CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

by **LionsShare** Wed Sep 29, 2021 1:24 pm

This is off the DailyExpose.co.uk web site, please read & make up your own mind:

Australia is a testing ground for what’s coming to the United Kingdom this winter
https://theexpose.uk/2021/09/29/australia-is-a-testing-ground-for-whats-coming-to-the-united-kingdom-this-winter/

Evidence the Covid-19 Vaccine programme is Genocide
https://theexpose.uk/2021/09/29/evidence-the-covid-19-vaccine-programme-is-genocide/

Why they created a fuel “crisis”
https://theexpose.uk/2021/09/29/why-they-created-a-fuel-crisis/

by **LionsShare** Wed Sep 29, 2021 8:46 pm

here is more
https://off-guardian.org/2021/09/22/30-facts-you-need-to-know-your-covid-cribsheet/

by **Mrblue2015** Thu Sep 30, 2021 7:06 am

Good finds LS, thank you. A lot of it makes sense and fits in with the overall plan (plandemic / reset).

I wasted my breath on a young guy the other day, who worked at a DIY store, and who had taken the jabs, trying to explain the bigger picture. He said he understood but you just know he’s one of the vast majority of young people who would still rather conform and push away any hard evidence laid in front of him. I ended the ‘conversation’ (well, it was mostly one way) by saying “Well it’s your generation who will suffer the most sadly”.

Then when I visited a pharmacy later that day, I didn’t talk about the plandemic but something else. Given the context of the conversation I was having with the (young) pharmacist (who should theoretically at least have been a ‘clever person’) it was clear to me that again, this young person, was not capable of critical thinking but rather relatively simplistic thinking.

I do fear that the art of critical thinking is incline in general. Something is dumbing people down. Or maybe I just take critical thinking for granted. Regardless, if critical thinkers were in the majority, oh boy, how different would society and the world be with the non-existence of propaganda (because it wouldn’t work) etc..

by **assassin** Tue Oct 05, 2021 2:21 am

Its a simple concept; tell the same lie long enough, loud enough, and often enough and people will believe it.

Happened for centuries.

by **Mrblue2015** Tue Oct 05, 2021 6:42 am

Agreed Assassin. I’m afraid people, in general, only have themselves to blame and people like us will always be in the minority.

by davidg4039 Tue Oct 05, 2021 8:13 am

I will be staying in the minority even if it means an early demise (not without a fight BTW!). I am appalled at how the world is full of wimps and snowflakes.

by davidg4039 Wed Oct 20, 2021 11:37 pm

CV Bill passed via a bunch of muppet mps yesterday. Dep. Speaker and others had a bit of a laff! F'in gov a disgrace IMO!

by **assassin** Thu Oct 21, 2021 2:59 am

davidg4039 wrote:CV Bill passed via a bunch of muppet mps yesterday. Dep. Speaker and others had a bit of a laff! F'in gov a disgrace IMO!

Those muppet MP's all work for the same company called UK Government PLC Limited and have to follow the company policy, we have a prime minister whose official title is First Minister of the Treasury and his role is to ensure the treasury coffers are full enough to pay those with their troughs in the taxpayer funded trough, so not muppets as they are merely following corporate policy to ensure their snouts remain in the trough, or simply put, looking after themselves.

by **assassin** Fri Oct 22, 2021 2:20 am

Note the term CV BILL, its a charge folks

by flyingfish Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:45 am

It's only a bill from the time it's drafted until it's passed. In this case this debate was for renewal of an existing act so not really bill, but rather a motion. You can see the complaints from members about how little chance there was for discussion and review, although in the end none of that prevailed and the motion passed. With this renewal most of the "temporary provisions" will remain in place for another six months making two years since they were originally rushed through also with insufficient scrutiny. Just by the bye most of the actual restrictions have been made by this act but rather by separate SIs relying on the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-10-19/debates/DE41995A-64A6-4CFE-BF4C-552F6875D6C6/CoronavirusAct2020(ReviewOfTemporaryProvisions)(No3)

by **LionsShare** Sat Oct 23, 2021 7:41 pm

please read the following, this could & I mean could (as oppose to would) be quite important:

https://theexpose.uk/2021/10/23/government-reports-suggest-fully-vaccinated-develop-ade-by-the-end-of-the-year/

on the surface things look bright & dandy but there could be something more sinister?

