"Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is and you must
bend to its power or live a lie" - Miyamoto Musashi
Commentator, observer of life and how it impacts on the ordinary person. His views on Covid and the Plandemic are straightforward, respectfully blunt and accurate.
A critical thinker who encourages us all to ask the right questions, not accept the word of authority that has llittle interest in our well being. - SEE HIS VIDEOS HERE
Michael O'Bernicia talks to Dr Sherri Tenpenny about her Mastering Vaccine Information Boot Camp and the information war over vaccines.
The 8-week, Mastering Vaccine Info (MVI) Boot Camp training is an intensive course that covers what you need to know and teach others about: vaccines are not safe and are not protective; the truth about smallpox and polio eradication; the difference between real and medical herd immunity; how to teach others to read a package insert if they do not have a medical background.
A Politically Incorrect Podcast from The Bernician about the idiocracy of wearing a cloth mask to prevent the transmission of a virus [contains strong language
In this essential interview, the brilliant and courageous Dr Sherri Tenpenny lays out the irrefutable facts about the dangers posed by the mandatory vaxing agenda.
Find out why Dr Tenpenny has spent 40,000 hours over the past 20 years researching the problems caused by injecting up to 200 hundred chemicals per shot into the human body, along with the vaccine-viruses which cause the very illness they are supposed to prevent.
8th April 2020 - Andrew Kaufman M D | The Truth About Viruses, CV19 & Vaccines
16 March 2020 - A Politically Incorrect Podcast from The Bernician, about the way in which the Corona Virus is being used as a mask for totalitarian 5G genocide.
19 February 2020 - The first in a new podcast series by The Bernician [aka Michael O'Bernicia]
Episode One: #5G - ONE MASSIVE COVER UP.
Firstly, Lawful Rebellion never made any sense to me, since I have never had any allegiance to the monarchy, notwithstanding any invisible or implied social contracts, which meant that I was simply not able to declare that I was withholding my allegiance until the restoration of the monarch’s constitutional responsibilities.
Secondly, my own research on the Common Law had already revealed to me that:
a. Rebellion is never lawful; and
b. Lawful Rebellion is therefore a legal oxymoron.
Furthermore, serving a claim of right allowed me to express my own feelings about the state of the world and the nation I was adopted by at birth, as well as my intentions regarding the way in which I was going to proceed in my life, from a philosophical perspective, as well as a legal or lawful one.
In the autumn of 2008, I served such a document by Post Office Recorded Delivery upon the Queen at Buckingham Palace, to which I received no sort of response.
In the spring of 2009, I amended the document to reflect the knowledge I had gleaned over the previous six months and sent it to Buckingham Palace by Special Delivery. The redacted version of the superseding document is transcribed below.
I, Michael-John of Bernicia, a blessed living soul, in the physical form of a flesh and blood Man, who, according to the eye-witness testimony of my biological mother, separated from her womb in the General Hospital of the county borough of Place of Birth, on the Date of Birth, do hereby state clearly and unequivocally that the following is a Verified Plain Statement of the Facts as I perceive them.
Whereas, it is my understanding that:
1. Natural Law, also known as the Law of Nature, is that which the Supreme Being, the Sovereign of the Universe and Creator of all that is, has prescribed to all Mankind, not by any formal promulgation, but by the internal dictate of reason alone, and,
2. Natural Law forms the permanent and underlying basis of all law and theories of Natural Law have been an integral part of jurisprudence throughout legal history, and,
3. Natural Law is to be distinguished from Positive Law, which is the body of law created by Man, and,
4. Natural Law is both anterior and superior to Positive Law, and,
5. The principals of Natural Law derive from the Fundamental Laws of the Universe, and,
6. The Fundamental Laws of the Universe include (without limitation) the Law of Allowance, the Law of Intent and the Law of Balance, and,
7. The Law of Allowance dictates that all sentient beings must be allowed to exercise their own Freewill at all times and without exception, and,
8. Common Law is that which derives its force and authority from the universal consent and immemorial practice of the people; it has never received the sanction of the legislature by an express act, which is the criterion by which it is distinguished from Statute Law, and
9. In accord with the Laws of Nature, Common Law dictates that all Men and Women are free to do what they choose for themselves, provided they do not infringe the rights to life, freedom, equity and/or the peaceful possession of property of another, and,
10. The land commonly known as England is a Common Law jurisdiction, and,
11. Parliament and the National Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland are legal entities, and as such, they are not immune from bankruptcy and insolvency laws, and,
12. Legal entities of any and all natures and descriptions necessarily require voluntary agreements in order to make claim to or assert authority and/or control over other parties and/or their property, and,
13. A ‘statute’ is the written will of the legislature, used in contradistinction to Common Law; it is considered a legislated rule of a society which has been given the force of law by the voluntary consent of its members, and,
14. A ‘society’ is a community of Men and Women united together by mutual consent, in order to deliberate, determine and act jointly for some common goal and/or purpose, and,
15. No Man or Woman, whether Monarch, Prime Minister, Pope, politician, judge or public servant of any description, is above the Fundamental Laws of the Universe, Natural Law and Common Law, and equity before the law is paramount and mandatory, and,
16. A ‘Sovereign’ is a man who governs himself independently of any foreign control, in the union and exercise of all human power possessed in a Sovereign Head of State and/or government, and,
17. ‘Government’ is the manner in which sovereignty is exercised in each Sovereign State, and ‘democracy’ is that form of government in which the sovereign power is exercised by the people in a body; therefore, ‘democratic government’ is the body which exercises the sovereign power of the people who consented to it, and,
18. The enforcement of government policy by coercive and/or deceptive methods is always, and without exception, a breach of Natural Law and Common Law, even if those methods are permitted or prescribed under statute or the orders of criminal governments, and,
19. The only form of democratic government which is recognised as lawful anywhere on the Earth is a representative one, and,
20. Representative government necessarily requires the voluntary consent of the governed, and,
21. In the absence of the voluntary consent of the governed, representative government cannot lawfully exist, under any circumstances whatsoever, and,
22. Men and Women born anywhere on Earth have a natural and unalienable right to self-determination and self-governance, and can therefore, at any time, choose to revoke or deny their consent to be governed, and,
23. Any flesh and blood Man or Woman who does revoke or deny their consent to be governed is free from government control and statutory obligations, restrictions and restraints of any and all natures and descriptions, and,
24. A perfected Claim of Right establishes a ‘lawful excuse’, and this factual truth is clearly expressed in the Theft Act 1968 and the Criminal Damage Act 1971, in relation to situations where the law creates and vests a specific right to disregard statutory obligations under certain circumstances, and,
25. In English law, a statutory breach made under a Claim of Right is considered to be a limited form of offence, as demonstrated in the case of Chamberlain v Lindon 1998 1 WLR 1252 , after Lindon demolished a wall to protect a right-of-way. Despite allowing nine months to pass before acting, Lindon honestly believed that it was immediately necessary to protect his legal rights without having to resort to civil litigation. It is not necessary to decide whether Lindon’s action was justified as a matter of civil law. For the purposes of criminal law, what matters is whether Lindon believed that his actions were reasonable, i.e. a subjective test. Thus, a lawful excuse may be acknowledged by a court to arise when an individual honestly, even if mistakenly, believes that their actions are necessary and reasonable, and,
26. ‘De facto’ denotes that something exists as a matter of fact, rather than of lawful right, and,
27. Any flesh and blood Man or Woman acting with lawful excuse is not in breach of any law in choosing to disobey any de facto government, court, tribunal, statute, act, bill, code, by-law, warrant, writ, directive, regulation, edict, decree, treaty or order, and,
28. The legitimacy of HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN & NORTHERN IRELAND, the authority of the CROWN and the jurisdiction of the Courts of England & Wales are de facto in nature, since every government, court and/or Parliament loses its legitimacy by default when it commits or assents to international war crimes or when it wages illegal wars under fraudulent pretexts and without the consent of the people, for the profit and gain of the shareholders and stakeholders of the Military-Industrial Complex, as the foregoing entities have done with regard to the Anglo-American occupations and ruthless plunder of Afghanistan and Iraq, and,
29. Any and all agreements made for and on behalf of the indigenous people of the islands commonly known as Great Britain, by HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN & NORTHERN IRELAND, THE CROWN, THE CITY OF LONDON, THE EUROPEAN UNION, THE UNITED NATIONS, and/or any of their executives, agencies, officers, partners, trustees, creditors, representatives, affiliates or any other legal entities, organisations or individuals, do not in any way legally bind the Men and Women of Great Britain who have revoked or denied their consent to be governed, nor do any of those agreements preclude the unalienable rights of the indigenous peoples of Great Britain to self-determination and self-governance, and,
30. Without dishonour, in the absence of my explicit, voluntary and sealed consent, I refuse to be bound by agreements made on my behalf by legal entities of any and all natures and descriptions, since legal entities are incapable of moral sensibilities and function only for the benefit their shareholders and stakeholders, very often to the detriment of my community and the beautiful, bountiful Earth, and,
31. The Courts of England & Wales, HM Revenue & Customs, the METROPOLITAN POLICE FORCES and their POLICY ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS are now, whether knowingly or unknowingly, engaged in the business of generating revenues for the benefit of the National Government’s creditors, and,
32. The Courts of England & Wales, the METROPOLITAN POLICE FORCES and their POLICY ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS are now, whether knowingly or unknowingly, consistently failing to uphold the rights to life, freedom, equity and the peaceful possession of property of the people of Great Britain, and,
33. If POLICY ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS are not providing a service for an injured party who has given sworn or affirmed testimony against another for infringing their rights to life, freedom, equity and/or the peaceful possession of property, there is no legal recourse to stop, detain, question or search any Man or Woman who is not in breach of the peace, and,
34. POLICY ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS who attempt to levy and/or enforce arbitrary fines and forfeitures, or any other statutory provisions, upon a flesh and blood Man or Woman who has lawfully revoked their consent to be governed, are, in fact, breaching the peace and automatically liable for the service and payment of the Fee Schedule prescribed herein, and,
35. Historically, the purpose of a national armed force was to ensure that foreign powers never invaded and governed under a force of arms, and,
36. The existence of armed militia patrolling and policing the streets is evidence of wars fought unsuccessfully and/or tyrannical government, and,
37. The law must provide remedy at all times and without exception, even against rogue or negligent JUDGES and POLICY ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, as well as de facto government participants who are controlled by soulless corporate interests, and,
38. Any action for which Men and Women can apply for and receive a license must itself be a fundamentally lawful action, and,
39. I am a fully grown, adult, flesh and blood Man, of sound mind, peaceful intent and loving heart; therefore, I do not recognise any perceived obligation to ask permission to engage in lawful and peaceful activities, under any circumstances whatsoever, and,
40. Legal entities exist in an entirely fictitious realm, and as such, they do not have the capacity to exert any control and/or authority over Men and Women who operate with regard to that knowledge, and,
41. Men and Women are born with the unalienable rights of full Freedom and Intercourse of Trade and Navigation to and from any port or place on the Earth, and,
42. Clause 39, “No freeman shall be arrested or imprisoned or disseised or outlawed or exiled or in any way victimised, neither will we attack him or send anyone to attack him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land”, and clause 40, “To no-one will we refuse or delay right or justice”, of the original Magna Carta of 1215 are still in full force and effect, and that the expression “law of the land” means Common Law, as defined in the foregoing, and,
43. Living freely in peace is within my community’s standards and does not create any harm, loss, injury, damage or liability, or comprise a breach of the peace in any way whatsoever, and,
44. The act of registering the birth of a baby forms an Implied Trust and Capitalised Trade Name (also known as a Legal Person), which then exist in association with that baby’s given and family names, and,
45. The formation and nature of these legal entities are not usually disclosed to a baby’s parents when they apply to the CROWN for a certificate of live birth for their child, nor is the pledging of said baby’s sweat equity to the creditors of the National Government, or the granting of a Life Annuity that is solely dependent upon the life that baby (the Beneficiary), and,
46. Life Annuities, more commonly known as government securities, are granted by the National Debt Commissioners (the Trustees) to any person they deem fit and deposited in the Issue Department of the Bank of England, as security for the Bank’s circulation of its fiat currency and surety for the National Government’s debts, and,
47. Once deemed abandoned funds, the beneficial interest from every unclaimed Life Annuity is pooled in the Consolidated Fund by the National Debt Commissioners, in order to reduce the ever-increasing debts of the insolvent National Government and Parliament, and,
48. Since the abolition of sterling’s gold standard in 1931, there has been no money of substance in existence and the primary form of currency accepted by the people of Great Britain has been and still is the tender of An Unconditional Promise to Pay, more commonly known as a Promissory Note, the payment of which is not contingent upon either the Maker or the Endorser having sufficient funds in a bank account, and
49. I have no legal or lawful obligation to obey the orders of any Man, Woman, individual, organisation or legal entity claiming to be acting on behalf of the Queen or King or Pope, including (without limitation) the executives, agents, officers, partners and affiliates of THE CROWN, THE CITY OF LONDON, THE VATICAN, THE UNITED NATIONS, THE EUROPEAN UNION and HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN & NORTHERN IRELAND, since I do not grant consent to any authority that they might claim to have over my person or my body, and,
50. Permanent, irrevocable estoppel by acquiescence, barring any POLICY ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, court and/or prosecutor from bringing charges against this flesh and blood Man and blessed living soul, under any act, bill, statute, by-law, ordinance, regulation, directive, order or code is automatically created, if this SOVEREIGN DECLARATION and the succeeding CLAIM OF RIGHT are not rebutted by lawful counterclaim, point for point, within ten (10) days of service, as certified by Post Office Special Delivery ********************.
