|Posted by Miri on January 27, 2021 at 9:50 AM||comments (0)|
Spot the difference...
On the one hand, we have a leaflet written in clear and professional terms that invites its audience to think, by asking questions and presenting them with a wide array of source material, including both mainstream and "alternative" resources.
It doesn't make any unsubstantiated claims, it doesn't reduce the issue to simplistic, black and white terms, and it presents itself as a primer for further discussion. It doesn't suggest anyone is crazy, delusional, or stupid based on what conclusions they come to.
This is the leaflet written by the crazy, science-denyin', tin-foil-hat-totin', conspiraquack.
The other leaflet - ostensibly written by the sane, sensible, "pro-science" folk - is an exercise in cultish indoctrination and brainwashing. No sources provided. No evidence. No encouragement to think or question. Extremely strong implication that if you disagree, you're - at best - thick, but more probably, lethally dangerous and a menace to society.
Pro-tip: Something isn't "a myth" or "debunked" just because Snopes, the Guardian, or an unsourced leaflet says it is. I'm sorry to shatter anyone's illusions here, but people - including "experts" - do actually lie, and fudge and misrepresent figures and facts - and scientists, quite frankly, are easier to buy than politicians.
If you've ever asserted you're pro-vax because you trust "peer-reviewed research", you're just revealing you know nothing about peer-review.
By all means, read peer-reviewed research. But understand how corrupt and corruptible it is. The former editor of one of the most respected peer-reviewed journals in the world stated: "It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgement of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine."
What this means is that no-one's going to spoon-feed you the answers, including and especially "experts". You have to - and I know this can be very scary at times and many people have decided they'd rather outsource such an ominous task to the Government - think for yourself.
That hasn't been "debunked" (yet, but I'm sure the BBC is working on it).
|Posted by Miri on December 10, 2020 at 7:15 PM||comments (0)|
I was talking to a friend last night about the HPV vaccine. Her daughter didn't have it - one of only a tiny smattering of pupils in her year who didn't - and at first, she wasn't at all happy about this. It wasn't just that she didn't want to be the odd one out amongst her friends, but rather, that her form tutor was repeatedly aggressively asking her, "so you want cancer, do you? You know you're going to get cancer if you don't get this vaccine, don't you?"
Cue my friend having to reassure her terrified 12-year-old daughter that, no, declining a neurotoxic injection full of detergents and sterilants was NOT going to doom her to a grisly cancer death (there remains no evidence whatsoever that the HPV vaccination has or ever will prevent a single case of cancer, though cervical cancers in the age-group that have had the vaccine have increased).
On vaccination day, my friend's daughter came home from school and declared, "Mum, you were right, I'm SO glad I didn't have that vaccine."
She then regaled her mother with the tale of how, prior to summoning the pupils into the school hall for vaccination, gym mats were rolled out across the floor. This was because the school was fully anticipating pupils to pass out.
Upon the vaccination being administered, several instantly fainted, and one began convulsing and had to be taken away in an ambulance. The school wasn't in the least perturbed, clearly used to this happening every year.
Amongst my social circle alone, I've heard reports of: girls having to lock themselves in the school toilets as staff bang on the door and shout at them trying to force them to have the vaccine; girls being cornered in rooms by multiple staff members and physically forced to have it; girls being taunted by peers and staff alike that if they don't get the vaccine, they will die of cancer. These are 12-year-olds.
In all of the above cases, the parents had clearly and unambiguously stated they did NOT consent to their daughters having the vaccine.
However, schools have full legal coverage to give the vaccine anyway, and many do so under extreme duress, because of a nasty little law called "Gillick competency", which declares that, if a medical professional deems a child "competent to understand the issues", they can consent to their own medical treatment without parental consent or even knowledge. What this means in practice is adult authority figures coercing children into receiving invasive medical procedures and then bullying them into not telling their parents. This is happening all the time, in schools up and down the country.
We need a robust challenge to the Gillick ruling to ensure children are no longer ruthlessly exploited and coerced into doing things they don't understand, and we need the law to put medical decisions for children back where they belong - with parents.
The only organisation I am aware of that is looking to challenge Gillick competency is the Freedom Alliance political party, which I've recently joined. Please have a read of their page on medical consent, including vaccine mandates and Gillick competency, and if you like what you read, do consider joining as a member.