I have my ideas but what do you the read think?

(2314)

by alab Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:06 am

Some times I ponder who pays these people to impose these dictates on us.

by **assassin** Sun Oct 24, 2021 3:52 am

You know who it is the same as the rest of us.

I walked in and caught an advertisement on TV and it caught my eye, it said people need to get vaccinated to stop the spread of covid; this is total BS as it is well documented and agreed by Government and SAGE that double vaccinations do nothing to stop you catching covid or even spreading covid. So this alone contradicts itself, whats more they are still spreading the lies and telling the same lie long and loud enough to hopefully influence people and many aren't falling for it, what about the third of NHS workers refusing to have the jab.

So why are they continually telling the same lie, covid jabs do not stop you catching covid, covid jabs do not stop you spreading covid, so how can getting double jabbed stop it spreading.

by flyingfish Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:20 am

LionsShare wrote:please read the following, this could & I mean could (as oppose to would) be quite important:
https://theexpose.uk/2021/10/23/government-reports-suggest-fully-vaccinated-develop-ade-by-the-end-of-the-year/
on the surface things look bright & dandy but there could be something more sinister?
I have my ideas but what do you the read think?
(2314)

That's the same article links in an earlier thread, and as I commented before the PHE report says nothing whatsoever about the immune system. The authors of that blog have just done some strange arithmetic on the figures and come to some strange conclusion. They seem to have missed the rather obvious fact that the people counted as testing positive in say week 32 are not necessarily the same as those testing positive in week 39.

The higher percentage positive tests remains unexplained however and I would be genuinely interested in the cause. If we made the rash assumption that testing is random, therefore an equal percentage of vaccinated and unvaccinated people were tested, then it appears to show a greater chance of a positive test for those aged 40- to 79, but a very much lower chance of illness or death. (The blog doesn't mention figures for illness and death, possibly because they don't support his scare story)

by **LionsShare** Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:40 pm

flyingfish wrote:That's the same article links in an earlier thread

FF there is I agree commonality between the 2 but there are 2 posts:
https://theexpose.uk/2021/10/10/comparison-reports-proves-vaccinated-developing-ade/
https://theexpose.uk/2021/10/23/government-reports-suggest-fully-vaccinated-develop-ade-by-the-end-of-the-year/

with the 2nd post, its more over the comments below it I should have high lighted more than anything else. There's something quite sinister about it?

Also cheers to JT for the 2nd link

by flyingfish Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:39 pm

Not sure about sinister but certainly strange. There is a lot that is not understood about the immune system and I've seen plenty of examples that appear to contradict general understanding of how it works. So could a new and rushed vaccine have unexpected results, I certainly think it's possible. So not impossible that it is an actual effect, something about the vaccine makes the recipients more likely to test positive although less likely to fall ill or die.

I did wonder about the chance of testing in the first place, for example I know people who are required to test twice or three times a week as a requirement of their jobs. No vaccine refuser is going to be doing a job of that sort, so wouldn't show up in the figures. Personally I don't think either the number of people in that sort of job, or the number of refusers is enough to have skewed the figures that much. Nevertheless I'd be happier if the figures showed percentage positive as well as absolute numbers, or even better if the tested sample was random.

by **assassin** Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:41 pm

Factor into the equation people who have tested positive who are actually negative, along with people who have tested negative but who are also positive.

This immediately raises doubts to the validity of the testing process and automatically skews the figures.

by Sponsored content

CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter

Re: CV19, & what could be coming to UK this winter