Wherefore, be it now known to any and all interested, concerned or affected parties, that I do hereby revoke my consent to be governed and honourably declare that I have reclaimed my unalienable rights as a Sovereign Being, nun-pro-tunc.
Furthermore, it is my honourable intention to live peacefully and lawfully, free from any and all statutory obligations, restrictions and restraints, and to travel freely without charges, delays or disruptions, whether traveling domestically or crossing international borders in my private sovereign capacity, maintaining the rights to create, build, cultivate, harvest, store, trade, exchange and serenely subsist without governance anywhere on Earth, and I hereby state clearly my intention to do so without limitations or regulations arbitrarily imposed by individuals, organisations and/or legal entities of any and all natures and descriptions.
CLAIM OF RIGHT
1. I claim the right to deny my consent to interact or co-operate with de facto government executives, agents, officers, bailiffs and/or grossly negligent JUDGES and/or POLICY ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.
2. I claim the right to peacefully possess, use and enjoy any and all property in my care, including (without limitation) land, water and airspace, without having to pay for the use or enjoyment of it.
3. I claim the right to view my community as Mankind and that my course of action is not outside said community’s standards.
4. I claim the right not to be compelled to perform under any statute, contract or agreement that I did not enter into knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally, and I do not accept the liability of any compelled benefits, responsibilities and/or obligations of any bill, code, direction, regulation, convention, statute, contract, trust and/or commercial agreement.
5. I claim that property of any and all natures and descriptions peacefully held in my possession is permanently held in private trust for the benefit of my offspring, and as such, it is exempt from taxation and statutory regulation.
6. I claim the right to use all necessary means to protect my family and its interests, in the event of any and all circumstances.
7. I claim the right to use all necessary means to protect my physical body and those of my family, in the event of any and all circumstances.
8. I claim the right to refuse to supply an intimate or non-intimate sample of my DNA for any purpose whatsoever.
9. I claim the right to refuse to supply samples of my blood, semen and/or urine, in the event of any and all circumstances.
10. I claim the right to refuse to be medicated, whether by any Man, Woman, individual, government, corporation or legal entity, under any circumstances whatsoever.
11. I claim the right to cultivate, harvest, store, trade, barter and/or use for my own purposes, any and all organic substances which will grow naturally upon the Earth.
12. I claim the right to refuse to be bound by the judgments, orders, warrants, directives and/or rulings of the de facto courts of THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN & NORTHERN IRELAND, THE EUROPEAN UNION and/or THE UNITED NATIONS, under any circumstances whatsoever.
13. I claim the right to charge a FEE SCHEDULE for any transgressions by POLICY ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, de facto government principals, executives, officers, agents or justice system participants, of THIRTY THOUSAND UNITS OF ANY FUNCTIONAL CURRENCY of my choosing, per hour or portion thereof, if I or any member of my family is questioned, interrogated or in any way detained, harassed or otherwise regulated, THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND UNITS OF ANY FUNCTIONAL CURRENCY of my choosing, per hour or portion thereof, if I or any member of my family is handcuffed, transported, incarcerated or subjected to any adjudication process, and THREE BILLION UNITS OF ANY FUNCTIONAL CURRENCY of my choosing, for any grievous or actual physical harm to my body or that of any member of my family.
14. I claim the right to use any and all lawful administrative and/or judicial processes I deem to be necessary in order to secure payment of the aforementioned FEE SCHEDULE, against any and all transgressors, who, by their actions or omissions, harm me, my dependents or my family’s interests, directly or by proxy, in any way whatsoever.
15. I claim the right to Diplomatic Immunity, including (without limitation) the right to a Diplomatic Passport and/or to create my own.
16. I claim the right to amend this Claim of Right by notice, as and when necessary, and at my sole discretion.
17. I claim the right of superior guardianship over my offspring, whether singularly or jointly with their biological mother, without limitation and strictly precluding government and/or corporate intervention of any kind, under any circumstances whatsoever.
18. I claim the right to hold exclusive Power of Attorney over the physical bodies and legal estates of my offspring, whether singularly or jointly with their biological mother, without limitation and until the eighteenth anniversary of their physical birth.
19. I claim the right to educate my children at home or in any way their biological mother and I deem to be beneficial for their intellectual, physical, emotional and spiritual development, without limitation, supervision, intervention, inspection or interference of any and all natures and descriptions.
20. I claim the rights of legal and equitable titles to my legal person and trade name (& all derivatives thereof) and copyright of the artwork expressed in writing or in print as, ‘Michael of Bernicia’.
21. I claim the rights of full Freedom and Intercourse of Trade and Navigation, to and from any port or place on Earth, including (without limitation) the rights to cross international borders and to return to the land of my physical birth at my sole discretion and without interference of any and all natures and descriptions.
22. I claim the right to statutory immunity.
23. I claim the right to self-determination and self-governance, without limitation, supervision, intervention or interference of any and all natures and descriptions.
As the Supreme Being is my witness, I hereby affirm that, to the very best of my knowledge, the entirety of the foregoing is true, correct and not misleading, on the 26th day of the month of March, in the year known as two thousand and 2009 CE.
Autographed by Michael of Bernicia
WITHOUT PREJUDICE – WITHOUT RECOURSE – NON-ASSUMPSIT
All Rights Reserved – Errors & Omissions Excepted
Executed in the presence of a Notary Public.
So what did serving this document atually achieve?
Exactly what I intended it to: the unchallenged revocation of my consent to be governed under the laws of the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland.
Upon reflection over the months and years which have passed without challenge or counter-claim, I have come to understand that what I originally hoped would be all-in-one administrative remedy, was ultimately a declaration to the woman who represented the interests of the monarchy, that I would be proceeding to live freely in peace and in accordance with natural law. Rather than acquiescing to the statutory dictates of tyrannical corporatist government.
However, in the event that as of COVID-1984, I had not revoked my consent to be government by tyrannical diktats and I wanted to achieve the same end, I would send such a document to BoJo’s de facto government, on the basis that QEII was deposed by way of section 38 of the EU Withdrawal (Agreement) Act 2020.
NOTICE OF INTENDED PRIVATE CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
You are hereby served notice that it is my intention to lay information in a Private Criminal Prosecution against yourselves, alleging that the following crimes have been committed against the British people:
1. Section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006 has been repeatedly breached in the enactment of the Coronavirus Act 2020 [the CV Act] – an act which was founded upon a series of dishonest statements relied upon by every serving MP. Namely:
a. That there was a genuine public health emergency, which justified the draconian measures taken.
b. That there was a legal basis for such an act to be passed into law.
c. That there was no viable alternative course of action that could be taken to “flatten the curve” of alleged COVID-19 deaths.
2. In addition, the CV Act unlawfully purports to have suspended the democratic right of every Briton to remove the government from office, as well as the individual rights guaranteed by the Common Law, which are beyond the jurisdiction of the legislature.
3. The CV Act also purports to have legislated for the falsification of death certificates, which has enabled the government to grossly inflate the number of people who have reportedly died of the COVID-19 virus, which in any event has never actually been proven to exist.
4. Nevertheless, the ONS data shows that the government policy which was enabled by the CV Act doubled the average five year UK mortality rate, which is considered tantamount to genocide under international law, when the fatal refusal of care to patients in care homes and hospitals is taken into account.
5. Furthermore, the enactment of the CV Act also comprises a fundamental breach of the Treason Felony Act 1848, in that it treasonously purports to authorise ministers of the Crown to govern the People by royal decree or proclamation, which is strictly prohibited by articles 1 and 2 of the Bill of Rights 1689.
6. In any event, as Lord Coke, the draftsman of the Petition of Right, said in the 1610 decision of Thomas Bonham v College of Physicians 8 Co Rep 107a; 77 Eng Rep 638, commonly known as Dr. Bonham’s Case, in the Court of Common Pleas:
“In many cases, the common law will control Acts of Parliament, and sometimes adjudge them to be utterly void: for when an Act of Parliament is against common right and reason, or repugnant, or impossible to be performed, the common law will control it and adjudge such an Act to be void.”
Should you collectively move to set aside the act which the Common Law ajudges to be repugnant, as well as void ab initio, as per the Dr Bonham case, no later than the midnight on the 2/10/2020, this action will be suspended.
However, in the event you fail to do so, for any reason whatsoever, a QC and legal team will be engaged to lay the information before a court of competent jurisdiction at the earliest opportunity and the Private Criminal Prosecution will commence.
Please be advised that a Grand Jury of the People has already determined that there is sufficient evidence to indict every MP for fraud, treason and genocide. This is your last chance to leave your mark on the right side of history because there is no jury that would not convict every complicit member of Parliament on the charges that will be laid.
Nevertheless, I trust you will see the devastating error you have made, before it is too late.
For & on behalf of the British People – All Rights Reserved
Last Chance Saloon
This notice represents the last opportunity that every serving MP has to put right their wrongdoings against the People and was served upon them all this morning, as they prepared for a Parliamentary debate about whether the unlawful and void Coronavirus Act 2020 should be treacherously applied for another six months.
In the event that enough MP’s do not rise in opposition to block the de facto government’s attempt to perpetuate its own unaccountability until next spring, by midnight on 02/10/2020, a top QC will be engaged and the charges will be laid in a criminal court against every serving MP.
Let’s hope that enough consciences are sufficiently agitated to make sure that the tyrannous act is struck out as void and unlawful, with those responsible for crimes against the People being prosecuted with the full force of the Common Law.
Because the most likely alternative is that the People will hold them all jointly and severally liable for every one of those crimes, in Common Law courts and genocide tribunals.
For those who don’t know, without spending a penny on legal fees, I’ve discharged fraudulent claims by a film sales company, a car franchise, a travel agent, two utilities companies, three major credit card companies, dozens of debt collection agencies and legal services companies, five councils, the DVLA, the police, HMRC, the Registrar of Births and two of the cartel’s protected banks, almost all of which has been well documented on various web platforms over the past twelve years [including this blog].
Proven Track Record
Whilst the vast majority of those disputes were settled in accordance with the Common Law, without once going before a judge, I have also proven fraud in the Magistrates, County and High Courts, as well as in Property Chamber and Land Registry applications.
In other words, when I allege fraud, I only ever do so when there is evidence that fraud has been committed and I can therefore always prove it in a court of law, whenever that is required.
Which is the reason why the arrogant cowards and thieves who defame my character and my work on social media, fraudulently claiming credit for the remedies I invented and gave away for free, always do so behind my back.
Nevertheless, with that proven track record in mind, here is a brief summary of the elements of the genocidal pandemic fraud we are all witnesses to.