I know many of us have our reservations about the political system, but I think at this point we need to try everything we can to stop the juggernaut that's coming. If Gillick can be used to force HPV vaccines on children, it can and will be used to force Covid ones, too.
While we have a political system and have the means to organise and challenge, let's use it.
|Posted by Miri on December 6, 2020 at 3:55 AM||comments (0)|
I wrote a post a couple of days ago, about us crazy, science-denyin', lizard-lovin', conspiraquackster anti-vaxxers, which gained an unexpectedly large response.
I asked how many times people who are effectively unvaccinated (e.g. have received no vaccines in the last ten years, since most or all vaccines are effective for no more than ten years) have died in that period, or otherwise contracted serious health problems as a result of their unvaccinated status. The responses were quite illuminating and instructive, and you can see them here: https://www.facebook.com/miri.anne8/posts/10157453423336034
So, in the interests of fairness and balance (since this is my Facebook page and not the BBC), I now throw the floor open to the fully vaccinated to tell us all about the wonderful, vibrant health they are enjoying courtesy of their comprehensive and regular vaccinations, and how they definitely DON'T have auto-immune diseases, serious allergies, asthma, eczema, diabetes, depression, OCD, dyslexia, Coeliac disease, POTS, POCS, Crohn's, UCD, IBD, IBS, infertility, cancer, Alzheimer's, or any of the other modern maladies that have "inexplicably" exploded right in line with the ever-increasing vaccination schedule.
And on the subject of said vaccination schedule, if you want to qualify as "fully vaccinated" by today's standards, that means:
*Five doses of the DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis) vaccine
*Five doses of the IPV (inactivated polio virus) vaccine
*Three doses of the Hib (haemophilus influenzae type b) vaccine
*Three doses of the Hep B (hepatitis B) vaccine
*Three doses of the Men B (meningitis B) vaccine
*Two doses of the Rotavirus vaccine
*Two doses of the PCV (pneumococcal) vaccine
*Two doses of the MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccine
*Two doses of the HPV (human papilloma virus) vaccine
*One dose of MenACWY (meningitis) vaccine
*Annual flu vaccine
That is what is currently being pumped into the nation's children by the age of fourteen, with the vast majority of it being administered by the age of three. So, adult pro-vaxxers, if you're not up to date on all the above, including regular boosters at least every ten years, not only are you not "fully vaccinated", you might even be "unvaccinated", since the overwhelming majority of adults are not up to date on their booster shots (without which, any "immunity" effect from vaccines wears off).
Anyway, though, for those of you who are genuinely fully vaccinated, or at least regularly vaccinated, please do regale us all below with tales of the wonderful health and vitality you are enjoying as a result. I am genuinely curious to know, because my experience is that pretty much invariably and without exception, those who receive regular vaccinations are in much poorer health than those who eschew them, but hey, I'm sure my tin-foil hat's just on a bit too tight (although this can't actually starve the brain of oxygen, unlike your mask...).
|Posted by Miri on December 5, 2020 at 4:00 AM||comments (0)|
I just saw someone on Twitter smugly ask, "so anti-vaxxers, if a vaccine was released tomorrow that stopped cancer, are you telling me you wouldn't take it?". Bless, nobody said they were the sharpest tools (repeated injections with neurotoxins will do that to ya, I guess), but they really don't get what the "anti" part of "anti-vaccine" means, do they?
Anyway, there is a vaccine already that purports to stop cancer. It's called Gardasil, and has one of the most atrocious safety profiles of any vaccine to date, which is really saying something. Needless to say, there is no evidence it has ever prevented a single case of cancer.
Pro-vaxxers, please pay attention. No disease, most certainly including cancer, was ever caused by a deficit of neurotoxins, detergents, disinfectants, carcinogens, industrial chemicals, or monkey kidney cells (oh yes, these are all common vaccine ingredients, go look it up). Disease at its root has three primary causes: toxicity from the environment; nutritional deficiencies; inflammation.
Vaccines are known to cause two out of three of these. Because of the method of delivery - injection, not ingestion - the fact that their toxic components come in "tiny amounts" does not render them harmless - far from it. Because vaccines are delivered straight to the bloodstream, bypassing all the body's natural defence and detoxification pathways, this means vaccinations represent an acute exposure to toxicity, and can and do cause all manner of serious illnesses, both chronic and acute. Most modern maladies, especially the sudden explosion of chronic illness in children (54% of American children now have at least one chronic illness) are either caused or exacerbated by vaccines.
