration by a far more pro-active young doctor who improved my (high blood pressure, mainly) medication. Despite the fact that I only attend the medical centre about once a year, I was sorry to read in the newsletter the practice puts out that he had relocated to London to join a purely private practice. I looked up that practice online. Based in Kensington, and I noticed that a home visit was charged from about £250!
I have to say that that young doctor must have been very driven, because after all most GPs now get over £100,000 anyway, especially if partners, and if they practise in an area such as this they can play golf, sail, ride etc. In other words, they can live a rather pleasant lifestyle. Well, there it is…
…though anyone actually disappointed in Boris-idiot as Prime Minister was far too optimistic to start with…
The woman arrested (with a degree of brutality, at that) cries out, “I have not done anything!”, as if that matters in the Britain of 2020 (cf. Alison Chabloz).
At what point does the “Overton window” move to the extent that it becomes accepted that former British “democracy and freedom” have been subverted, and therefore that it is acceptable to do whatever it takes to restore our liberties?
It is not often that I agree with Dan Hodges! In an extraordinary year, this stands out. Britain is, arguably, now run by the “ho” (to use the now-ubiquitous black argot) of the part-Jew chancer currently posing as Prime Minister!
Who is Carrie Symonds? This is what Wikipedia says: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrie_Symonds.
A degree in art history and theatre studies, then Miss Symonds joined the Conservative Party in the lowly position of one of many press officers. Nine years later, she was heading that department, but “It was reported that she was asked to leave her post as director of communications after sources claimed party chiefs had said her performance was poor, and questions were raised over significant unjustified expenses claims.” [Wikipedia]
I notice that Miss Symonds was appointed to head the department in which she had worked for many years in 2018, the same year in which she started her affair with the still-married “Boris”.
“It’s not what you know but who you know”…(or should that be “It’s not what you know but by whom you are known”, using “known” in the “Biblical” or “Ugandan” sense?)…
Miss Symonds is an advocate for animal welfare. I like that. However, as Hodges says, this is no way to run a government.
Laura Towler and her husband, of Patriotic Alternative, were attacked by three “antifa” swine yesterday, but beat them off. This has generated very many tweets.
Brave lady. What a contrast to the “Mike Stuchbery” types…
A reminder to all that Alison Chabloz will be put on trial at Westminster Magistrates’ Court, 181 Marylebone Road, London, on Tuesday 17 November. That is the day after tomorrow. All supporters welcome. THe nearest Underground stations are Edgware Road (District, Circle, Bakerloo) and Marylebone (Bakerloo). The trial is expected to start at 1000 hrs.
Idiots such as “@MunroeL” are all too prevalent in the Britain of 2020. He or she would have been right at home in the days of the Inquisition…
Galileo had “dangerous” ideas which were treated as “lies”…
Life is very short in any one incarnation. “There is the individual, but beyond the individual there is the race” [Adolf Hitler, after Stalingrad].
Why do almost all self-describing “anti-fascists” have mental problems? I even blogged about it a year or two ago: https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/07/18/theyre-coming-to-take-me-away-ha-ha/
The Sunday Times? Murdoch. NWO. ZOG. Lugenpresse. Judenpresse.
One less. On the general point, if a woman attacks a man in any serious way, she gets what she gets.
They don’t want Israel flooded by (non-Jewish) immigrants, though!
Watching that Schwab “Great Reset” video above reminded me of the opinion of Max Planck, who said that most scientists [and therefore people in general] are not convinced by theories, facts or new facts, but that once that sceptical generation is replaced by a new generation brought up with those new facts, the new theory becomes accepted wisdom.
That is what the propaganda is aimed at— the younger generation, including young children. What propaganda? Not just the “Coronavirus” stuff, but also “Black Lives Matter”, the whole racemixing agenda, all sorts of associated stuff too. The Great Reset. The Great Replacement. White Genocide.
It is not aimed against people born( like me) in 1956, nor at those born in 1966, or 1976, or even 1986. It is aimed at those born in the 1990s, the 2000s and the 2010s.
The problem with that view is that the “Judenpresse” is, and for a long time has been, owned, controlled or very strongly influenced by the Jew-Zionist element. The Internet promised —and briefly delivered on that promise— to provide free expression, but “they” are now reasserting control, and only the harshest resistance will prevent that.
Peter Hitchens’ view of “Press freedom” is very out of date.
Surprising that such wild country is so near to Edinburgh (I have never been there, perhaps obviously).