Elements of Genocidal Pandemic Fraud
1. Imperial College, Jenner Institute, Oxford University, BBC and UK government materially gained when they received substantial funds from Bill Gates, prior to COVID-1984 beginning on 23/03/2020.
2. The parties involved then conspired with the Gates controlled WHO to cause the People to rely upon a series of entirely dishonest statements, made by the UK government to justify the lockdown.
3. The reliance upon those false statements has already caused many tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths, destroyed the economy and caused untold misery, distress and fear, as well as procured unaccountable totalitarian power for the UK government.
4. The government is partnering with and funding Gates controlled GAVI, the openly stated objective of which is to vaxxterminate the entire world.
5. The secretary of state for health is the owner of Porton Biopharma Limited, a company dedicated to making profits for the government from pharmaceuticals, including vaccines.
6. One hundred million brand new, untested, DNA altering vaccines have reportedly been ordered by Porton Biopharma, from Oxford University’s development partner, AstraZenica, in partnership with Gates controlled GSK( Glaxo Smith Kline).
7. All of the conspiring parties have been indemnified against all claims of vaxxtermination injury, including death, even if vaccines are forcibly administered without consent. The government is, however, offering to pay compensation for vaccine injury from tax-payer’s money.
Grand Jury Indictment
When I initially presented the complaint of pandemic fraud several months ago, a Common Law Grand Jury ruled that there was enough prima facie evidence to justify a full blown investigation into the alleged frauds.
This was followed a few weeks later by the submission of additional evidence, which proved the government was relying upon entirely false statements about supposed COVID deaths, according to the data published by the Office of National Statistics.
However, since then, following a concerted counter-propaganda campaign by the real independent media and genuine grass roots activists, the government has conceded through gritted teeth that every piece of data which they relied upon to justify the unjustifiable lockdown measures has proven to be false.
A few weeks ago, following an investigation of emphatic evidence of pandemic fraud, as well as treason and genocide, the Grand Jury unanimously decided that it has seen more than sufficient evidence to indict every cabinet minister for crimes against the People.
In simple terms, this means that the decision of the Grand Jury, formal notice of which will soon be made public, in addition to the now increasingly widespread allegations of statistical fraud, have been emphatically sustained by the voluntary admission by the accused.
Banged To Rights
Indubitably, we’ve got the government banged to rights on criminal charges of fraud by false representation, non-disclosure and abuse of position, under sections 2, 3 and 4 of the Fraud Act 2006, since neither they, nor Parliament, has any excuse for not knowing that the data relied upon in the shutting down of the entire country by statute was entirely false.
Moreover, since it is public policy that fraud unravels all, as per the Supreme Court decision in Takhar , this session of Parliament is void and the government is acting ultra vires [without jurisdiction].
That’s before we even mention the growing evidence that genocide is being carried out by government decree and that every MP has committed treason against the monarch and the People, by deposing QEII and making the government unaccountable to the electorate.
Private Criminal Prosecutions
Therefore, a Private Criminal Prosecution against the government is now being prepared, seeking to indict the cabinet for multiple breaches of sections 2, 3 and 4 of the Fraud Act 2006. It is also anticipated that a top QC, who specialises in criminal fraud, will be engaged to present the allegations before a jury.
Parliament will also be put on notice that, in the event the Coronavirus Act 2020 is not declared a legal nullity by 30/09/2020, Private Criminal Prosecutions will be issued, alleging that every MP has committed petty treason against the People in allowing the act to pass into lawlessness; and that the consequence of the resulting government policy was to cull the elderly and vulnerable in their tens of thousands.
Genocide, by another name, under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
“FORMER nurse Janet Atkinson has become Leominster’s first citizen less than a decade after moving to the town from Stoke-on-Trent.
Ms Atkinson (Labour), UNISON branch organiser at the trade union’s Hereford office, was unanimously elected by her fellow town councillors as the 464th Mayor of Leominster last Saturday.
She first won election to the town council in 2000 and earned a reputation for blunt speaking and a persuasive, non-confrontational approach.
Ms Atkinson would provide the town council with a strong chair said friend and fellow councillor Ann Tether who nominated her.
The new mayor paid tribute to her Conservative predecessor Roger Hunt and outgoing councillors Richard Westwood, Peter Goody, Tony Forrester, Patty Hall and Gordon Morris.
Her aims were to get a new swimming pool built in Leominster and help secure the future of Waverley House care home for the elderly, she said. Her mayoral ‘good cause’ fundraising would be for Leominster Scouts and Guides. Leaders from the groups attended the mayor making ceremony at Bridge Street Sports Centre.”
Save for her years spent acting as a panelist on employment tribunals, every aspect of Janet’s backstory, as expressed in my article below, is affirmed by the succinct piece of local journalism above.
For The Avoidance of Doubt
For the avoidance of doubt, the alleged attempted murder of Janet Ainley [formerly Atkinson] took place on the Team Ward of Wye Valley NHS Hereford County Hospital, shortly after her discharge from the oncology department at Cheltenham General Hospital, where she underwent out-patient radiotherapy.
To settle any remaining skepticism people might have as to the veracity of Janet’s testimony, here is an photographic extract from her hospital discharge notes, confirming her name, her patient reference number and her NHS number:
Last week I was contacted by an ex-nurse, who is the son of a retired nurse of 32 years, about what he alleged to be an attempt to murder his mother.
Over the course of the last 48 hours, I have thrice spoken to her [and her devoted husband] about the traumatic ordeal she has survived, involving a despicable and callous attempt to murder her with a cocktail of morphine, statins, neglect. malice and deception.
Here lies a summary of the facts, which the seventy two year old whistle-blower, Janet Ainley [formerly Atkinson], and her husband, Harvey Ainley, delivered to me, with regard to the crimes committed by senior staff on the Team Ward of Wye Valley NHS Hereford County Hospital, who were acting in accordance with government policy.
The powerful credibility of this testimony is not only bolstered by Janet’s 32 years working as an enrolled nurse at staff nurse level, since she also served 23 years on employment tribunals dealing with complex human rights issues and labour laws.
In addition to having been UNISON trade union organiser for her region and twice being elected mayor of Leominster in Hertfordshire, with a completely unblemished record of public service, which is rarer than hen’s teeth in the current epoch.
Everything Janet claims in her backstory, save for her years as an employment tribunal panelist, are confirmed in this Hereford Times article from 05/06/2003.
Not long after the lockdown measures were imposed, Janet was admitted into a private hospital for a rectal cancer investigation. Following which she was transferred to the oncology ward at Cheltenham General Hospital for out-patient radiotherapy, which finished in June 2020.
However, because she suffered chronic sickness and blisters all over the radiated area, causing severe bleeding and intense pain, her family doctor prescribed patches for her arm, which administered the minimum dose of heavy duty pain-killing drug, morphine.
In addition, Janet was prescribed liquid morphine, which she was instructed to use, in the event that the dose from the patch was not strong enough. However, on the only occasion she took the smallest dose of the liquid possible, she had a major adverse reaction.
Within just a few hours, Janet felt all the symptoms of being anesthetized by the heavy opiate and lost control of her body, before suffering from prolonged psychotropic hallucinations and memory holes.
Shortly afterwards, she had a blood test and her potassium level was found to be dangerously high. Since Janet is also insulin dependent, she was admitted on to the Team Ward at Wye Valley NHS Hereford County Hospital, for observation and treatment.
Janet consented to hospitalization on the understanding that her husband, Harvey, had informed the hospital that liquid morphine had proven to cause a severe adverse reaction and should not be prescribed to her again, under any circumstances.
Not only did he make that perfectly clear to the staff on the ward, he did so on a daily basis throughout Janet’s five day stay.
No Duty of Care Fulfilled
From the moment Janet entered the hospital, everything felt wrong.
Firstly, Harvey was refused entry by hostile security staff, when he was trying to deliver everything his wife would need, including her wheelchair, without which she was immobile.
Eventually, somebody came to meet him at the door to pick up her things, but they wouldn’t let him in to see her or tell him what was going on inside the hospital. When he finally managed to get somebody on the end of the intercom from the Team Ward, he stressed to a young receptionist that morphine must not be administered.
However, if he had been allowed on to the ward he would have seen that Janet was almost immediately subdued with enough morphine and statins to make her violently ill with diarrhea, cause her to drift in and out of consciousness, slow down her breathing dramatically and make her dangerously dehydrated.
Even when she was drifting in and out of consciousness, Janet was still very aware of the fact that, save for those she considered to be junior staff, there was no duty of care being fulfilled on the ward.
Moreover, she felt like there was very little, if any, concern shown for her well being by the senior staff. If anything, she felt malice from at least one of the experienced nurses on the ward.
Meanwhile, Harvey called the hospital incessantly for three days, during which time he was constantly fobbed off by every member of staff he talked to, none of whom informed him about the condition of his wife’s deteriorating health. Each time he repeated that they must not give Janet morphine.
Nevertheless, for increasingly longer periods each day, Janet was left on her own in a private room on the ward, where she was suffering from chronic sickness because of the morphine and statins her body was evidently being pumped with against her will.
This gradually started shutting down the respiratory function of a woman already suffering from very low blood pressure, hypoglycemia and radiation sickness.
In fact, she was left so long without any care that she had to scream like a banshee, until a few of the staff rushed in with more than minor irritation at being asked to do their jobs.
As they cleaned up the mess, including some incredibly sore blistering caused by Janet’s recent course of radiotherapy, the nurse she accuses of malice deliberately burst one of the blisters on her back, then appeared to be smirking about the pain she had just caused.
Had Janet not been so drugged into passivity, the nurse in question would have felt the wrath of a woman who has more than three decades experience in nursing, as well as more than two decades as panel member in employment tribunals, who knows all about human rights issues and the duty of care incumbent upon every member of NHS staff.
She was even forced to inject herself with her own emergency supply of insulin, after the staff repeatedly failed to administer her daily requirement. Had she not been so diligent, she would simply not have survived to blow the whistle on the crimes committed against her.
At the end of his patience, Harvey called the family doctor to express his serious concern about not knowing what was happening to his wife. In truth, he was certain she would die if they failed to act decisively.
He explained that he had managed to talk to Janet on the phone for a few minutes, twice a day, for the five days she had been on the ward, but he knew that the only time she had ever been so incoherent was after taking liquid morphine, just before she was admitted into hospital.
The family doctor contacted the ward and told them that there were serious concerns about Janet, who would be much better off being cared for at home by her husband.
This quickly led to Janet discharging herself from the hospital, since when she has been cared for by Harvey at home, during which time her health has greatly improved every day, after deteriorating every moment she spent in hospital.
The nature of Janet’s discharge was curious, to say the least, because it was formally objected to by the senior staff on the ward, who strongly advised that she should remain hospitalized, to manage the treatment of a tumor in her liver which did not exist.
Furthermore, the discharge was conditional upon the hospital providing all the necessary equipment for home care, including an orthopedic bed.
However, Janet and her husband were somewhat shocked when eight senior medical professionals they had never met, arrived without notice at their home, under the pretext of making sure it was fit for home care.
Nevertheless, the copious discharge notes they were given confirm that statins were administered without discussion or consent, but there is no mention of morphine, the omission of which is conspicuous by its absence, for the following reasons.
Firstly, morphine is routinely used on cancer wards to relieve pain, in addition to being given to patients deemed to be travelling down an ‘end of life pathway’, which is where the senior staff were clearly attempting to lead Janet.
Secondly, the side effects she suffered during the five days she was in hospital were identical to those she suffered after taking liquid morphine, just before being admitted on to the ward.
Thirdly, after Janet was discharged, the hospital sent her a job lot of the medication they prescribed for her home care – a case of glass ampules, full of the type of morphine that is only ever injected.
Why would the senior staff on the cancer ward prescribe morphine injections after Janet’s discharge, if they weren’t administering them while she was in hospital?
The only logical answer is that they would not have done so, in which case:
Why did the consultant omit morphine from the discharge notes?
The most likely answer to that question is that they don’t want Janet and Harvey to know that morphine and statins were being administered without her knowledge or consent.
