Discrediting The Myths And Conspiracy Theories

History was made this week when the United Kingdom became the first country in the world to approve a coronavirus vaccine and the first doses of the Pfizer and BioNTech jab, made in Germany, are set to arrive in Britain and will be dispatched to 50 hospitals in the coming days.

As a consequence of the swiftness of development and anti-vaxxer conspiracy theories spreading online, there’s a tremendous amount of tension around the new vaccine.

Tom Phillips, from the leading fact-checker charity Full Fact, warned that since the beginning of the pandemic, they have seen wave after wave of misinformation which damages confidence in potential coronavirus vaccines and that bad information destroys lives.

He said that in previous pandemics and health situations around the globe, this type of misinformation has cost lives.

So, at Metro.co.uk they’ve done some research to discover the truth behind the main rumours on the internet and here are some myths that have been discredited:

That the vaccine alters your DNA – the main conspiracy theory about the vaccine presently is that it will change your DNA and a Facebook post asserts that the new vaccine for COVID 19 will alter your DNA and that it will encase itself into your structure and that you’ll become a genetically modified human being.

But this is not correct. However, it doesn’t clarify accurately how this type of jab works.

The Pfizer vaccine, alongside the preponderance of the COVID 19 vaccine candidates, is an RNA injection.

Conventional vaccines are created using weakened forms of the virus, but RNA based jabs instead use the virus’s genetic code.

When a person is injected, a molecule is introduced into the body which tells cells to produce a coronavirus spike protein and this protein, or antigen is then recognised by the immune system which produces antibodies and T cells in preparation against the infection.

It means if a person gets COVID 19, these antibodies are then triggered to combat the virus. It doesn’t alter the body’s DNA or swathe itself into your system.

RNA vaccines are normally viewed positively as they don’t involve using part of the virus itself and are affordable.

The Oxford University and AstraZeneca vaccine is not an RNA vaccine but instead uses an innocuous cold virus from chimpanzees modified in a lab to look like coronavirus when it enters the body.

Another claim suggests that the Pfizer jab is too cold to be a real vaccine and that it’s alive.

It is correct that the vaccine has to be stored at -70 degrees Celsius, but that’s just to prevent it from spoiling – no vaccine is alive and the coronavirus vaccine isn’t the only vaccine which needs to be stored at extremely low temperatures, the Ebola vaccine had to be transported at -60 degrees Celsius.

However, it’s difficult to sort out which whoppers are spewing propaganda, but should people be having a non-liable experimental mRNA vaccine with unknown long term side effects? Assuming that people will be heading out to get the vaccine.

Sadly nothing will ever persuade the tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorists that they might be wrong, on the other hand, they could be right, or are we all just sheep?

Although I don’t believe they sell tin foil hats anymore and sheep are good at making yarn from, although allowing the sheep not to be sheared could encumber them quite a bit.

And Pfizer isn’t squeaky clean, all you have to do is look at their track record.

Pfizer and its subsidiary Pharmacia & Upjohn Company paid $2.3 billion to settle criminal and civil liabilities for illegal promotion of their pharmaceutical products.

The amount included payment of more than $102 million in civil settlement to six whistleblowers of the company’s dishonest practices in 2009.

Bextra, an anti-inflammatory drug was removed from the market in 2005 due to safety concerns, which was marketed by the company for various off label uses.

The company also illegally promoted several other drugs, including antipsychotic drugs Geodin, antibiotic Zyvox, and antiepileptic drug Lyrica.

Healthcare providers received payments for prescribing these drugs to patients for off label use and fraudulent claims were submitted to government healthcare programmes, circumventing the insurance programmes.

The company had to pay approximately $1 billion to Medicare, Medicaid, and other government insurance programmes under the settlement.

Trans Teens Under 16 Can Get Puberty Blockers

A High Court has ruled that Trans children under the age of 16 can only consent to puberty blockers if they understand the nature of the treatment.

The ruling was given during a landmark case, in which Keira Bell, 23, brought legal action against Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust, which runs the UK’s only gender identity development service for children.

