Simon Dolan’s Case – Thrown Out
The treatment of this case was exactly the same as Dr Judy Wood’s 9/11 Qui Tam case, back in 2008/2009 – the judge has the right to simply ignore all the evidence and not do anything. Dolan writes:
Disappointed beyond measure to let you know that we have received the High Court ruling and the Judge has disallowed our case – essentially this means we have no recourse to the law. We have published the full decision on the website. Please do read through this as you will see just how lightly and with complete disdain the Judiciary have dismissed the enormous amount of evidence we provided. We are currently considering an Appeal.
I want to say a personal and very heartfelt thank you to all of you. It has meant the world to stand alongside so many people who believe like I do that Britain should remain a free country. We will continue the fight – either in Court of via other means. Please do consider signing up to www.keepbritainfree….
There is something disconcerting to me about the “Keep Britain Free” site – I find the child and “heart balloon” symbol as inappropriate for this matter – maybe someone can enlighten me though..
People’s Brexit – “Govt must Prove COVID-19 Exists”
They, too, a trying to force a judicial review, but on a different basis to the Simon Dolan case:
They recently posted this:
Now our friends at StandUpX – Science Committee have written to the PM demanding proof of the existence of so-called ‘covid-19’. This is to be by way of peer reviewed evidence of isolation and purification of the ‘virus’. This is also to be produced with peer reviewed proof that all of the Koch Postulates have been applied to the ‘virus’.
As this so-called ‘covid-19’ ‘virus’ is now controlling and dominating our lives, it is only reasonable to be given proof of it and if this proof is not given their ludicrous measures of control and vaccination plans should STOP NOW!
They also link to some work by ….
Dr Kevin Corbett – ‘An Interactive Anti-Coronavirus Toolkit’
Thanks to Janet for this link. Although Corbett is an artist, he also has other qualifications, including an MSc in Nursing. He has written a number of pieces of the CV scam – posted here:
It seems he has put these together into a longer document/report – which makes excellent reading (although I spotted a few typos)
CDC On Mask Usage
Thanks to Nuno for these!
Just wanted to bring to your attention this study published by the CDC itself on the use of protective equipment. Several very interesting things are said in there, including some contradictions, take a look. The gist of it is that even according to that study from the CDC masks are ineffective in these kinds of situations. The study focuses on influenza, but it should apply to CV.
Just 2 quotes from the study that I think are fundamental:
“In this review, we did not find evidence to support a protective effect of personal protective measures or environmental measures in reducing influenza transmission. Although these measures have mechanistic support based on our knowledge of how influenza is transmitted from person to person, randomized trials of hand hygiene and face masks have not demonstrated protection against laboratory-confirmed influenza, with 1 exception.”
“We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility.”
WHO Discuss CV’s “Low Morality Rate” and German Extra Parliamentary Enquiry
Thanks again to Nuno for sending these links!
Just wanted to bring to your attention another 2 things I found relative to the CV question.
The first is an article from a media outlet from my country. I send you the translated website to English, I think the tool did a good job of it:
In the article it mentions that on Thursday, I guess the 2nd of July, 1300 scientists gathered in online sessions organized by the WHO to discuss the issue of mortality rate from CV. Seemingly they came to the number of 0,6%. Of course the article goes on to make silly points and absurd comparisons. I just thought the number was very telling, so even the WHO agrees it’s around 0,6% mortality rate. Unfortunately, I couldn’t find any other source of confirmation for this. But the outlet is a reputed one in my country, I don’t see why they would lie.
The other thing is a video I picked up from GlobalResearch: www.globalresearch.c…
Direct link: vimeo.com/434999409
Which is an Extra-parliamentary Corona Committee of Inquiry in Germany. Think there’s some good stuff in there.
Become a Card-carrying Californian Resister
Thanks to Kathy for this link:
The images are followed by the text that in in them.
I recommend you carry this card with you, and hold it up for the employee to READ OUT LOUD. You do not need to say a word. It is better if you say nothing and have the person read this in their own words, so they will better understand what the law states.
A message for the manager
To be read out loud
1. A licensed medical professional is the only person qualified to give medical advice, including the advice to wear a mask, which negatively affects the respiratory system, neurological system and immune system.
2. Practicing medicine without a license is an offense punishable by law.
3. There is no law in California that requires anyone to wear a mask into any business establishment. Guidelines are not laws.
4. Equal access and accommodations in any business establishment whatsoever is protected by law. No citizen may be discriminated against
5. based on a health condition. (California Civic Code 51 (b). [See reverse for applicable laws.]
6. Any threat of intimidation in this matter will result in law enforcement being summoned.
CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE Sec. 51.7 (a) All persons within the jurisdiction of this state have the right to be free from any violence, or intimidation by threat of violence, committed against their persons or property because of political affiliation, or on account of any characteristic listed or defined in subdivision (b) or e) of Section 51, or position in a labor dispute, or because another person perceives them to have one or more of those characteristics. The identification in this subdivision of particular bases of discrimination is illustrative rather than restrictive. Sec. 51(b) All persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever.
Look at “Recent Posts” on the website : www.checktheevidence…
Follow on Facebook: www.facebook.com/Che…
Follow on Twitter: twitter.com/check_ev…
Follow on Linked in: www.linkedin.com/in/…
Or if you don’t use social media, you can use an RSS reader and use the link on the www.checktheevidence… site for RSS