The Elements of A Heinous Crime
In summary of what Janet and Harvey are alleging against the senior staff on the ward:
1. She was denied all forms of care due to her, as a retired taxpayer who paid into the system her whole working life.
2. She was subdued against her will by morphine and statins, which are routinely given to patients suffering from cancer, in increasingly larger amounts, more often than not leading to respiratory failure or a coma.
3. She was the victim of a concerted attempt to procure her signature on a DNR notice, when she was suffering the ill effects of morphine and statins being administered without her knowledge or consent.
4. She was the victim of an attempt to kill her with prescribed drugs and neglect, which only failed because she had the experience and knowledge to realise what was happening to her and because her husband took action before it was too late.
5. She strongly suspects that the motive which propelled the attempted murderers was the aim of strictly adhering to government lockdown policy of denying care to the over-60’s and facilitating as many premature deaths as possible, in the name of ‘the greater good’.
In other words, Janet and Harvey allege that it was an attempt to murder her, under the authority of a silent but deadly government decree that everybody over sixty is an unnecessary drain on national resources.
More Damning Evidence of Genocide
This damning testimony is the flip-side of the highly censored deposition of the anonymous NHS consultant from a big Surrey hospital, where the same kind of crimes against humanity are expected of all staff, on the threat of never working again in their chosen professions, if they breathe a word of it on social media or to the press.
However, many other healthcare workers are now also coming forward in corroboration of the same or similar allegations of genocidal government policy, as well as the setting aside of medical ethics, the law and morality.
In essence, this is what they are being told behind closed doors:
“It’s for the greater good, so just mark it down as a COVID death and keep your mouth shut.”
Nevertheless, it is through the courageous actions of people like Janet and Harvey that many more will be inspired to speak out, until enough people know about these crimes, to guarantee an end to the genocide being perpetrated, once and for all.
In the meantime, Janet has agreed to provide a witness statement to Simon Dolan, in the event that would assist him in his on-going battle to have the lockdown regulations which authorised these crimes struck out as the treacherous decrees they most certainly are.
It is also her intention to bring criminal proceedings against the accused, so they can answer to their crimes before a jury; as well as making a civil damages claim for the injury, harm, damage and loss incurred at the hands of plainly murderous government policy.
We need to get the word out fast, so please share this post far and wide, copy and paste it to your page and send it to all your contacts, preferably before the censors block it to stop it going viral.
in the run up to the December 2019 election, about how parliamentary sovereignty is borrowed from the People, via a democratic mandate.
I wrote this blog post on that very subject at the time, but I didn’t mention this obvious anomaly, since the in-coming government had already publicly and repeatedly declared that such sovereignty was dependent upon the democratic consent of the People that Parliament should exercise it.
Nevertheless, from this observation a question naturally arose:
"If Parliament has only previously acted with the sovereign authority of the monarch, was the real intention of section 38 to depose QEII?"
Since I knew that more facts would have to come to light before I could even broach the subject of a treasonous Parliament, I decided to carry on researching the matter, until the events of COVID-1984 revealed that Parliament was acting with what the constitution deems to be prohibited royal powers.
From which juncture is has become increasingly obvious that the UK government has ever since purported to exercise national sovereignty in the interests of Bill Gates, GAVI and the WHO, as per the sustainable development agendas 21 and 30.
This was enough to convince me that I’d seen enough to reasonably conclude that Parliament had created unaccountable government, upon its assumption that such an act could be deemed lawful, on the ground that it has declared itself sovereign in a statute.
Parliament Is Merely The Supreme Legislature
However, Parliament is merely the supreme legislative authority of the United Kingdom, consisting of three separate but equally integral elements – the monarch, the commons and the lords.
It has no lawful authority to receognise its own sovereignty, which has always been vested by the People in the monarch, who is bound to uphold the Coronation Oath:
Archbishop: Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern the Peoples of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, Pakistan, and Ceylon, and of your Possessions and the other Territories to any of them belonging or pertaining, according to their respective laws and customs?
Queen: I solemnly promise so to do.
Archbishop: Will you to your power cause Law and Justice, in Mercy, to be executed in all your judgements?
Queen: I will.
Archbishop. Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel? Will you to the utmost of your power maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law? Will you maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England? And will you preserve unto the Bishops and Clergy of England, and to the Churches there committed to their charge, all such rights and privileges, as by law do or shall appertain to them or any of them?
Queen. All this I promise to do.
By those solemn words, QEII was lawfully bound to uphold the Common Law, which guarantees the unalienable rights, freedoms and protections of the People, as per Constitutional Law and Convention.
In the event she has been deposed of sovereignty, whether treasonously or not, there is no longer a constitutional contract between the monarch and the People and no judge has the jurisdiction or authority to act in her name.
Parliament Cannot Be Sovereign
Nevertheless, Parliament has never previously been legally endowed with sovereignty, notwithstanding William Blackstone’s erroneous claims to the contrary, which resulted in the complete misconception that Parliament is sovereign, within the legal professions and the judiciary.
In reality, the People are sovereign and they only divest responsibility to the monarch, for the purposes of exercising that sovereignty, in return for the rights, freedoms and protections guaranteed by the constitution the monarch is sworn to uphold, as per the Common Law
However, in recognizing itself as sovereign, Parliament appears to have implicitly deposed QEII of the sovereignty vested in the monarch by the People, for the purposes of suspending those unalienable rights, freedoms and protections, as well as the Common Law.
This necessarily includes the monarch’s power to dissolve Parliament, in the event it is found to have become tyrannical, which compelling evidence shows has emphatically been the case since the start of COVID-1984.
It naturally follows that, in declaring itself sovereign, Parliament purports to have removed the prerogative powers of the monarch, as well as disabled the constitutional means by which the People can remove the government from office by voting them out, until they say COVID-1984 is over.
A Constitutional Monarchy
Despite this, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is undeniably still a constitutional monarchy at law, in which the sovereign monarch is bound by the following key constitutional documents:
† Magna Carta
† Declaration and Bill of Rights
† Coronation Oath
† Act of Settlement
† Petition of Right
† Acts of Union
† Human Rights Act
Without the monarch, there is no sovereign power for Parliament to wield in the UK legal system and the government is operating outside of the parameters it is bound to stay within.
Furthermore, without a monarch recognised as being sovereign, the judicial system does not have the jurisdiction to rule over any matter, whether civil or criminal, since all judges purport to rule in the name of the monarch, under the sovereign seal of the crown.
Crucially, in the grave circumstances we currently face, the absence of a sovereign monarch automatically vitiates every oath taken by the armed forces to serve ‘queen and country’, along with all other oaths of office to the queen.
The Apparent Deposing of QEII
All the prima facie evidence suggests that, given the totalitarian power grab which the Coronavirus Act 2020 enabled, Brexit was used as a smokescreen for a Big Pharma Bolshevik Coup, which I alluded to in my previous blog post.
As described in the foregoing passages, in recognizing itself as sovereign in the final Brexit bill, it appears Parliament has implicitly deposed the monarch of sovereignty at law, thereby automatically forfeiting its legitimacy and electoral mandate.
It has also conspired to allow the government to rule the People by decree, since the imposition of the lockdown regulations, in abject and fatal breaches of articles 1 and 2 of the Bill of Rights 1688, which prohibit the exercise of such royal powers explicitly:
That the pretended Power of Suspending of Laws or the Execution of Laws by Regall Authority without Consent of Parlyament is illegall.
Late dispensing Power.
That the pretended Power of Dispensing with Laws or the Execution of Laws by Regall Authoritie as it hath beene assumed and exercised of late is illegall.
A Face Like A Smacked Arse
All of which might just explain why last October’s and December’s state openings of Parliament were unique for two superficial reasons:
1. QEII was not wearing the imperial crown for the first time in history on such an occasion last October.
2. Last December, she had a facial expression throughout which betrayed a woman who was smoldering with an anger that was only just below the surface.
In the vernacular of Gen-X, she had a face like a smacked arse.
This naturally transpired after she had agreed to sign off on the final Brexit bill, section 38 of which implicitly stripped her of sovereignty and purported to vest it in Parliament:
It is recognised that the Parliament of the United Kingdom is sovereign.
Section 38(3) reaffirms this, then goes one legal step further:
Accordingly, nothing in this Act derogates from the sovereignty of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.
However, sovereignty has never been vested in Parliament, since it can only act with delegated authority from the monarch, under the constitutional concept of the Queen [or Crown]-in-Parliament.
According to the undisputed Queen-in-Parliament Wikipedia Page:
The Queen-in-Parliament (or, during the reign of a male monarch, King-in-Parliament), sometimes referred to as the Crown-in-Parliament, is a technical term of constitutional law in the Commonwealth realms that refers to the Crown in its legislative role, acting with the advice and consent of the parliament (including, if the parliament is bicameral, both the lower house and upper house). Bills passed by the houses are sent to the sovereign, or governor-general, lieutenant-governor, or governor as her representative, for Royal Assent, which, once granted, makes the bill into law; these primary acts of legislation are known as acts of parliament. An act may also provide for secondary legislation, which can be made by the Crown, subject to the simple approval, or the lack of disapproval, of parliament.
The concept of the Crown as a part of parliament is related to the idea of the fusion of powers, meaning that the executive branch and legislative branch of government are fused together. This is a key concept of the Westminster system of government, developed in England and used across the Commonwealth and beyond. It is in contradistinction to the idea of the separation of powers. The specific language of “the Crown”, “the King”, or “the Queen” in parliament used in the Commonwealth realms also alludes to the constitutional theory that ultimate authority or sovereignty rests with the monarch, but is delegated to elected and/or appointed officials.
If we accept these as established legal facts, is clear that Parliament has no lawful authority to act, except with the royal assent of the monarch.
Moreover, as was affirmed in the supreme court, when it considered allegations that the government unlawfully prorogued Parliament – the government does not possess the powers of royal prerogative, the monarch does, even if sovereign powers are delegated to ministers under the Common Law.
Whilst Brexit proved that major constitutional changes can only be made with the consent of the People in a democratic plebiscite.
It is therefore simply not arguable that changing the nation state of Britain from a Parliamentary democracy, with a monarch bound to uphold the Common Law, to a totalitarian, unaccountable dictatorship, does not comprise the most serious constitutional changes imaginable.
Treasonous & Fraudulent Acts
Nevertheless, even if section 38 of the final Brexit bill was intended it to depose QEII, the Common Law adjudges that Parliament has enacted a statute that is definitively treasonous in nature and void ab initio on the most treacherous of grounds.
These charges arise under the Treason Felony Act 1848, which prescribes that it is treason felony to compass, imagine, invent, devise, or intend:
* to deprive the sovereign of the Crown,
* to levy war against the sovereign “in order by force or constraint to compel her to change her measures or counsels, or in order to put any force or constraint upon or in order to intimidate or overawe both Houses or either House of Parliament”, or
* to “move or stir” any foreigner to invade the United Kingdom or any other country belonging to the sovereign.
It is difficult to dispute that to pass an act which purported to recognise Parliament as sovereign is to definitively deprive the sovereign of the Crown, within the meaning of the 1848 Act.
Or that the government has stirred foreign invaders in the form of the WHO, the Bill Gates appointed dictators of UK health policy and the purveyors of a mandatory vaccination agenda.
This means that the constitutional contract between the monarch and the People, which guarantees our unalienable birthrights under the Common Law, has clearly fallen into a fatal breach.
And that’s before we even mention the government’s multiple breaches of the Fraud Act 2006, for falsifying the data relied upon to justify the lockdown measures, failing to disclose facts they were bound to disclose about the UK mortality rates and gross abuse of position in waging psychological warfare against the People, with intense propaganda campaigns founded on lies, which everybody living here can testify to.
The result is a government that Parliament purports to have made unaccountable to the People, by suspending the right to remove it from office until Demonic Cummings says so, under the draconian Coronavirus Act 2020.
Regardless of one’s own position on the legitimacy of monarchy, it is urgently worthy of our attention that Parliament has granted itself the supreme authoritarian power of a dictator, which the People fought to overcome in the devastating English Civil Wars of the 17th century.
In other words, Parliament has claimed and used the dictatorial royal powers which were and remain forbidden by articles 1 and 2 of the Bill of Rights 1688, thereby automatically forfeiting its legitimacy.