Keira Bell, who has since transitioned, started taking puberty blockers at 16 and went on to take cross-sex hormones and underwent a double mastectomy.

A second legal challenge was also put forward by Mrs A, the mother of a trans autistic girl, 16, on the waiting list for treatment.

Both Ms Bell and Mrs A asked the High Court to rule it unlawful for trans children to be prescribed hormone blockers without a ruling from the court that such treatment was in their best interests.

In reply, the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust said the claimants were attempting to impose a blanket exclusion on children under the age of 18 being able to consent to medical treatment, which they described as a radical proposition.

In a judgement, Dame Victoria Sharp, sitting with Lord Justice Lewis and Mrs Justice Lieven, said that children under 16 needed to comprehend the immediate and long term effects of puberty blockers before they receive them.

She described a child’s capacity to give valid consent as being able to understand, retain and weigh many factors involved in the treatment.

She noted these would include understanding the immediate consequences of the treatment in physical and psychological terms, and the reality that the vast preponderance of patients taking puberty-blocking drugs proceed to take cross-sex hormones, meaning they were a pathway to much greater medical intervention.

Dame Victoria also said children would need to comprehend the impact of the treatment pathway on future and life long relationships, and be mindful of the unknown physical consequences of taking puberty-blocking drugs and the fact that the evidence-based for this treatment is as yet highly uncertain.

She added that the court was only ruling on the informed consent of a child to take puberty blockers and not the benefits or disbenefits of the treatment and the judges noted that it was highly doubtful that a child of 13 or under would be competent to give consent and doubtful that a child or 14 or 15 could comprehend the long term risks and consequences of puberty blockers.

However, puberty blockers can be reversed by stopping the medication if the child later decides not to transition to another gender and puberty blockers can give transgender children a smoother transition into their chosen gender identity as an adult.

Of course, children and people make poor decisions all the time. People have breast implants and then regret them. People get married and then regret it. People have children and then regret them but you can’t stop someone doing something they’ve wanted for several years just because they might regret it, but what is important is that all trans teenagers must have access to a range of therapies to help them make the best decisions for themselves.

Puberty blockers are designed to prevent early transitions because they prevent puberty occurring until they’re old enough to decide on their own if they choose to transition as adults, which then makes the transition easier.

If they’re one of the very few who choose not to then transition they can simply quit taking the drug and allow puberty to occur.

This isn’t giving children the choice to transition early, it’s quite literally allowing them to become adults first before they make a life decision.

Shops To Remain Open Up To 24 Hours A Day In The Run-Up To Christmas

Stores could remain open 24 hours a day in the run-up to Christmas in a Government bid to boost England’s ailing high street.

Under the new plans, councils will be able to waive rules prohibiting retailer’s opening hours to help shop owners recoup sales lost during the coronavirus lockdown.

Announcing the move on Sunday, Communities Secretary Robert Jenrick said he wanted to ensure a more enjoyable and safe shopping experience for all.

Existing regulations state that any retailers wanting to extend their hours beyond 9 am to 7 pm from Monday to Saturday must apply for special permission, but Robert Jenrick said he wanted to suspend such processes, which can take weeks to help business owners after months of COVID 19 constraints.

The minister said stores should be able to determine their opening hours through December and January and even have the option of operating 24/7 services.

Robert Jenrick said that with these modifications local stores could open longer, ensuring more enjoyable and safer shopping with less stress on public transportation.

He continued that how long would be a matter of choice for the shopkeepers and at the discretion of the council, but that he would recommend they offer those hard-pressed entrepreneurs and businesses the greatest possible flexibility this festive season.

He said that as Local Government Secretary he was relaxing planning constraints and issuing an unambiguous request to councils to let businesses to welcome them into their glowing stores late into the evening and beyond if they desire.

He continued that those shops and supermarkets would be able to restock their racks whenever they wish, with flexible deliveries to keep the streets free for the rest of us when we’re out and about and he suggested that such modifications would enable to free our small business people to get on with earning a living.

The announcement came as England prepares to enter a fresh round of tiered constraints as the national lockdown concludes.