Second, inflammation: it is a known fact - any vaccine clinic will confirm this - that vaccines cause inflammation. That is why vaccine clinics can predict their patients are at a heightened risk for depression soon after the vaccine, because the root cause of depression in many cases is not "a chemical imbalance in the brain" (this is nothing but a marketing slogan to flog antidepressants; it was never backed up by credible evidence), but bodily inflammation. Inflammation is also now known to be the driving cause of many other chronic conditions, such as heart disease (NOT caused by high cholesterol - another marketing ploy to sell statins and low-fat diet books. Actually, high cholesterol is protective and linked with longevity, whilst low cholesterol is linked with premature death, including from suicide).
Another pro-vaxxer marvelled at the fact that us crazy whackaloon types "don't trust your doctor, don't trust the NHS, don't trust the WHO, so who do you trust?"
I know this is a really alien concept to those in the chronic and possibly terminal throws of expertitis, but I trust MYSELF. I trust my God-given intelligence and discernment to read, to think, to study, to evaluate, and to draw conclusions based on credible evidence and real-world experience, not media soundbites and talking heads (including "my doctor" - not that I have one, having deregistered from the GP years ago - given doctors are some of the most breathtakingly clueless people about the workings of the human body I have ever encountered).
It seems to drive "normies" into a state of demented frenzy and rage when I say this, because WHO DO I THINK I AM?! I'm not a doctor. Not a scientist. Not an "expert".
They actually seem to find it offensive that I am of the view that the person best qualified to and most responsible for protecting my health is, er, me.
And that ultimately is why we are in this mess. Courtesy of 12+ years of the state indoctrination camps we call "schools", too many people believe it is not "their place" to think for themselves, but instead to meekly outsource all their thinking and decision-making to "experts". This reality is deeply depressing on many levels, but answer me this, normies: if you have a vaccine or other pharmaceutical intervention and are left severely damaged and disabled as a result, who is going to be left with the responsibility for dealing with that?
No. You. You are. If the aforementioned "experts" won't take 100% responsibility for any and all potential adverse effects (and they most certainly won't), why are you letting them take 100% responsibility for making decisions about your health?
I once again prevail upon all silent readers of my page to please THINK for themselves. As yet, the government hasn't slapped any bans, restrictions, or fines on this activity, so please do squeeze it in whilst you still can...
|Posted by Miri on October 10, 2020 at 5:45 AM||comments (0)|
It's most interesting to note it is all the more "right-wing" newspapers and figures opposing lockdown (Daily Mail, Telegraph, Spiked, and their various journalists and contributors), whilst the holy "liberal" (har de har) shibboleths of the Guardian, BBC and Independent keep up their banshee-like shrieking for ever tighter restrictions.
When the death count does really start to sharply rise, as it will very soon, courtesy of 'flu vaccines, contaminated test kits, months of sedentary solitary confinement, and filthy face nappies, this will then be used as another stick to beat the "evil right-wingers" with (bearing in mind the definition of "right winger" is now - quite dizzyingly perversely, given we ostensibly have a Conservative government - anyone who disagrees with the state on anything).
Once the deaths start spiking and the hospital beds start filling up - as happens every "flu (vaccine) season" - the "right wing" (e.g. any and everyone who has ever opposed lockdown restrictions) will be painted as selfish, reckless, science-denying granny-killers, whilst the noble, holy, Guardianistas, who obediently sacrificed their entire lives upon state command and begged for ever more to be taken away from them, will be canonised as altruistic saints whose advanced intellects and superior moral compasses allowed them to have the foresight and to make the sacrifices that the "right wingers" were just too evil, selfish, and thick to do.
Have you noticed how all the anti-lockdown protests are ALWAYS characterised by the press as "right wing", when there is no evidence those attending share any particular political allegiance? Has the press made any attempt to interview protestors in significant numbers and establish the most common political leanings? Of course not, so why this relentless mischaracterisation? It's because the whole thing is being carefully stage-managed to set up anyone who opposes Holy State and Dear Leader as "right wing", a slur we have all been taught to conflate with the worst character traits and historical figures imaginable.