No wonder Bojo, Demonic and Wancock are starting to look like murderous governors of an increasingly brutal open prison, who can’t remember if they put their trousers on this morning.
Furthermore, at this precise moment, most of the People don’t know about any of this and if it turns out to be substantiated by the facts which unfold from here on in, they are going to be more than a little pissed off when they find out what’s been done to their significant detriment, under the pretense of the keeping them safe.
Reasons For Optimism In Dystopia
Nevertheless, all of the available the evidence suggests that Britain has no reigning monarch, no legitimate parliament or government and the People are rapidly waking up to the government crimes which have been committed during COVID-1984.
Sooner or later, the shit is really going to hit the fan and when it does, expect nothing except the unexpected and be prepared to defend everything we all hold dear with everything you are, or prepare to lose it all at the hands of murderous despotism.
Having said that, take heart because we are never more capable of snatching victory from the jaws of defeat, than when our collective backs are against the wall, as they are right here, right now.
I therefore spit righteous indignation and recalcitrant optimism into the face of the dystopian puppet masters, which my instinct decrees is the result of knowing that good fortune arises from the marriage of preparation and opportunity.
“Never once did what he was told and loved every minute of his lifelong, fearless disobedience of all forms of totalitarian authority.”
To be honest, I really haven’t thought about it since the day she read it out in class to howls of knowing laughter [including my own]. Despite having gone on to live the life of anarchic recalcitrance which she so sagely predicted.
Back To COVID-1984
Then, yesterday morning, I visited two local shops without a pair of underpants on my face, where I smiled from ear to ear at everybody, whether they were masked or unmasked.
As I stood in the queue at the first checkout, I was reminded of deliberately running up the school corridors, just because the power-crazed hall monitors were ordering everybody to walk.
Which is what led to the recall of the fictitious obituary exercise, on the basis that COVID-1984 is what happens when we allow totalitarian hall monitors to rule the world.
In both cases, there was no way I was going to obey an arbitrary rule just because some ‘authority figure’ said so.
Nor were there any adverse consequences of my flagrant disobedience of the respective authoritarian dictates, whilst nobody suffered any harm, injury, damage or loss in the process.
However, yesterday’s disobedience was somewhat akin to that of Robert Duval’s character in Coppola’s harrowing film, Apocalypse Now, when he refused to wear a helmet to protect himself from the missiles he and his men were being bombarded with on a Vietnam beach.
The reasons his character did so were because it has been known throughout the ages that the first soldiers to fall in battle are those paralyzed by fear or cowardice and because a helmet is not going to help you in any event, if a missile hits your head.
Whereas, it is also universally accepted that fearlessness is the greatest weapon a soldier can possess because it is something which all battle-hardened survivors have. Duval’s character’s refusal to follow orders and wear a helmet is symbolic of that fearlessness.
This is somewhat analogous to the increasingly widespread refusal to wear a pair of underpants on the face during COVID-1984.
Which is symbolic of the refusal to fear the consequences of disobeying totalitarian government dictates that are founded upon obvious falsehoods.
One being that a mask offers protection from the government lurgy, another that there is a lurgy to catch in the air that we breathe.
Yet another lie is the one about Hydroxychloroquine not being a viable allopathic treatment for chronic COVID symptoms, as is passionately explained by the courageous Dr Stella Immanuel in this heavily censored video, taken from America’s Frontline Doctors’ press conference two days ago.
Having said that, a natural remedy such as Vitamin C and Zinc supplements with Quercitin [the active ingredient in onions], which has anecdotally been used to wipe out the same symptoms, without any of the potential side-effects of using pharmaceuticals like Hydroxychloroquine, will always be preferable.
Especially when the government lurgy is fake, but the very real symptoms of it are identical to the non-ionising radiation sickness caused by the 5G roll-out, which just so happened to coincide with the scamdemic.
However, the very fact that the content released this week on Facebook, YouTube and Twitter by America’s Frontline Dotctors has been so brutally and immediately censored, after gaining millions of views, is enough to conclude that Big Pharma does not want people to hear what these doctors have to say because it clashes with the vaxxtermination agenda.
attempting to prove viruses are contagious were carried out in the 1918 flu pandemic and these experiments failed 100% of the time.
The details can be found in The State of Science, Microbiology and Vaccines Circa 1918 by John M Eyler PhD:
Moreover, the results of the experiments proved beyond doubt that viruses are so NOT contagious that they cannot be transferred from one human body to another, even if blood, snot from a flu-ridden nose and thick phlegm from the sufferer’s throat are consumed by the recipient in large amounts.
The experiments also showed that vaccines do nothing good whatsoever.
The State of Science, Microbiology and Vaccines
In the well referenced and peer reviewed paper, it is stated as follows [with spacing added to assist the reader]:
Perhaps the most interesting epidemiological studies conducted during the 1918–1919 pandemic were the human experiments conducted by the Public Health Service and the U.S. Navy under the supervision of Milton Rosenau on Gallops Island, the quarantine station in Boston Harbor, and on Angel Island, its counterpart in San Francisco.
The experiment began with 100 volunteers from the Navy who had no history of influenza. Rosenau was the first to report on the experiments conducted at Gallops Island in November and December 1918.
His first volunteers received first one strain and then several strains of Pfeiffer’s bacillus by spray and swab into their noses and throats and then into their eyes. When that procedure failed to produce disease, others were inoculated with mixtures of other organisms isolated from the throats and noses of influenza patients.
Next, some volunteers received injections of blood from influenza patients. Finally, 13 of the volunteers were taken into an influenza ward and exposed to 10 influenza patients each. Each volunteer was to shake hands with each patient, to talk with him at close range, and to permit him to cough directly into his face.
None of the volunteers in these experiments developed influenza. Rosenau was clearly puzzled, and he cautioned against drawing conclusions from negative results. He ended his article in JAMA with a telling acknowledgement:
“We entered the outbreak with a notion that we knew the cause of the disease and were quite sure we knew how it was transmitted from person to person. Perhaps, if we have learned anything, it is that we are not quite sure what we know about the disease.” (p. 313)
The research conducted at Angel Island and that continued in early 1919 in Boston broadened this research by inoculating with the Mathers streptococcus and by including a search for filter-passing agents, but it produced similar negative results.
It seemed that what was acknowledged to be one of the most contagious of communicable diseases could not be transferred under experimental conditions.
Vaccine Controversy & Standards For Vaccine Trials
As was the case with Pfeiffer’s bacillus vaccines, most of the early reports on the use of these mixed vaccines indicated they were effective. Readers of American medical journals in 1918 and for much of 1919 were thus faced with the strange circumstance that all vaccines, regardless of their composition, their mode of administration, or the circumstances in which they were tested, were held to prevent influenza or influenzal pneumonia. Something was clearly wrong.
The medical profession had at the time no consensus on what constituted a valid vaccine trial, and it could not determine whether these vaccines did any good at all. The lack of agreed-upon standards was exacerbated by the informal editorial procedures and the absence of peer review in scientific publication in 1918.
During the pandemic of 1918–1919, the profession was forced to develop standards for vaccine trials.53 Park and George McCoy, director of the Hygienic Laboratory of the Public Health Service, led the assault pointing out the fallacies in design or inference of current reports.
Most trials began after the first cases of influenza had appeared locally, often after the epidemic peak had passed, and hence the most susceptible may already have been attacked and could not appear in the vaccinated group, and the more resistant were likely to be assigned to the vaccinated group.
Little effort was usually made to minimize selection bias in assignments to experimental or control arms or to match each group by age, sex, and exposure. And too many trials operated with poor observation and imperfect data collection.54,55 (p. 103)
McCoy arranged his own trial of the Rosenow vaccine produced by the Laboratories of the Chicago Health Department. He and his associates worked in a mental asylum in California where they could keep all subjects under close observation.
They immunized alternate patients younger than age 41 on every ward, completing the last immunization 11 days before the local outbreak began. Under these more controlled conditions, Rosenow’s vaccine offered no protection whatsoever. McCoy’s article appeared as a one-column report in the December 14, 1918, edition of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).56
At the meeting of the American Public Health Association (APHA) later that month, McCoy and Park used their positions on the Executive Sub-committee on the Bacteriology of the 1918 Epidemic of Influenza to issue a manifesto that appeared in APHA’s “Working Program against Influenza.”57 APHA declared that because the cause of influenza was unknown, there was no logical basis for a vaccine to prevent the disease.
There was a logical basis for believing that a vaccine to prevent the secondary infections might be developed, but there was no evidence that any of the vaccines currently available were effective. The association then specified the criteria that a trial must meet, if its conclusions were to be valid.
There must be a control group, the association specified, and the vaccinated and the control group must be equal in size. The relative susceptibilities of the two groups must be equivalent as determined by age, sex, and prior exposure. Their degree of exposure must be of equal duration and intensity, and should take place during the same phase of the epidemic.57 (p. 3)
The Pandemic & Biomedical Knowledge
While the experience of the great pandemic of 1918–1919 had given American medical researchers a heightened appreciation of the dangers of pandemic influenza, and while it permitted epidemiologists to enlarge the fund of descriptive information on influenza outbreaks, it had done little to unlock the mysteries of the disease. If anything, the experience of 1918–1919 served to deconstruct existing biomedical knowledge.
This void in fundamental knowledge would not be filled soon. When Jordan published his massive, 500-page authoritative synthesis of the influenza literature in 1927, the most basic and fundamental features of influenza were still unexplained. Jordan told his readers that influenza could only be defined by its pattern of occurrence—its epidemiology. Its cause was unknown, and its pathology was indefinite.
It was uncertain whether there was acquired immunity for influenza, and, if there was, how long it lasted. Why pandemics occurred when they did and why they spared some places were also unknown. It was also uncertain whether the disease called influenza that occurred every year in sporadic cases and small outbreaks was the same disease that circulated in the pandemics. He continued the practice of distinguishing “influenza” from “epidemic influenza.”73
Jordan did suggest that changes in virulence of the still unknown agent of influenza might be important and that this agent might be filterable, but in 1927 these were still speculations for which there was no direct evidence. In short, the three decades that had passed since Leichtenstern published his major synthesis had seen remarkably little addition to the fund of basic scientific knowledge of influenza, in spite of concerted efforts by researchers employing the best available research tools.
Now, more than a century later, not one single controlled experiment has proven that viruses are contagious and that vaccines prevent or cure people from illness.
Yet, the UK government has decreed that it will be mandatory to wear face masks in shops from 24/07/2020, claiming that is to stop the spread of COVID-19.
Which the experiments described in the foregoing proved that you couldn’t catch if you drank a pint green snot from the sufferer’s nose.
In other words, the mask is nothing but a mask for yet more government lies, in service of an overtly nefarious agenda.
Freedom Ended in COVID-1984
The last year of freedom for the human race was 2020, which shall forever be known as COVID-1984, to those of us who know the truth of what transpired during the domestic imprisonment of the entire population by the last democratically elected UK government.
First they took away the rights you were born with to protect you from the Common Cold, which they fooled you into accepting by calling it a deadly virus and whipping up panic, fear and hysteria in the state controlled media.
Then they decreed that you were all under house arrest and confined to your own homes till further government dictate, except for essential shopping and an hour of daily exercise. They even stopped you practicing religion, seeing your friends and tending to dying loved ones.
But because the government said they would pay for everything, you did nothing except what you were told [including grassing on your neighbours for having the courage to call out their lies for what they were].
Unaccountable COVID-1984 Government
Needless to say, they also made themselves unaccountable to the People by suspending the democratic right to remove the government from office and proceeded to murder tens of thousands of people in care homes, in service of UN Agendas 21 and 30.
But because most of those people were old or suffering from other ailments, you did nothing except what you were told you to do. Even when a plethora of expert and eye witnesses spoke out, in the days before doing so was punishable with a harsh fine, prison sentence and social cancelation.
Then, having shut down every aspect of your lives, for what they told you would be no more than a few weeks of ‘flattening the curve’, they extended the lock-up indefinitely, thereby maximising the mortality rate, which doubled, according to Office of National Statistics data.