Under the new system, non-essential shops, gyms, beauticians and other personal care services will be permitted to open across the country, making a relaxation on the pre lockdown tiers, but several of Robert Jenrick’s Conservative colleagues believe the new measures too draconic, or unfair on specific areas, and the Government has scrambled to suppress a backbench uprising over their enforcement.

However, too many shop employees are already working long hours for very little income and usually don’t get enhancements for unsocial hours, so there needs to be some fairness and reasonableness for everyone in our society.

England used to be known for its sense of fair play, but now we’re turning into ‘I’m alright jack’ in a mini American society.

So, this now means that we can go shopping without a substantial meal and you might not have to go home until after 11 pm and COVID won’t attack us – extremely interesting because loads of stores will be heaving, with no social distancing or test and trace, so is this really about the virus?

I just hope that staff are paid appropriately for these unsociable hours, but then it appears that retail staff aren’t that important, but I guess if staff are willing to work, it might save them from losing their jobs and their businesses closing down.

This is similar to the ‘eat out to help out’ just so they can try and save the economy at Christmas, while the rich get richer and the working classes die, and it seems that London gets to open up like there’s no pandemic, while the rest of us are on tier 3.

Pensioner Jailed For Playing Classic FM Too Loudly Dies In Prison

An 83-year-old man who was imprisoned for constantly blaring Classic FM in his home has died while serving his sentence.

Ian Trainer was jailed for 24 weeks in February this year after he was found to have breached a condition of a restraining order, but he was jailed again after continuing to breach the order when he was released.

The pensioner was given a restraining order in 2019 which banned him from playing any audio at a volume exceeding normal talking level between the hours of 9 am and 10 pm.

The Ministry of Justice (MOJ) confirmed Ian Trainer had sadly passed away – a Prison Service spokesman said that the HMP Liverpool prisoner Ian Trainer died in hospital on the 24 November and that the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman had been informed.

The spokesman didn’t confirm the cause of Ian Trainer’s demise and said that it was a matter for the coroner.

At a hearing in February, Liverpool Magistrates Court heard how Ian Trainer’s neighbour, Thomas Michael Thompson, had experienced noise pollution from his neighbour’s property for many years.

On December 17, 2019, a police officer attended Ian Trainer’s property in Liverpool, after being called out for a noise complaint by Thomas Michael Thompson.

The court heard Ian Trainer told the officer that he enjoyed playing music at a level he enjoyed as he was being arrested for breaching the straining order.

The statement, read in court, also reported that Ian Trainer had said he had a nasty cold and could only hear in one ear. He also informed the officer that being on steroids for a medical illness meant he couldn’t wear headphones as they irritated his ears.

Ian Trainer was sentenced to 24 weeks in jail for breaching the order and the judge told the court that he’d played music at a level that induced distress.

Ian Trainer was also ordered to pay court costs of £600 and a further victim surcharge to Mr Thompson of £122.

The pensioner appeared again at Liverpool Crown Court in June via video link from HMP Altcourse and was remanded in custody.

He faced allegations of breaching the court order again by playing music too loudly.

Ian Trainer pleaded not guilty to the charge, arguing the accusations were vicious lies. He also said he had underlying health issues.

It’s not evident whether Ian Trainer, who had been before the courts numerous times in recent years relating to noise complaints, had been convicted of the new allegations at the time of his demise.

However, at 82, his hearing might not have been so good, either way, what sort of society puts an old man in jail for doing what he enjoys in his final years and doing no real harm to anyone else and then the system whines that it’s not got enough space in their prisons for murderers et cetera, that’s because it’s too full of old people who have been a tad mischievous.

And I bet there wouldn’t have been any objections if the neighbour had a liking of classical music, and this is the same pathetic society that arrested an old lady in her 70s for protesting outside the houses of parliament and handcuffed her and carried her spread eagle to put her face down in the back of the police van, which was horrendous.

Would it have not been more cost-effective to fit a bit of soundproofing in this mans home? He was old and perhaps a little bit deaf and this hardly warranted a prison sentence.