So, the more the "right wing" mainstream press and talking heads oppose lockdown, and the more the "liberal" ones support it, the more I worry about what the endgame is with this, and whether it is about - very cleverly and persuasively, certainly - stage-managing us into a trap. The oldest trick in the post-war book - Reductio ad Hitlerum.
In short: anyone who opposes the state-us quo is a Nazi.
(Never mind the fact Nazi is an abbreviation of National SOCIALIST - why let the truth get in the way of a good story? The state certainly never has.)
|Posted by Miri on October 5, 2020 at 5:30 AM||comments (1)|
Facebook showed me a rather pertinent and prophetic "memory" this morning, which I reproduce below.
A further poignant twist is that I vividly remember writing it, sitting in The Graduate pub in York, an establishment I had happily sauntered into veritably flaunting my nose and mouth, where I had been greeted by the smiling faces of PPE-free staff (ah, those halcyon days when pubs looked like pubs and not medical detainment facilities!), and no-one wanted my personal details to pass onto the state in case they wanted to incarcerate me. Can you believe the human race made it as far as 2020 routinely deploying such reckless and cavalier disregard for our safety?!
From October 5th, 2019
THINGS THE HEALTH SECRETARY DOESN'T WANT TO MANDATE:
*Healthy, affordable, unprocessed food;
*A clean food chain free of glyphosate and other carcinogens, poisons, and anti-nutrients;
*Uncontaminated water free from aluminium, chlorine, fluoride, and other hazardous materials;
*Clean air free from pollutants;
*Safe food containers free of endocrine disruptors;
*Safe medicines free from mutagens, sterilants and carcinogens
THINGS THE HEALTH SECRETARY DOES WANT TO MANDATE:
Conclusion: Mandating vaccines is not about optimising the nation's health. The health epidemics currently ravaging the country - obesity, diabetes, heart disease, cancer, dementia, and autism - are not caused by a lack of vaccination.
Whilst cancer is now projected to affect one in two people, and millions suffer the crippling consequences of autism, diabetes, dementia, and other chronic conditions, the current measles 'epidemic' is affecting 0.0004% of the population. Of those 0.0004%, approximately 0.01% will experience serious complications as a result.
Given these facts, I'd be most interested indeed to see the figures that show vaccinating millions on the public purse is cheaper than treating measles, mumps, rubella etc. Of course, it isn't, because a) vaccination doesn't reliably prevent outbreaks; even 100% vaccinated populations can experience them, and b) in the overwhelming majority of cases, measles and other childhood diseases are trivial and benign, and require no treatment whatsoever from the NHS.
So, Health Secretary, why this obsessive focus on mild and brief infections, which only in exceptional cases require hospital treatment? Measles and mumps are not bringing the NHS to its knees; diabetes and autism are. Chicken pox is not causing catastrophic crises throughout social care; dementia is. 50% of people aren't getting rubella; they're getting cancer.
There are myriad proven ways to prevent and treat the chronic conditions listed above (note that the HPV vaccine isn't one of them, as it has never been shown to prevent a single case of cancer), but rather than use the state propaganda organs - sorry, 'free press' - to promote these, instead, those charged with preserving and promoting national health want to mandate injections of known neurotoxins, carcinogens, and sterilants, which have never been shown to improve a nation's health or longevity (quite the contrary, in fact).
Powerful figures behind mass vaccination drives openly state their commitment to significantly depopulating the world. People who prioritise depopulating the planet have no incentive to protect or preserve life, so clearly that's not really what vaccines are for.
Obviously, pointing out this flagrant discrepancy in global policy makes me a conspiracy theorist. To avoid that label, it's important you see what authority figures tell you to see, rather than using your brain and your eyes, and seeing what is actually there.
''The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.'' - George Orwell, 1984
|Posted by Miri on September 17, 2020 at 8:00 AM||comments (1)|
My position since they closed the schools has been that, when they do reopen them, it will be for one reason and one reason only - mass vaccination. Once this has been accomplished, the schools will be shut again - this time permanently.
(Please see my earlier post on why permanent closure of the schools is a major agenda item: https://www.miriaf.com/apps/blog/show/48836324-schools-brave-new-normal-).
The schools have barely been back two weeks, and I'm already hearing reports they're vaccinating children, and not just without parental consent, but without even informing the parents first that a vaccination drive is taking place - and I'm sorry to say that this has been going on for years and it's effectively impossible to challenge after the event, due to two completely diabolical rulings, known as 'Gillick competency; and 'implied consent'.