But because you were getting paid not to go to work, you did nothing to stop the them destroying the economy with a mandatory general strike, which benefited nobody except the self-appointed genocidal ‘elite’.
You just stood by and watched as your children’s lives were reduced to captivity and millions of livelihoods were decimated beyond repair.
While thousands more continued to die in care homes and all deaths were recorded as COVID deaths to create the false impression that there really was a killer virus on the loose, to justify the continuation of the genocidal plan.
The COVID-1984 Jackboot Came Down Hard
Then they made it a criminal offence not to wear a mask, which they had previously admitted didn’t protect you from anything. They then banned all free movement and decreed that there was no right to travel, buy or sell without wearing one in public.
But you were so scared of the imaginary boogeyman, you did nothing to stop the subsequent theft of everything generation after generation who preceded you gave their blood, sweat and tears to guarantee as your birthrights.
Then the government decreed that the army would be deployed on every street to enforce the new Bill Gates vaccine program, without any double blind placebo or safety tests being completed.
But you were so scared witless by this point that you just watched and rolled up your sleeves, as children and their anti-vaxxer parents were jabbed with poison against their will outside your front door.
Even when perfectly healthy people dropped down dead with a needle in their arm, you deluded yourselves that they must have had other fatal health issues, just so you could cling to the faint hope of not suffering the same fate.
All Dissenting Voices Disappeared
Then they rounded up all the anti-vaxxers and everybody else who had ever spoken out about the tyrannies which were rampant. None of them were ever seen or heard of again and their names were erased from history, but they are the only ones who are beyond reproach for what became of the world.
They may have all fallen without achieving their aims, but the surviving children of those who perished for telling people the truth about the genocide that had become government policy, will give their lives in the blink of an eye to restore what has been lost, no matter how long that takes.
Nevertheless, the majority of the world’s population were either dead not long after being injected with an actual deadly virus, bio-digital ID and nanobots, or imprisoned within a microwave control grid.
Population Control & History Erased
Over less than a decade, the world’s population was reduced to a much more manageable forty million people and ‘freedom’ was one of the words which was eradicated from the lexicon.
This was done during the first purge of language used by enemies of the new one world government, which abolished the nation state by decree, under the pretense of keeping people safe from the monster it controlled.
But anybody who openly disagreed with government policy was sent to a Re-Education Camp, never to be seen again, if they weren’t shot dead in the street for not wearing a mask, breaching a curfew or evading the Vaxx-Squad, all of which became summary on the spot capital offences, after the one world government seized power.
Having children was also criminalised and replaced with a strictly controlled quota of genetically engineered babies, reared by government machines to become the first generation to merge with Artificial Intelligence.
This measure was used to justify the sterilisation of all humans with a healthy reproductive system, in the name of ‘the greater good’.
The international communists’ goal of eradicating the individual, the family and the constitutional nation state was thereby completed, along with the extermination of 95% of the world’s population.
The Epoch of Cowardice
It’s no wonder then that the historical records which somehow survived the cultural purges record your era as the Epoch of Cowardice, but for one reason more than any other:
It is an act of extreme cowardice to refuse to exercise the unalienable sovereign rights we are all born with, let alone to do so without standing up to fight for what’s right, when your people are suffering all around you.
According to our previously noble ancestry, that’s considered to be the worst kind of cowardice and beneath contempt.
To the tiny minority of us who know what really happened upon this Earth in the year 2020 and before, save for the ones who gave their lives trying to awaken the masses, you are the most despised people in history.
You gave away everything we would gladly give our lives to get back for our people and you did so to preserve your own lives above those of everybody else, when it was more than within your capabilities to create a much better world for everybody.
The Destruction of Lives Worth Living
Now every single aspect of human life is controlled by a vast AI control grid, which is ruthlessly programmed by an unknown, unaccountable, technocratic, international communist, crony capitalist, unelected world government.
We have been told we have no families, our sex lives are regulated, our lovers chosen by machines, as is everything we consume, use and throw away. We can’t travel, gather together in groups of more than two and we have no choice where we live or who we live with or what we do with our lives, such as they are.
The only life worth living now is one dedicated to setting the People free from this totalitarian dystopian nightmare, which you had the chance to wake up from in the summer of 2020, before the jackboot came down hard with the planned 2nd wave in the Autumn.
Message From The Future
If a single message could be sent back in time to those of you who bequeathed this hell on Earth to your descendants, it would be this:
Nobody’s coming to save you, believe nothing the government or the media tells you and doing nothing will result in the end of every aspect of life that is worth living for perhaps every generation to come.
Post Script Resolution
The critical purpose of this fictitious warning from our near future is to help people learn from the mistakes which have already been committed en masse this year, as well as forewarn about what is certain to happen if the majority continues to make the same mistakes for long enough.
Nevertheless, we still have time to restore the Common Law and put an end to the myriad of crimes that are being perpetrated against the People, so we must do everything we can to awaken the masses to the truth of these, the most troubling of times.
Tell everybody who needs to hear, lose the fear, check the facts for yourself and unite under the banner of Magna Carta 2020. Before people start getting arrested and charged with having too much to think in a public place and the opportunity to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat slips through our fingers.
The jury was asked to rule on whether there was sufficient evidence of pandemic fraud, upon the evidence submitted into the public domain by numerous doctors, experts and eye witnesses, to justify a formal Grand Jury investigation.
There now follows a summary of the allegations presented.
FRAUD – A false representation of a matter of fact—whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of what should have been disclosed—that deceives and is intended to deceive another so that the individual will act upon it to her or his legal injury.
CORONAVIRUS – Any of a family of single-stranded RNA viruses that infect mammals and birds, causing respiratory infections such as the common cold and SARS in humans, and that have spikes of glycoproteins projecting from the viral envelope.
PANDEMIC – 1. Widespread; general.
2. Medicine Epidemic over a wide geographic area and affecting a large proportion of the population
In January 2020, the UK government classified the COVID-19 strain of Coronavirus as a High Consequence Infectious Disease [HCID], following a worldwide panic over an alleged pandemic which originated in Wuhan, China.
Then on 16/03/2020, Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London claimed that 500,000 British people would be killed by COVID-19, based upon the Bill Gates financed university’s predictive computer model, in the event Brits just carried on as normal.
However, on 19/03/2020, COVID-19 was reclassified by the UK government from being a serious public health risk to an easily manageable one, only two months after being declared a High Consequence Infectious Disease.
Nevertheless, on 23/03/2020, the UK government imposed a voluntary indefinite domestic prison sentence upon the population of Britain, in the name of keeping people safe and protecting the allegedly over-stretched National Heath Service.
Two days later, on 25/03/2020, the Coronavirus Act 2020 was rushed through Parliament, on the alleged ground that the country was in grave danger from a viral pandemic, which the government had already reclassified on 19/03/2020, from being considered a serious threat to being no more threatening than a common cold or influenza.
The Coronavirus Bill (HC Bill 122) was purportedly enacted without the conventional Parliamentary scrutiny and debate, purportedly to keep people safe and free from harm and to save the NHS, during this alleged public health emergency.
However, the following powers it purported to authorise under the provisions of the Civil Contingencies Act 2004, represent fundamental breaches of Magna Carta, the Act of Settlement, the Declaration and Bill of Rights, the Petition of Right, the Coronation Oath and the Human Rights Act, which constitutionally forbid the suspension of the unalienable rights and protections guaranteed by the Common Law.
Forced detention and isolation of anyone, including children, and for any amount of time.
Authorities can take biological samples from your body by force [including at the point of a gun].
Your body will then be claimed as the property of the state, to do with as it sees fit and there is no right of appeal.
Nobody’s legal rights are recognised in the as yet unidentified isolation facilities, which are quickly being built around the country.
Emergency powers will last up to 2 years, with reviews every 6 months and the unrestricted option to extend indefinitely.
Lock-down powers have been drafted so that they can be used to prevent mass protests against the totalitarian measures imposed.
State surveillance safeguards have effectively been abolished, authorising total surveillance of every aspect of our lives, in the 5G control grid they are erecting, while everybody else is imprisoned in their homes.
Protections from forced detainment and cruel and unnecessary treatment under the Mental Health Act have been relaxed indefinitely.
Cremations can be enforced against personal and religious wishes.
No inquests into any suspicious deaths will be held until further notice.
No requirement for any medical certification for burials or cremations are now required.
The health service has been indemnified, should they fail for what ever reason to provide care to people who need it, or if they administer forced treatment and the patient dies as a result.
Only one government appointed medical ‘officer’ is required to sign off COMPULSORY TREATMENT ORDERS, which mean you can be forcibly medicated.
Or held down and injected with whatever is seen fit, by whomsoever your caring and compassionate government chooses to answer to nobody but them.
Local Authorities are also now exempt from compliance with their duties under The Care Act 2014, but they are still sending parking bandits to fine you for parking in front of the home you have been imprisoned in.
If someone dies in police custody or any type of custody they can simply dispose of the body without any paperwork, medical exam or certification or inquest.
Any criticism of government policy is a summary public order offence, until they end the state of emergency, liable to fine and imprisonment without trial.
Ferguson Backtracks But Lockdown Continues
Almost inexplicably, on the same day the Coronavirus Act was passed by Parliament, which promptly dissolved till further notice, Ferguson publicly admitted his predictions were woefully inaccurate; and that, upon reflection, there should be no more than 10-20,000 UK deaths.
However, the UK government proceeded to ignore the corrected mortality prediction, as well as its own reclassification of the disease as not being a serious public health risk and the lockdown continued with an aggressively renewed totalitarian vigour.
Questions of Legitimacy
This naturally gave rise to questions of such significance to everybody in Britain and the rest of the world, which has almost entirely followed suit.
If the UK government knew COVID-19 was not a serious public health risk on 19/03/2020, why did Parliament pass the Coronavirus Bill six days later?
Upon the available evidence, the only logical answer is that the bill was passed in order to use a manufactured public health crisis as a mask for a totalitarian power grab, on the basis that the unconstitutional statute and the regulations which arose out of it, purport to place the UK government, the NHS and the councils beyond being held accountable for their actions by the people.
Why else would they have used their landslide majority in Parliament to ram through a bill which suspends the legal right to remove the government from office, until they say so?
Whilst everybody involved in these critical investigations sincerely wishes it were otherwise, the facts dictate that there is simply no other rational explanation as to why the government is relying upon plainly dishonest statements, which call into question the very legitimacy of this Parliament.
The Elements of Fraud
For an allegation of criminal fraud to be proven at law, the following elements must be in place:
1. Party A knowingly relies upon dishonest statements for the purposes of procuring material gain.
2. Party B is caused to rely upon those dishonest statements by the actions of Party A.
3. Party B [and Party C, D, E etc, whenever appropriate] suffers losses [or might have suffered them] as a direct result of relying on the dishonest statements of Party A.
4. Party A becomes guilty of committing fraud the moment they obtain material gain from relying upon their dishonest statements, whether Parties B and C suffered losses or not.
A Matter of Public Record
In this case, it is a matter of public record that Party A [the UK government] appears to have made dishonest statements to Party B [Parliament] and Party C [the People], for the purposes of procuring unaccountable totalitarian power.
It is also indisputable that Party B was caused to rely on those dishonest statements, which resulted in the passing of the Coronavirus Bill, which legally mandated Party C to rely upon those dishonest statements, without recourse to criticising government policy or removing them from office in a democratic plebiscite.
Party B was therefore caused the loss of the means to carry out its primary constitutional purpose – to oversee, scrutinize and block any attempts by government to grant itself powers which are unaccountable to the free and sovereign people of Britain.
Furthermore, in relying upon the government’s dishonest statements, Party C was caused the loss of the democratic right to remove them from office, as well as the unalienable rights of free speech, free assembly, freedom of movement, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion and the right to a private family life, to free trade, to be presumed innocent until prove guilty before a Common Law jury.
Party A appears to have obtained material gain from those dishonest statements at the moment the 2020 Act was enacted by Parliament, since the Act purported to suspend the democratic rights of the electorate to remove it from office, until such time that it deems appropriate.
Summary of Dishonest Statements
Here is a summary of the dishonest statements allegedly made by Party A in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic, based solely on the evidence publicly submitted by experts in the fields of virology, microbiology, immunology, medicine, vaccines and health care, the names of whom are compiled in the references at the bottom of this post.