So, it was deemed appropriate to put this poor man in prison, yet we have terrorists wandering our streets, absolutely inexplicable.

The illegal Sterilisation Of Women In Prisons

A film that was shot over seven years, called the ‘Belly of the Beast’ uncovered a disturbing practice of tubal ligations in California.

In 2001 Kelli Dillon was a prisoner in Central California Women’s Facility when she started experiencing pain in her stomach.

A doctor, suspecting ovarian cysts, ordered a biopsy, but after the procedure, Kelli Dillon began having heart palpitations and night sweats, and her periods ceased.

The doctor had not only removed the cysts, but he’d also taken out her ovaries and she had been sterilised at the age of 24.

‘Belly of the Beast’, a documentary directed by Erika Cohn, chronicles Kelli Dillon’s brutal experience, which was shot over seven years, and which also follows Cynthia Chandler, the co-founder of Justice Now, an advocacy group for women prisoners, as the pair sought legal and financial redress.

Kelli Dillon’s discovery that a dozen other women in the prison had also been sterilised was the catalyst for further investigation by the group and later by Corey Johnson of the Centre for Investigative Reporting, a think tank.

Corey Johnson discovered evidence of 148 instances between 2006 and 2010 in which doctors in two prisons had performed unauthorised tubal ligations, the permanent blockage or removal of the fallopian tubes on prisoners.

Some women said that they were pressed to get the procedure, which was frequently added onto surgeries such as caesarean sections, others weren’t properly informed about what would take place.

Dr James Heinrich, who performed many of the procedures, told Corey Johnson he had been saving the state from having to pay welfare for unwanted children.

After the story broke, California’s lawmakers held hearings, at which both Ms Dillon and Ms Chandler testified and prohibited sterilisation as a form of birth control in prisons in 2014.

Data from a state audit, and prison records compiled by journalists working with Ms Cohn, revealed that between 1997 and 2013 nearly 1,400 women were sterilised while imprisoned in Californian correctional institutions.

‘Belly of the Beast’ was a difficult film to make and would-be financial backers initially found the premise preposterous and Ms Cohn had little access to her sources in prison and it was difficult to get access to records because some of the pivotal events had already occurred behind bars.

They decided to carefully reconstruct each memory, each moment, each constricted space, she said as she incorporated those into a compelling narrative with an assortment of interviews and archival footage.

This is all extremely horrific, totally unacceptable and illegal and nothing more than a concentration camp for women.

These women will suffer long term consequences for who knows how long throughout their lives.

Where were these women’s human rights? And it’s eugenics all over again.

Ms Cohn claims that the procedures were not an anomaly and that in the 20th-century eugenics programmes were standard in America and of the more than 30 states that enforced them, California was the biggest, with some 20,000 people forcibly sterilised between 1909 and 1979.

The programmes targeted people for reasons such as being feeble-minded, immoral or an addict, and frequently singled out ethnic minorities.

Virginia, which was second only to California in the number of people it sterilised, also continued with the policy until 1979, and more than a fifth of its approximately 8,000 victims was African American.

We’re Prepared!

An army of recruits is being taught on how to administer the life-changing COVID jab as Britain readies for the looming launch of the most major vaccine campaign in history.

The momentous programme could start within days as regulators at the Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Agency are expected to approve the vaccine forged by Pfizer and BioNTech this week.

In trials, it was found to be 95 per cent effective at preventing COVID infections.

Yesterday Nadhim Zahawi was named as the Government’s vaccine tsar, temporarily standing down from his position as a junior Business Minister to mastermind the rollout.

The MP revealed he’s been at the forefront of research, having volunteered to trial a vaccine for US firm Novavax.

He’s already received one jab and will have his second this week, but doesn’t know if he’s getting the vaccine or a placebo.

If the Pfizer vaccine is approved, deliveries could begin within hours – the Government has ordered 40 million doses, enough for 20 million people.

Ten million of these are scheduled for delivery next month, ready for injections to start as early as December 7.

First in line are likely to be NHS workers, especially as the vaccine needs to be stored at 70C and only hospitals have the necessary freezer facilities – social care workers and care home residents will be next in line.