Gillick competency really only applies to secondary-aged children (although there is no set age where a child becomes Gillick competent, and I certainly wouldn't put it past schools to use it on older primary pupils), and it is a law which states that if a medical professional considers an underaged child "competent to understand the issues involved", they can consent to medical procedures without parental consent or even knowledge. So your 12-year-old child could come home from school having received a vaccination or series of vaccinations and you would never know, unless the child at some point decided to tell you. I have heard more than one report of a girl in her early teens suddenly developing health problems such as PCOS, with the family at a loss as to where they've come from - until eventually discovering she received the HPV vaccine at school, even when the family had expressly contacted the school beforehand to revoke consent. That doesn't matter, because legally, consent for vaccination doesn't reside with the parent, but with the child. Schools pay lip service to the idea of parental consent by sending out forms to lull the parents into a false sense of security - "we would never medically assault your child behind your back! Who do you think we are?!" - but they would and they do. Even when the children know their parents have said no and they don't want it themselves, the pressure from the school, including their peers ("oh, so you want cancer then, do you?") can be too much.
Schools have a very loose definition of "consent" where it comes to applying vaccination, and this interpretation is aided and abetted by the WHO's position on the matter, which states:
"the physical presence of a child or adolescent at the vaccination session, is considered to imply consent." Parents may be informed in advance this session is taking place "sometimes".
Bottom line: Children can and will be vaccinated without parental consent or knowledge and there is no way to know for definite whether this has happened. Mass vaccination drives are the only reason the establishment wants children back in schools, and these vaccines (whatever they are; I'm hearing reports of children coming home reporting receiving "multiple" jabs) are being used to create the "second wave".
Bill Gates warned us - grinning and sniggering all the while, ecstatic with duper's delight - that the second wave "will really get their attention". So, he is telling us: there IS going to be severe ill health this time. People we know ARE going to be dying and dead. I see no evidence the overlords are capable of creating mass ill health by releasing something into the air - but they can do it by injecting something into people. It could be something that sheds (live virus vaccines, such as the MMR, shed the infection for up to six weeks afterwards, making the recipients contagious; it's why recently-vaccinated persons are asked not to visit cancer wards).
I know this is such a difficult decision because removing children from school can seem like an impossible option (if the parents need to work, or have opposing views), but please be aware of what schools can and do do to children, and that they will probably be closing down permanently soon anyway. The system currently, where if one child tests positive for coronavirus (on a totally inappropriate and flawed test known to regularly throw up false positives), dozens of others are sent home for weeks, is obviously completely unsustainable and it is meant to be. As I said in my post linked at the top, they are purposely making schools unsustainable in the long-term as they want them (and colleges and universities) closed down permanently and all learning moved online; the only reason - the ONLY reason - they are open right now is to get the children mass-poisoned - sorry, "vaccinated" - to create a tidal wave of ill health that will "really get our attention".
If you're able to get your children out of schools, please do seriously consider it. If you can't, make sure they know they have your permission to walk off school premises if any pressure is put on them to receive a vaccination and you will come and collect them, or arrange a taxi.
We are in a war, and the enemy is not honourable. They will play dirty. We must be forewarned and forearmed, especially when they target the children, which they always do, because evil is always after the children. Everything that can be done to protect them at the moment must be the priority.
|Posted by Miri on September 5, 2020 at 8:00 AM||comments (0)|
I went to a pub yesterday - or rather, I tried to - and had barely set foot in the door when a girl in a visor pointed a gun at my head and said brightly:
"Can I take your temperature please."
No question mark, because it wasn't a question. I spun on my heel and got out of there as quickly as I possibly could. The most disturbing part about this was that the pub was full and bustling. People obviously didn't mind.
"What's the problem, it's just taking your temperature, it doesn't harm you, just calm down and get on with it, Karen."
That will have been the mentality of every punter in there. It's "just taking your temperature", just like it's "just a mask", and it's "just two metres" and yes, we all know where that line of thinking ends (hint: it doesn't. It never ends. It becomes used to justify anything and everything).