Allegations of False Representation
1. COVID-19 is a serious public health risk, which justifies the Draconian measures taken.
2. COVID-19 is a pandemic of a naturally occurring virus, rather than having been manufactured by the Bill Gates financed vaccine industry.
3. COVID-19 is a serious threat to the National Health Service, which justifies refusing to treat people with serious illnesses and classifying every death since lockdown as a ‘COVID death’.
4. COVID-19 is an airborne naturally contagious virus, rather than a chemically manufactured poison which can be sprayed in the air, added to liquids or injected into the body.
5. COVID-19 cannot be controlled without widespread vaccination, when every vaccine necessarily contains the virus it is supposed to prevent.
6. COVID-19 has been the cause of every UK death since the lockdown began, since when every fatal heart attack, stroke, brain hemorrhage, car crash and suicide has been falsely recorded.
7. Lockdown measures are keeping the public safe and saving the NHS, when the UK has suffered the highest death rate per million of all locked down and not locked down European nations and hospital wards are empty all over the country.
Allegations of Non-Disclosure
Here is a list of the alleged facts that Party A failed to disclose to Parliament and the people:
1. COVID-19 was reclassified as not being a serious public health risk six days before the Coronavirus Bill was enacted by Parliament.
2. All Coronavirus strains, including COVID-19, were created by institutions, foundations and companies engaged in the development, production, manufacture and distribution of vaccines.
3. COVID-19 is putting less stress on the NHS than it withstood during every previous annual flu seasons.
4. Viruses are not naturally contagious, whether airborne or otherwise.
5. South Korea minimised COVID-19 deaths with the widespread use of Vitamin C, whilst a combination of Quinine and Zinc is curing all symptoms within 12-36 hours, in countries all over the world.
6. The UK’s official COVID-19 death rate includes those caused by any other disease, heart attacks, road traffic accidents, natural causes and suicide.
7. Lockdown measures have resulted in a massive increase in the number of UK deaths by suicide, which will continue to increase for as long as domestic captivity lasts.
8. The government’s Chief Medical Officer, Chris Whitty, received a substantial amount of money from the Gates Foundation, which is heavily invested in forcing mandatory vaccinations upon the world.
9. Imperial College London received a similarly massive grant from the Gates Foundation.
10. Matt Hancock, the secretary of state for health, is CEO of Porton Biopharma Limited – a company engaged in the development of vaccines.
11. Porton Biopharma Limited is the modern version of Porton Down, a military-controlled institution which was scandalized when it was revealed that it had secretly tested nerve gas on unsuspecting victims, many of whom were killed or maimed.
12. Oxford University, the Jenner Institute, Vaccitech and Glaxo-Smith Kline – the entities engaged in developing, producing, manufacturing and distributing a vaccine for the UK – have all received funding from the Gates Foundation [or other Gates-controlled entities].
Unanimously, the Grand Jury ruled that there is enough prima facie evidence to justify a hearing of the expert and eye witness testimony under oath, which will take place at the earliest opportunity.
For the 2020 Act to be formally declared a nullity, on the ground its provisions [including the subsequent regulations] are unlawful and incapable of enforcement under Common Law, the Grand Jury must rule that the allegations of pandemic fraud are proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Dr Mohammad Iqbal Adil:
Prof Sucharit Bhakti:
Knut Wittkowski PhD:
John A Lee:
Dr Jeffrey Barke:
Here lies an anonymous statement from an A&E consultant in a major hospital in Surrey, in relation to the criminal gagging of all levels of NHS staff, who have been threatened that they will lose their jobs if the speak out about the COVID-1984 scamdemic.
“I am a consultant at a major , regional hospital in Surrey. By major you can take that to indicate that we have an A&E department. I had agreed to give an interview to an anti lockdown activist in which I would have revealed my identity. I have since changed my mind and only feel able to give an anonymous statement. I have changed my mind simply because that all staff , no matter what grade, at all hospitals have been warned that if they give any media interviews at all or make any statements to either the Main Stream Press or smaller, independent press /social media we may, immediately be suspended without pay. I have a family, dependents and I simply cant do it to them. I therefore can not reveal my identity at this time but wish to state as follows:
In my opinion, and that of many of my colleagues, there has been no Covid Pandemic, certainly not in the Surrey region and I have heard from other colleagues this picture is the same throughout the country. Our hospital would normally expect to see around 350,000 out patients a year. Around 95,000 patients are admitted to hospital in a normal year and we would expect to see around a similar figure, perhaps 100,000 patients pass through our A&E department. In the months from March to June (inclusive) we would normally expect to see 100,000 out patients, around 30,000 patients admitted to hospital and perhaps 30,000 pass through A&E. This year (and these figures are almost impossible to get hold of) we are over 95% down on all those numbers. In effect, the hospital has been pretty much empty for that entire period.
At the start, staff that questioned this were told that we were being used as ‘redundant’ capacity, kept back for the ‘deluge’ we were told would come. It never did come, and when staff began to question this, comments like, ‘for the greater good’ and to ‘protect the NHS’ came down from above. Now its just along the lines of, ‘Shut up or you don’t get paid’. The few Covid cases that we have had , get repeatedly tested, and every single test counted as a new case. Meaning the figures reported back to ONS / PHE (Office for National Statistics & Public Health England) were almost exponentially inflated. It could be that Covid cases reported by hospitals are between 5 to 10x higher than the real number of cases. There has been no pandemic and this goes a long way to explain why figures for the UK are so much higher than anywhere else in Europe.
The trust has been running empty ambulances during lockdown and is still doing it now. By this I mean ambulances are driving around, with their emergency alert systems active (sirens & / or lights) with no job to go to. This I believe has been to give the impression to the public that there is more demand for ambulances than there actually is. Staff only wear face coverings/ masks & social distance when public facing, as soon as they are out of public view, the masks come off and social distancing is not observed. Indeed jokes are made about the measures, and I have heard staff express amazement that despite warnings on packets and at point of sales, telling people masks are totally ineffective and dangerous , the public still buy them, because a politician has told them too.
We have cancelled the vast majority of operations and of these ALL elective surgery has been cancelled. That’s surgery that has been pre planned / waiting list. Non elective Surgery, this tends to be emergency surgery or that which is deemed urgent has been severely curtailed. The outcome of this is simple. People are at best being denied basic medical care and at worst, being left to die, in some cases, in much distress and pain.
Regarding death certification. All staff that are responsible for this have been encouraged where possible to put Covid-19 complications as reason for death, even though the patient may have been asymptomatic and also not even tested for covid. I feel this simply amounts to fraudulently completed death certificates and has been responsible to grossly inflating the number of Covid deaths. The fact is that regardless of what you actually die of in hospital, it is likely that Covid-19 will feature on your death certificate. I have included with my statement the detailed published guidance from Government on Death Certification which shows how Covid-19, as a factor is encouraged to at least feature on a death certificate.
Remember Covid-19 itself can not kill. What kills is complications from the virus, typically pneumonia like symptoms. These complications are in reality incredibly rare but have featured and a large amount of death certificates issued in recent months. As long as Covid-19 appears on a death certificate, that death is counted as Covid-19 in the figures released by the ONS and PHE. I genuinely believe that many death certificates, especially amongst the older 65+ demographic have been fraudulently completed so as to be counted as Covid-19 deaths when in reality Covid-19 complications did not cause the death.
There have been Thursday nights when I stood, alone in my office and cried as I heard people cheering and clapping outside. It sickens me to see all the ‘Thank You NHS’ signs up everywhere and the stolen rainbow that for me now says one word and word only; fear.
There are many good people in the NHS and whilst I do not plead forgiveness for myself, I do plead for them. Most are on low pay, they joined for the right reasons and I did and have been bullied and threatened that if they don’t ‘stay on message’ they don’t eat. I know that if a way could be found to assure staff within the NHS of safety against reprisals, there would be a tsunami of whistleblowers which I have no doubt would help end this complete and brutal insanity. I am finding it increasingly hard to live with what I have been involved in and I am sorry this has happened. To end, I would simply say this. Politicians haven’t changed, the country has just made a fatal mistake and started trusting them without question.”
My friends, followers and all freedom-loving people who stumble upon this post, time is of the essence, so I will cut straight to the chase. Whatever you do, don’t ‘Trust The Plan’ to distract you from the real plan, which is already unfolding before our eyes.
Naturally, this post will already have upset, angered and antagonized those of you who have pinned your hopes on a Little House On the Prairie style ending, to the dystopian nightmare we are currently living through on the British Isles, in America and pretty much everywhere else.
However, since some who have earned my trust and respect from both sides of the Atlantic, as well as many thousands [if not millions] of others, are convinced that Trump and Q-Anon are engaged in saving the world from the abject tyranny that abounds, I have forced myself to seriously consider whether that is a realistic possibility.
Buckle Up For A Bumpy Ride
Those who don’t already know exactly where this urgent rhetoric is heading, really should buckle up because it’s going to be a bumpy ride, if you are not already fully availed of the undisputed and demonstrable facts, in relation to Trump’s relationship with Rothschild.
Nevertheless, if you are a committed Trump supporter, you will win my genuine admiration if you manage to read this article in full, check the references given and not have an emotional breakdown of some form or another in the process of doing so.
Because there appears to be an unspeakably nefarious deception at play, which has your kind, loyal and trusting heart ensnared, in its complex webs of plausible deniability, hearsay and gobshite, spun with military precision, by armies of well trained propagandists for the self-appointed ‘elite’.
A Spoonful of Poison Helps The Medicine Go Down
At this juncture of critical analysis, to make it slightly less difficult to accept that Trump might well have been contracted by the ‘deep state’, to play the leading role in the controlled opposition to totalitarian tyranny, it is starkly illuminating to frame the narrative as a billion dollar international psyop.
In which case, it is more than feasible that the operation was designed to minimise resistance to a soft-kill genocide, which commenced in Britain with the long-planned 5G Roll-Out, the COVID-1984 lockdown and the legislation which enabled mandatory vaxxtermination, the falsification of death certificates and the purported suspension of everybody’s legally guaranteed rights.
No doubt this was carried out to help flatten the curve of CO2 emissions, by 2030 at the latest.
Can you see what it is yet?
Bread & Circuses
‘Trust The Plan’ is a direct instruction from Q-Anon I have seen written repeatedly in the comments section on any Trump-related Facebook post for several months, but it has been floating about on social media for a number of years.
I am, of course, referring to the message that all good people should just relax and place their trust in a single US political figurehead carrying out an alleged twenty year plan to put the entire world right.
Well, the inherent problem I have with that postulation is that there are too many plans to choose from already in motion and not one of them has anything other than a genocidal agenda.
Agony of Choice
Do they mean the plan for Trump to partner with Gates-funded GAVI and the UK government to vaxxterminate 8 billion people at warp speed?
Or the plan to destroy the world’s economies, national sovereignty, free trade and individual freedom, with the Rockefeller-Rothschild sponsored Lock-Step program?
Or the plan to manufacture a scamdemic, establish totalitarian control and cause an international Marxist revolution, with exactly the same endgame as UN Agendas 21 and 30?
Because all of those things are happening, right here, right now, whilst too many good people are doing nothing to prevent ongoing crimes against humanity from continuing, when they might otherwise have been raising hell over what’s already transpired, were it not for trusting the plan.
Who benefits the most from attention being fixed on bread and circuses, instead of the totalitarian power grab by the banksters’ puppet governments, in service of their UN-approved genocidal agendas?
That’s right – the banksters – as always, since they are the controlling financiers, founders of the United Nations and sponsors of the zero carbon dioxide agenda, as well as creditors to every national debt they manufacture, by creating false narratives for their puppet governments and controlled media to parrot, till their message gets through enough spinning heads, enough times for the opinion to form.
Now for the money shot. Literally, as well as figuratively.
Trump’s Billion Dollar Debt To Rothschild Inc
Before some of you emotionally explode in defence of Trump after reading that last headline, ask yourself why he received a billion dollar bailout in 1991/92 from Rothschild Inc, when he was on the verge of bankruptcy.