Other vaccines in the pipeline, including one from Oxford University and AstraZeneca, from which the Government has ordered 100 million doses, have less demanding prerequisites.

GPs are set to offer vaccinations seven days a week, while mass vaccination centres will be set up and St John’s Ambulance is training 30,000 volunteers to assist.

Perhaps they should give it to all the politicians first because then at least if the vaccine isn’t safe, the country will be safe and there will be a ton of people out there that will refuse to take it because there’s no data for side effects.

This is a vaccine with a 99 per cent survival rate, but there will be people out there lining up to have the jab without asking any questions and this could end up in tears, and it appears that the pharmaceutical companies are confident, but will they be so confident and liable if things go wrong?

And there will be millions of people who will rush out to get this untested precarious vaccine, to have unknown toxins infiltrated into their bodies, not knowing if it will make them sick or not, and are we being used as guinea pigs?

And can we trust something that’s been made from desperation and hastiness?

This isn’t just about money, it more about power because if it were really about money, our Government wouldn’t have destroyed the global economy, it’s about agenda.

This is why Bill Gates is constantly talking about depopulation, and why was the World Economic Forum talking about the great reset? But whether you’re a conspiracy theorist or not! Will you get the jab or will you take your chances of contracting the virus?

Royal Shake-Up

Kate Middleton has drafted plans for an extreme shake-up of the monarchy when she becomes Queen Consort, as royal sources suggest she will transform ancient royal practices.

According to royal sources, Kate Middleton plans to revamp the monarchy when she becomes Queen Consort.

The Duchess of Cambridge wants to use her position when William ascends to the throne to become more personable to the British people and according to Us Weekly, Kate wants to be talking to the people more both in person and with broadcasts and could ditch some of the royal rules.

Talking on Royally Us, Us Weekly reporter Christine Garibaldi said that they were getting information on how Kate intends to change some of the royal rules when she becomes Queen Consort.

Co-host Molly Mulshine explained that evidently, she wants to be talking to the people more both in-person engagements and occasions as well as with broadcasts.

Christine Garibaldi responded that she didn’t believe that was unexpected and that in the last few months she’s become more relaxed doing that and that she’s done a ton of zoom calls and a ton of virtual chats, and more so than ever she’s been speaking one to one with the people.

She added that she thought it was amazing and that having a personable affinity is what a lot of people want.

Molly Mulshine said that she felt like she never really spoke that much and that now we’re hearing her all the time and that was wonderful.

Christine Garibaldi noted that it seems the Royal Family are extremely pleased with her and they’ve had reports that the Queen adores Kate and the Queen loves that she’s stepped up in the last few years and taken on a ton of other stuff and that she’s the head of eighteen different charities.

She’s putting in the work and she does a lot behind the scenes that we don’t see and Kate has encountered a surprising wave in popularity as a senior royal and the wife of future King, Prince William this year.

And a royal source told Us Weekly that Kate may alter some of the outdated royal rules when she becomes Queen Consort and the source continued that it used to be that you’d never see Kate at an event without William, but now she’s attending numerous official functions on her own – a sign that she’s ready to be queen.

But does Britain need a Royal Family? Perhaps we do, perhaps we don’t, but it’s fairly evident that the Royal Family is the envy of the world, even if it is a fairy tale that’s outstayed its welcome.

And even if the Royal Family was to go, then it must be replaced with something much better, although I’m not sure what we’d replace it with, probably a political dominion!

Talk about jumping out of the frying pan into the fire because they’re all mostly foreign bloodsuckers and perhaps we should vote on whether we want to keep these freeloaders.

They might have altered their surname to fit in but they’re from foreign lineage and the British monarchy should be as it says, British and not marauding scavengers, although I’m sure that our Government, particularly Boris Johnson would love the monarchy to be gone because without a monarchy, all we have is a dictatorship regime.

And of course, there will be no more Royals sponging off the taxpayer, no Royal homes to fund, but that wouldn’t work either because our Government would simply tax as more.