It's so thoroughly depressing that people would submit to having a gun pointed at their heads (the psychological connotations of that are obvious and the health effects of the infrared ray are unknown) and volunteer private, personal health information to total strangers in order to have a drink in a pub. Today, they take your temperature, but what will it be tomorrow? Your weight? Your blood pressure? Your vaccination status?
And, of course, it will be the latter and that's what this, the gun-pointing, is all building up to. Normalising the idea of having a scan and a health-check at the door before you go in anywhere. If pubs have already casually and successfully sold the idea to people that it's perfectly fine, sane, and normal to be temperature-checked before you go in, it's no leap at all to being vaccination-checked. And this is something I am profoundly concerned about, because how do we tackle it? I don't think the government will "force" the vaccination; I don't think they'll be going door-to-door and I don't think they'll go against parental wishes and do it covertly at school (not after so many parents have made such a racket and it's even made the press; it would be too much of a headache for them).
What I do think is that they will effectively lock those of us who don't comply out of society. The mask-wearing is a beta-test, intended to make those who don't wear one feel intimidated and unwelcome in society to the extent they start to acclimatise to not fully participating in it, and it's worked very well, but at least there is some legal and medical protection for not wearing a mask. Medical exemptions for masks are generally (not always, but generally) recognised and the law states you need provide no proof or letter from a doctor.
However, the same is not so for vaccination. Getting a medical exemption for vaccination is harder than pulling hen's teeth (even if you had a child so profoundly injured by a vaccine they died, and it was proven in court the vaccine killed them, this still wouldn't be enough reason for their siblings to be granted a medical exemption). Therefore, refusing the vaccine will be seen as a "lifestyle choice" with no medical justification, meaning shops, pubs, and other private businesses will be able to simply shut you out, the same way they can currently refuse service to people who don't want to have their temperature checked.
How do we tackle this? It's patently obvious that most people are prepared to submit to literally anything "to go back to normal" (which we never are, but little carrots of normality will be dangled under our noses in return for compliance) so I think a lot of people, even those somewhat vaccine-sceptic, will, when push comes to shove, think, "oh well, it might make me a bit ill for a few days like the flu vaccine, but it's worth it to go back to normal". And, even more sinister, I think many employers might try to mandate it - I think they would be on dicey ground if they actually tried to fire someone for not being vaccinated, but they could make working life very difficult, and insist you must work in isolation (and, perhaps, a gold star, to denote your filthy unvaccinated status). Or just insist you work from home permanently.
So this is my concern: I think we can avoid the vaccine, I think we can avoid the test. But how do we avoid effectively living the rest of our lives under house-arrest, if private businesses determine we can't enter without providing proof of vaccination status? Which they can do. We have no God-given "right" to enter any particular shop or business. Their businesses, their rules (hence rules about trainers and caps and other such things in clubs, and now temperature-checking in pubs).
That's my worry. They're going to use the vaccination to lock us out of the world.
What can we do?
|Posted by Miri on August 26, 2020 at 11:10 AM||comments (0)|
I am very, very concerned about the re-opening of the schools and the more I see and read, the more I feel I must strongly advise anyone with school-aged children, don't send them back.
I know it's not as simple as that for parents who need to work, who don't have the support to homeschool, or whose older children are insisting themselves they will go back. But please think really carefully in the time we have left about what your options are. Could you use FB to link up with other nearby, like-minded families and support each other with homeschooling? (You'd be amazed at the connections you can use FB to make - I moved to Huddersfield last October, and when I arrived, I had no friends here at all - now, I have a big group of them that I meet with at least weekly; all thanks to FB!)
If your children are very young and you need extra hands-on support at home, have you thought about crowdfunding for a nanny or au pair? With the jobs market in tatters, I bet you'd be flooded with applications and would be doing a good deed for whoever you employ in helping keep them independent. Don't be shy to ask for financial help if you need it, and crowdfunding does work. Anyone wanting to do a campaign like this, let me know and I'll post it on my page.
If you've got older children who are demanding they must return to school, I wouldn't rule out bribing them to stay at home - ! This is only a short-term solution to keep them safe whilst the schools do their worst (I maintain my belief the schools will be closed permanently after a month or two as we enter the "second wave"). Of course bribing children is morally questionable, but at this point I would be doing anything possible to keep them at home - and frankly, bribing does work (I once knew a family where the parents told their delinquent, failing son they would give him £100 for every A he got at GCSE - they ended up nearly bankrupting themselves as he got a run of nearly completely straight As....). Obviously, this also depends on family resources, but you could promise them something for the future if you can't guarantee it now. Anything just to get them to cooperate in the short-term and keep them out of school.