Then ask yourself why billionaire, Wilbur Ross, who worked for Rothschild Inc for almost thirty years, was appointed as Trump’s Commerce Secretary 15 years later, without so much as a probing question from the ‘fake media’ that Rothschild’s well paid proxies control, via Reuters and AP.
It is clearly more than just a coincidence that Forbes described Rothschild’s financial rescue of Trump’s casino from the creditors of a junk bonds deal [upon which he was paying 14% interest to Rothschild clients], in these very telling words:
“In stepped Ross, then head of Rothschild Inc’s bankruptcy advising team, to represent bondholders, who were pondering forcing the casino into involuntary bankruptcy and ousting Trump. Ross reportedly saw crowds pressed against Trump’s limo windows to get a peek at the mogul, and realized the value of Trump’s celebrity.
He struck a prepackaged bankruptcy deal: Trump would give up 50% of his stake … but would receive better debt terms and would remain in control. The Donald was back in business: He ultimately made similar deals for his other troubled properties and climbed out of debt and back onto the Forbes 400.”
Those Who Control The Purse Strings Control All
All of which reminds me of what founding Bilderberger, Denis Healey, said about the way the world is made to appear:
“World events do not occur by accident. They are made to happen, whether it is to do with national issues or commerce; and most of them are staged and managed by those who hold the purse strings.”
It is also reminiscent of what Demonic Cummings’ political idol, Vladimir Lenin, said about controlling political opposition:
“The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.”
Moreover, since the UK lockdown was imposed, it has become obvious that Cummings and Johnson were the selected leaders of the controlled opposition to Britain remaining in the EU.
Had they been sincere in campaigning to restore the sovereignty of the British people by Getting Brexit Done, they would never have driven the Coronavirus Act 2020 and subsequent unscrutinized regulations into lawlessness, effectively declaring themselves unaccountable to the electorate, until they say the fraudulent public health emergency is over.
Totalitarianism by another name, in the British Isles, of all places, by way of the tyrannous 2020 Act, which is a nullity at Common Law, for purporting to suspend the unalienable constitutional rights everybody is endowed with at birth.
The Totalitarian State of Britain
Why is Trump not tweeting about Totalitarian Britain? It’s only the most treasonous crime ever perpetrated against the people, since the Declaration of Rights 1688 was declared to end comparable unaccountable powers of the state on these shores.
That’s only the constitutional document the authors used as a template for the US Constitution, which Trump is sworn to uphold and protect. In other words, if Britain’s Declaration of Rights is being treated as meaningless, so is the US Constitution. This is one of the reasons why the futures of the US and the UK are legally bound together, whether we like it or not.
Even if he is a genuine maverick, Trump should be seeking the indictment of Gates et al for crimes against humanity, not partnering with their international vaxxtermination syndicate and allowing their immunity from civil and criminal liability to continue, no matter how many children are killed and maimed by their legalised poisons.
Puppets Never Have Any Real Power
This indicates that either Trump doesn’t have the power to stop the vaxxtermination agenda, or he has no real intention of doing so, just like the Right Dishonourable Twat Wancock, the secretary of state for mandatory vaccinations and sad little poster boy for COVID-1984.
Living satire to one side, if Trump was worthy of the political santahood [yes, santahood] bestowed upon him by so many good people, he would be denouncing UN Agendas 21 and 30 as signed confessions to future crimes of genocide, some of which have been carried out during his presidency.
As opposed to adhering to those agendas, which his partnership with Gates-funded GAVI confirms he is doing, no matter how much anybody wants to believe otherwise.
In and of itself, this is the counter argument which just keeps on telling the devastated hypothesis to get a fucking grip, before it’s too late to take responsibility for a potentially fatal mistake.
Smoke & Mirrors
The apparent arrest of a suspected Mossad agent, who happens to be the daughter of and former pimp for two other suspected Mossad agents, both of whom are also suspected of faking their own deaths, convinces me of nothing.
Except, perhaps, that the nefarious deception being played out is geared to maximise the public spectacle. But only for long enough to perpetuate enough interest, derision and hope, in all the targeted demographics.
The primary marks or targets of this deception are the most trustworthy and trusting of all intelligent people, with the singular aim of the psyop being to lull them into protracted inertia, instead of the decisive action they might have taken without trusting the plan.
And all the while, behind the smoke and mirrors, the unlawful lockdown measures imposed have killed hundreds of thousands of people all over the world and vaccinations are already mandatory in many places, with anti-vaxxers increasingly being denounced as putting the vaccinated at risk, when nothing could be further from the truth.
In the name of keeping us safe from a false flag boogeyman, which was invented for the very purpose of using fear as a silent weapon in the quiet war being waged against the people.
As UK Column has been vocal in very astutely pointing out, state controlled media and a now vast UK intelligence service have used fear-mongering propaganda, misinformation and disinformation to scare the shit out of as many people as possible, in the service of their political ends – which is the somewhat colloquial legal definition of terrorism.
Since the tactic of scaring the people into accepting the loss of the rights nobody can take away is always used by totalitarian power-grabbing governments to distract attention away from their unlawful acts, we need to understand exactly what it is they want to distract us from.
What if the real plan is to reach zero carbon dioxide emissions by reducing the world’s population by up to 95%, using a fake pandemic to justify taking control of every aspect of human life [including who lives and who dies]?
If that’s the plan you are placing your trust in, you’d better think again without letting pride restrict your ability to reason as objectively as possible, when faced with the incontrovertible truth about a misplaced trust.
The future of all our children depends upon us uniting behind one common cause and we haven’t got time for debate or nursing the bruised egos and hurt feelings of anybody who could otherwise be dedicating their energies to snatching an unexpected victory from the jaws of the most annihilating defeat.
At this point, nothing else will suffice.
Simon Dolan’s Case
It is therefore little surprise that the courageous Simon Dolan’s high court challenge to the UK government’s lockdown measures was thrown out yesterday, by a judge who ignored the doubling of Britain’s mortality rate, which occurred as a direct result of those measures.
Nevertheless, his judgment is automatically void, on the ground that the judge is bound by the Common Law to declare that the 2020 Act and the lockdown regulations are legal nullities, incapable of enforcement, as per Thomas Bonham v College of Physicians 8 Co Rep 107a; 77 Eng Rep 638:
“In many cases, the Common Law will control Acts of Parliament, and sometimes adjudge them to be utterly void: for when an Act of Parliament is against common right and reason, or repugnant, or impossible to be performed, the common law will control it and adjudge such an Act to be void.”
Simon Dolan and his legal team could appeal the decision on the ground that the Common Law ajudges the acts of the UK government and Parliament to be void because they fly in the face of common right and reason, they are impossible to perform lawfully and they are repugnant for doubling the death rate, according to the government’s own data.
However, as we proved in The Great British Mortgage Swindle, the so-called justice system in this country is rigged to protect the banksters from the consequences of their crimes, which extend way beyond the boundaries of the financial system.
Furthermore, the dismissal of Simon Dolan’s challenge gives a judicial green light to more lockdowns, which will result in more deaths. That is why he shouldn’t back down, no matter what the totalitarian state throws at him because he has the Common Law and the People on his side.
If I can help Simon in any way I will and I urge every Briton to join his movement to Keep Britain Free. To achieve that end we must restore the Common Law by any lawful means necessary.
Unite Behind One Common Cause – Magna Carta 2020
Ultimately, all that really matters is that enough good people unite and form an unstoppable, dynamic force, which stands up together to fight for everything that’s good in this world, before the opportunity for peaceful resolution is crushed under jackboots, food riots, race wars and anti-vaxxer purges.
With facilitating that purpose in mind, the final draft of Magna Carta 2020 will soon be published, along with details of our historic opportunity for every Briton of legal age to help peacefully restore the Common Law.
Between now and then, please help spread #KeepBritainFree and #MagnaCarta2020 far and wide, telling everybody you know that we need to unite and fight for what is right without any more delays.
Wondering why the Gates-funded UK government has reluctantly admitted that fines for alleged breaches of ‘social distancing laws’ cannot be legally enforced?
Or why the government let the Soros-funded BLM protesters kick the shit out of the Metropolitan Police last weekend, even though they have legislated for a full-blown authoritarian Police State?
Or why Johnson implicitly announced yesterday that there is an alternative ‘treatment’ to the unholy grail of a Gates-funded vaccine?
The answer is the same to all three questions – everything the government has enacted since the Coronavirus Bill was passed last March has been unlawful.
Dr Bonham’s Case
Here lies a seminal Common Law precedent, which nullifies every action Parliament and the government have taken since the murderous lock-up began.
In the 1610 decision of Thomas Bonham v College of Physicians 8 Co Rep 107a; 77 Eng Rep 638, commonly known as Dr. Bonham’s Case, in the Court of Common Pleas before Coke, the learned judge ruled that:
“In many cases, the Common Law will control Acts of Parliament, and sometimes adjudge them to be utterly void: for when an Act of Parliament is against common right and reason, or repugnant, or impossible to be performed, the common law will control it and adjudge such an Act to be void.”
Applicability To Lock-Down Laws
This applies to all the Coronavirus Act 2020 and every one of the 90 statutory instruments which have since been decreed into lawlessness without Parliamentary scrutiny, for the following reasons:
1. They purport to have suspended the common rights of freedom of assembly, freedom of movement and freedom of conscience, as well as the rights to justice and the protection of the law, Habeus Corpus, the presumption of innocence and a private family life.
2. They fly in the face of reason because there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE that the measures imposed have done anything except cause significant harm to the British people.
3. They are repugnant on the ground that, far from fulfilling the repeatedly stated objective of “flattening the curve”, the Office of National Statistics data proves that the lock-up [not COVID-19] doubled the national mortality rate, rendering the actions of Parliament and the government both fraudulent and genocidal in nature.
4. The measures imposed were and remain impossible to perform, on the simple basis that the Common Law forbids such actions to be taken under any circumstances.
These actions represent clear and present ‘trespasses upon the person’, for intentional interference with the bodies and liberty of the British people, as per the rules set down by Dr Bonham’s case.
The Common Law therefore adjudges the statute and the regulations which followed to be void ab initio, whilst Parliament automatically forfeited its legitimacy by attempting to suspend the rights guaranteed under Constitutional Law.
Evidence To Indict
In other words, we have enough evidence to indict the government [and every MP], since every action they have taken was and will always remain treasonously fraudulent and constitutionally unlawful.
Is that why, if you listen very carefully, you can hear the slippery clenching of butt-cheeks every time the Secretary of State for Mandatory Vaccinations issues the daily propaganda briefing?
Could it also be the reason why the government declared yesterday that Dexamethasone [a well established treatment for pulmonary altitude sickness] has proven in tests to be an effective treatment for ‘the deadly virus’?
After all, there would be no greater trespass upon the person than Hancock’s threatened compulsory vaccination edict, which the government previously insisted was the only way out of lock-down.
Murder By Vaccination
However, he might also have been informed that the Secretary of State for Health in the Philippines has been indicted for crimes tantamount to the murder of children, who died after being vaccinated with Dengue Fever drug, Dengvaxia.
Indicted to face criminal charges with them is a negligent researcher, as well as as former and current employees of the vax manufacturer, Sanofi – the company currently working with Glaxo-Smith Kline to rush a COVID-19 vaccine on to the market.
Nonetheless, once #VaxLiesShatter in the minds of enough people, it is the politicians, their so-called ‘scientific advisers’ and the financiers of the mandatory vaccination agenda who will be locked up, until they meet their fate at the end of their trials for crimes tantamount to genocide, under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
So please share the #VaxLiesShatter material on every social media platform you give your attention to, until we reach the tipping point, at which people of all colours will realise that no lives [except their own] matter to the murderous eugenicists who pull the strings of the puppet politicians peddling their genocidal poison.
Jonathan L Trapman is an author, creative writer and photojournalist who has spent the better part of his 45 odd years in public life, learning from his personal experiences, sharing them, listening to others, whose lives have allowed him to open his own mind to a beauty, even within horror, that is transforming and empowering. His written work endeavors to convey, through true tales and fiction, impressions thus garnered. Dreams and Realities can be purchased (signed by the author if wanted) here.