Anyhow, it will be a long time before the Duke of Cambridge advances to the throne. Assuming that Charles becomes King and lives that long, because William will be about pension age when he becomes King.

Brazil’s President Bolsonaro Declares He Will Refuse To Take COVID-19 Vaccine

Brazil’s president Jair Bolsonaro has said he won’t take a COVID 19 vaccine even after it receives approval from his own government and in a video shared to social media on Thursday, Jair Bolsonaro stated that he would not be taking the vaccine and that it was his right.

Brazil has recorded more than 170,000 coronavirus demises, making it the second worst-hit country in the world and Jair Bolsonaro encountered criticism for his handling of the pandemic, which has included playing down the virus, opposing lockdown measures and relentlessly promoting the drug hydroxychloroquine despite studies demonstrating it’s ineffective against COVID 19.

He caught COVID 19 himself at the beginning of July, and more than half of his cabinet had tested positive for the virus in recent months, but once any treatment is approved by Brazil’s health regulatory authorities, his government will immediately arrange its acquisition and issuance to those who want it.

But he added he was sure that Brazil’s parliament would not make immunisation compulsory.

Many nations are pinning their hopes on a vaccine to end the nightmare of the pandemic, with two jabs on the verge of approval by authorities after showing about 95 per cent effectiveness in trials.

On Wednesday, US-based pharmaceutical giant Pfizer gave the results of the tests of their candidate to the office of Brazil’s health regulators, a crucial step to endorse and register the vaccine – Brazil’s health ministry has already agreed to purchase 100 million doses of a different vaccine developed by AstraZeneca and Oxford University.

Perhaps Jair Bolsonaro’s terrified of needles or maybe he knows something that we don’t and I think that everyone’s going to be a tad nervous as this new drug has been created relatively quickly.

And what will the risks and dangers of the vaccine be? Will it confound and harm the immune system? And it appears that it’s money again and again that these pharmaceutical companies want.

Should we be taking something like this new vaccine when it’s so unexplored and not proven to work 100 per cent? But people may have no alternative but to have the vaccine because if they don’t, the Government and businesses will make sure you have restricted movement.

And whose responsibility will it be if and when the vaccine has bad side effects?

It needs to be made extremely apparent before people have the vaccine that it’s not been adequately trialled, with very little human trials.

Clinical trials move through stages, testing intervention in larger groups until they’re determined safe and effective.

These trials usually enrol 20 to 100 healthy volunteers or people with the condition being investigated and last several months.

This phase estimates safety by testing for any adverse side effects of the treatment, but not necessarily how effective the drug or device is.

About 70 per cent of possible new drugs enter phase two, which continues to gauge safety, while also examining how effective the treatment is and carefully studying its side effects.

Phase two trials recruit up to several hundred patients with the condition to take part. This phase generally lasts several months to two years and just 33 per cent of drugs make it to phase three, which tests the potential treatment on the largest number of people.

This phase measures both safety and effectiveness with numerous volunteers, sometimes thousands – phase three trials last from one to four years.

After phase three, a pharmaceutical company may submit a New Drug Application and the views from that will determine whether it’s endorsed or not so that pharmaceutical companies can begin marketing it to the public – in other words, it can take an extremely long time before it reaches the public.

Disaster For Boris Johnson

According to reports, eurosceptic Tory MPs have cautioned they could vote against any EU trade deal which intrudes on Britain’s sovereignty, even if it’s recommended by Boris Johnson.

The Government is presently trying to negotiate a new trade deal with Brussels. This would come into effect when the Brexit transition period finishes at the end of the year. However, talks stay deadlocked over European access to British fishing waters and the EU’s need for a regulatory level playing field.

And talking to a news outlet, a source close to the European Research Group (ERG), a Eurosceptic group of Tory backbenchers, delivered a warning to Boris Johnson.

They said ERG members could vote against the trade deal in the House of Commons unless their red lines were respected.

The source remarked that for Brexiteers, the overwhelmingly important issue is UK sovereignty and that if it’s not preserved in the final agreement, he had no doubt that they will vote against the treaty in whatever vote is called.