I know this is an extraordinarily difficult area to navigate, but please heed the warnings of increasingly large numbers of people, including the Irish teacher's statement I posted yesterday and this short video from Sweden (in English, linked below). You could show this to older children, if you think they'd be receptive.
Schools are not a safe place for your children and the authorities are doing everything possible to make damn sure that they're not. Ultimately, once your child leaves your care at the school gates, you have no control over what happens to them next. Please think about what you're going to do very, very carefully, and as I say, don't be scared to ask for help (of whatever stripe) if you need it.
|Posted by Miri on August 15, 2020 at 11:45 AM||comments (0)|
I really don't want to scaremonger anyone, but I'm following the rapidly escalating developments in other countries, and I think it's very likely the "quarantines" already instituted in New Zealand are coming here.
In case you were unaware, NZ is now quarantining anyone who tests positive for coronavirus - regardless of whether they have any symptoms of illness - in state-controlled "facilities".
Who knows what's happening to people in these places, but bear in mind, in the UK, the Coronavirus Act allows the state and its agents to forcibly "treat" people against their will. Forced testing? Medicating? Ventilating? All could be happening in these quarantine facilities, and no-one would know, because medical staff are all gagged from speaking out about what's really going on.
I can imagine a situation in the UK where both positive-tested people and anyone they've come into contact with (family members, work colleagues, school friends) are ordered into quarantine. I could see this happening concurrently with ongoing power cuts, making it difficult or impossible for people to alert others via phone calls or social media that this is happening. Many people may not make it alive out of quarantine, and we will be told they died of the virus.
I sincerely hope these concerns are far-fetched conspiratorial nonsense, but frankly, everything about this current situation would have sounded that way six months ago, so we must consider even the most extreme possibilities.
In order to avoid any risk of state officials ordering you off to quarantine camps, it is of the utmost importance that you are never tested for this virus and that you do not ever submit details for track and trace. I would also advise caution with taking your phone out and using your bank card anywhere (pay cash only), because I certainly wouldn't put it past them to track us that way, too.
I would also advise extreme caution with children returning to school, because not only are they at risk of being tested there (remember that because of the Gillick competency ruling, parental consent or even knowledge is NOT required), but there is no fail-safe way of protecting them from track and trace given that all the schools have a daily list of who is in attendance. Whole communities could be marched off to quarantine if just one child tests positive.
I know many families are not in a position to home-school, so in these situations, please make sure your child is as armed as possible with the facts (see my vaccine site aimed at teenagers: www.striveuk.webs.com). If they're old enough, tell them to walk out if anyone tries to administer any test or vaccine to them. Have them sign a statement prior to school starting stating that they do not consent to testing or vaccination, and make sure this statement is sent via recorded post to at least three members of staff, and that they acknowledge receipt.
I think the state will stop short of actually, physically dragging anyone off against their will, because of a complex number of factors, not least some strange clause in their "moral code" that seems to require our "consent" for all the ruthless brutality they subject us to. But what they will do is use the mantle of their supposed authority to put huge, huge pressure on us to comply, including through lying and issuing threats. They will tell you that you "have to", that it's "mandatory", etc. and use trickery and linguistic sleights of legalese to manufacture your consent.
It will be a lot easier to avoid all this if they don't have cause to come to your house. The overlords are not omnipotent and don't have endless resources. They're not going to be knocking on every door in the country; they're going to be going for the "low-hanging fruit", people who have tested positive or participated in track and trace or are otherwise implicated in being a "virus risk". So it's really important to make sure you're not giving them any reason to pay you a visit.
I know a lot of us are looking into the Magna Carta and other ways to challenge the corrupt and illegitimate statutes and acts that are enabling this situation, and we should keep doing that. But there is no magic bullet, no "get out of jail free" card - including Q, Trump, The Plan etc. There may be some kind of value or validity in all of these things, but we've got to be aware of the WHOLE picture and how many different angles they're coming at us from. Quarantines, vaccines, food shortages, power cuts, unemployment, etc. etc. - there's no one way of addressing everything we may have to face, so just keep learning and keep being aware, because to be forewarned is to be forearmed.