The red pillers of society saw this coming months ago! But according to the MSM nothing is happening whilst its happening.
cheers
2 Likes
I can’t see any UK cases before the courts on the legality of mandates for the current crop of covid jabs. There has been only one case before the European Court of Human Rights (
Vavřička and others v the Czech Republic (8 April 2021)
and this looked at the right of a state to fine parents who didn’t let their children be vaccinated for about 6 vaccines several years ago. ( I covered it here:
The one issue I didn’t bring up at the time is whether the UK injections against Covid are still experimental or not . In the US because the FDA has only issued an Emergency Use Authorisation they are regarded as experimental procedures for which full safety data will not be available until 2023.
I think Pfizer has asked for this to be changed to full FDA approval - once this is given, the chances of legal success against mandatory vaccines ( using the Nuremburg code and Human Rights legislation ) drops dramatically, imo.
cheers
Perhaps they changed the “from and with” beacuase of public awareness they were cooking the books. All they needed to do to show the “vaccines” work is turn down the cycles on the PCR (or even do fewer tests).
Or maybe I’m now so suspicious of big government, I see things when there is nothing there 
1 Like
Hi @PatB , I think you are seeing things pretty accurately. They have certainly abused PCR tests at every turn to manipulate the data. It could be the public that are more aware but it could also be the professionals doing the lab work - informed experts might have a lot of personal data to share with the public before the Online Safety Bill pins everyone to the ground.
It could also be the innova lateral flow test scam which can’t be so easily manipulated at source - the new NHS rules would give them total control over the data coming from NHS sources which they could keep hidden until the Vacts can be compiled “correctly”.
cheers
1 Like
As a partial answer I noted this reference to the temporary nature of the authorisation in respect of Pfizer:
“This temporary Authorisation under Regulation 174 permits the supply of identified COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 batches, based on the safety, quality and efficacy data submitted by Pfizer/BioNTech to MHRA in the period from 1 October to 2 December 2020; …
This authorisation will be valid until expressly withdrawn by MHRA or upon issue of a full market authorisation by the MHRA.”
…
This final part of the regulations references a control arm of a continuing study and allows participants to opt out of the control arm to get vaccinated - if everyone opts out then there is no control arm so what is the value of the study? /and if there is no point does this invalidate their licence?
“Pfizer/BioNTech must: …
Ensure that any participants in study c4591001 that choose to be unblinded and then have a COVID-19 vaccination if they are on placebo arm, should have an end of study visit including immunogenicity assessment (including anti-N antibodies) and also NAAT. This is to ensure that they have a complete status before they become unevaluable for the control arm.”
This point also confirms that there is a continuing study ( study c4591001) of the “vaccine” which is not complete - I think and so must be still experimental and temporary licensed only … I ran out of researching energy at this point!
cheers
1 Like