Whilst Britain formally left the EU at the end of January it stays in a Brexit position period until the end of this year.

During the time the United Kingdom retains membership of the European single market, it must continue paying into the EU budget, implementing Brussels legislation.

If no new deal is agreed Britain and the EU will trade on World Trade Organisation (WTO) terms, with tariffs on numerous products.

A second ERG figure also warned the group could vote against any trade deal Boris Johnson agrees with the EU and they said that their side had made it clear that they trust the Prime Minister on his red lines like sovereignty et cetera.

However, as a research group, they will read it before deciding and that in the unlikely event it doesn’t respect sovereignty MPs would vote against it.

If the ERG does oppose a trade deal agreed by Boris Johnson he may need the support of Labour MPs to get it through Parliament.

Sir Keir Starmer has previously demonstrated he’s keen for a new trade agreement to be reached and Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage has warned Brexit is now in danger amidst rumours of a compromise.

Earlier this month he announced his faction would be rebranded as the Reform Party and would campaign against coronavirus lockdowns and any concessions of sovereignty to Brussels.

It needs to be a good deal or no deal and it needs to be properly monitored to ensure none of the red lines are breached. After all, we wouldn’t want breaches like a hard border in Ireland or making sure there isn’t a fight over a few Cod, Haddock or Bass.

It needs a good deal because the repercussions don’t bare thinking about and for the United Kingdom to be truly Independent, the Withdrawal Agreement should be binned, otherwise, the United Kingdom becomes a Vassal State of the EU.

At present, the stage is still set for the Government to compromise to EU demands and then endeavour to peddle it as a victory.

Every detail of a deal must be examined, but watch out for Boris Johnson backing down.

Britain is not self-sufficient and hasn’t been for an extremely long time because we import at least 40 per cent of our food. Although we could grow more if there was an incentive to do so.

And it’s obvious that the EU want to hang on to us, they need our money and they don’t want us to be free of them in case we make a success being out of the EU, which might then encourage other members to leave.


Businesses Could Turn Away Customers

It’s been claimed that private firms could turn people away if they’ve not had a coronavirus vaccine and a senior cabinet official said that there’s nothing to stop companies from demanding customers having the jab.

However, Boris Johnson has said that Government would not force people to get vaccinated, saying that’s not the way they do things. However, a senior Whitehall source told a news outlet that they do believe that very quickly when the vaccine becomes available that all sorts of organisations will come to their own conclusions, and that to say fly or operate safely, businesses will decide it’s safer to ensure people have been vaccinated.

But that they can’t put the cart before the horse because vaccines haven’t yet been approved and they haven’t had to make those kinds of discussions yet.

Australian airline Qantas has already said it won’t let international passengers board their flights unless they have evidence they’ve been vaccinated against COVID 19.

CEO Alan Joyce said the move would be a necessity once constraints across the globe start to relax and he told Australia’s Nine Network that the company was presently looking at altering their terms and conditions to ensure all international travellers are vaccinated.

He went onto say that whether we need that domestically, they will have to wait and see what happens with COVID 19 and the market, but certainly, for international visitors coming out and people leaving the country, they believe that’s a necessity.

It’s expected that a coronavirus vaccine could be rolled out to the most vulnerable in the United Kingdom before the end of the year, with the preponderance of the population being vaccinated early next year.

Health Secretary Matt Hancock said life could start to go back to normal after Easter following the breakthrough in the Pfizer jab and Oxford vaccine, although this would depend on them being approved.

Although vaccines won’t be compulsory in the United Kingdom and Boris Johnson said everyone should be extremely pro-vaccine as he tore into anti-vax propaganda at a Downing Street press conference.

He estimated that the preponderance of people could be vaccinated by Easter if there was a favourable wind and chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty added that his advice or any medical practitioner’s advice would be that these should be voluntary vaccinations.

Businesses attempting to force vaccinations on people is against your human rights and I can see in the future numerous people suing – this is not Nazi Germany, well not yet anyhow.

And it’s so amusing because the Government are denying that they’re making the vaccine mandatory, but in fact, it appears they’re considering it.

%d bloggers like this: