Sunday, May 31, 2020

66|0011|171 The timeline of the secret meetings - deliberate intentions to make the people of the UK sick/sicker/sickest/



VOBE 31 May 2020
10:58

 This is in progress so please check back & if you could sign the petitions - 323703, 32


huge gaps between evidence provided and policy decisions
throughout resulting in huge policy leaps from meeting to meeting with no evidence as to why  




SAGE MEETING DATE
SAGE NOTES

CROWN'S SERVANTS / AGENTS ACTIONS

04.02.2020
"It is possible that school closures would be less effective than in previous epidemics

SAGE heard that NERVTAG advises that there is limited to no evidence of the
benefits of the general public wearing facemasks as preventative measure."


18.02.2020
"Chloroquine represents potential treatment that is low cost and widely available. However, SAGE is unaware of any
clinical trials assessing its effectiveness"

Chloroquine is not mentioned again from this point




25.02.2020
"The risk of public disorder in the UK — defined to include opportunistic crime, community tension and rioting — is assessed to be very low in response to an epidemic"


25.02.2020
"SAGE discussed a paper modelling four non-pharmaceutical interventions: university and school closures, home isolation, household quarantine and social distancing, including use of interventions in combination"
*Lockdown looks like it came from study







27.02.2020
"SAGE reviewed Covid-19 planning assumptions and advised that, in the reasonable worst case scenario, 80% of the UK population may become infected, with an overall 1%
fatality rate in those infected" 








03.03.2020
"There is currently no evidence that cancelling large events would be effective"

This is when the behavioural science come to the fore on message and
communication 

05.03.2020
"HMG should plan for the introduction of behavioural and social interventions within 1-2 weeks to contain and delay, depending on progress of the epidemic.

SAGE claims that the science supports combination of case isolation and
whole family isolation"



05.03.2020

SAGE agreed there is no evidence to suggest that banning very large
gatherings would reduce transmission. Preventing social interaction in public spaces,
including restaurants and bars, would have an effect, but would be very difficult to
implement. 

05.03.2020

Cocooning of older and vulnerable patients can start later, and would have
to continue longer, than other measures. 

10.03.2020

Social distancing ("cocooning") is for those 70 and over, as well as those of
any age in vulnerable groups.
The modelling concludes that restricting this group to 70+, rather than 65+
would not cause significant increase in numbers of deaths. 

16.03.2020
"The science" suggests additional social distancing measures should be introduced as soon as possible
While SAGE's view remains that school closures constitutes one of the less effective single measure to reduce the epidemic peak, „„it may nevertheless become necessary to
introduce school closures in order to push demand for critical care below



23.03.2020







26.03.2020
"Prepare public for hospital admission" via Gov message




Surveillance of internet use and mobile phones


29.03.2020



Beds not at full capacity




31.03.2020



No exponential growth


 Bed occupancy not reached saturation



07.04.2020

"Face masks would have minimal effect"




Transmission slowing

However a new study commissioned on masks, clearly somebody wants them




09.04.2020



Excess deaths linked to fall in GDP

The WHO ~~no conclusive evidence facemasks are effective, yet still a push to find "evidence"


14.04.2020




Deaths plateauing,
transmission in decline

Evidence for facemasks is weak

Deep recession would have significant impact on health

'R' rate below 1 in the community


21.04.2020 





Face mask evidence is weak but advise to wear them anyway

Vaccine immunity will differ from natural immunity






28.04.2020





Virus could last on face mask for up to 7 days

Closer contact than 2m poses very low risk

Borders still open, imported cases could increase
30.04.2020





Plan to vaccinate the entire UK population for flu this winter

01.05.2020






Concern over false negatives, despite "highly accurate PCR"

No concern over false positives

Behavioural scientists promote advise to "maximise adherence"



a
 SAGE 1 minutes: PrecautionPrecautionary SAGE meeting on Wuhan Coronavirus (WN-CoV)  - 22 January 2020ary  
SAGE 2 minutes: Second SAGE meeting on Wuhan Coronavirus - 28 January 2020
SAGE 3 minutes: Third SAGE meeting on Wuhan Coronavirus (WN-CoV) - 3 February 2020
SAGE 4 minutes: Fourth SAGE meeting on Wuhan Coronavirus (WN-CoV) - 4 February 2020
SAGE 5 minutes: Fifth SAGE meeting on Wuhan Coronavirus (WN-CoV) - 6 February 2020
SAGE 6 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 11 February 2020
SAGE 7 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 13 February 2020
SAGE 8 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 18 February 2020
SAGE 9 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 20 February 2020
SAGE 10 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 25 February 2020
SAGE 11 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 27 February 2020
SAGE 12 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 3 March 2020
SAGE 13 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 5 March 2020
SAGE 14 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 10 March 2020
SAGE 15 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 13 March 2020
SAGE 16 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 16 March 2020
SAGE 17 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 18 March 2020
SAGE 18 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 23 March 2020
SAGE 19 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 26 March 2020
SAGE 20 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 29 March 2020
SAGE 21 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 31 March 2020
SAGE 22 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 2 April 2020
SAGE 23 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 7 April 2020
SAGE 24 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 9 April 2020
SAGE 25 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 14 April 2020
SAGE 26 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 16 April 2020
SAGE 27 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 21 April 2020
SAGE 28 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 23 April 2020
SAGE 29 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 28 April 2020
SAGE 30 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 30 April 2020
SAGE 31 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 1 May 2020
SAGE 32 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 1 May 2020
SAGE 33 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 5 May 2020
SAGE 34 minutes: Coronavirus (COVID-19) response, 7 May 2020

Saturday, May 30, 2020

66|0010|170 SAGE and the big pharma charity It's "unlawful" to vaccinate you, the people of the UK, but we're going to do it anyway - the position of the crown's servants and agents


Vobeshy 31 May 2020  00:53


It's "unlawful" to vaccinate you, the people of the UK, but we're going to do it anyway - the position of the crown's servants and agents
Some notes from a secret SAGE meeting have come over.  The document lays out the plans to, amongst things, (#30.) force a *Mandatory flu vaccine (Biogenic) on the entire UK population for Winter 2020/21.

So the Bill Gates funded SAGE, Imperial College, UK government is pushing vaccines when (a) the Gates' ChineseWuhan Lab SARS-CoV-2-Pathogen is about over (b) secret documents leaked in Germany show that the UK government's advisor Ferguson got the figures seriously wrong, for yet another issue and that the Covid-19 illness was less deadly that the 2017/18 'flu season (c ) unless very sick (usually because of underlying health issues) the best treatment is hydroxycholoroquine and zinc; a fact the secret SAGE people know but have ignored in favour of the Gates eugenicistic preferences.

The branch of the Crowns Servants and Agents that is the Petitions committee, have rejected numerous petitions where the crown's subjects are saying no to 'mandatory vaccines'.  Within that rejection notification, the Petitions Committee say this:-
We think your petition is covered by Government or Parliament action
already. It you'd like something else, you could start a new petition clearly
explaining what it is.
It is already against the law tor people to be required to undergo medical
treatment, including vaccinations. The Coronavirus Act 2020 has not
changed this.

Which makes the SAGE declaration that they're pushing for a UK wide DNA, RFID needled 'flu biogenic' disturbing.

The outward facing story being given to the UK public is "mandatory vaccination is unlawful" whilst secret, unelected bodies, whose funding, or large chunks of it comes from a charity which seeks to unlawfully do the opposite.

The charity has patents for vaccines, is embedded in all spheres of the influence within the UK to exert undue influence over those attending the secret meetings on account of how they are funded.  The financial influence of the charity has been shown to take precedence by pushing unlawful and unnecessary vaccines over non-patented alternatives, for which large pharmaceutical companies owned by the charity, would not profit from.

It is surely, incitement to commit a crime, by firstly manipulating circumstances through imaginatively created data and then say you intend to stick a needle in the crown's subjects to vaccinate them knowing such wholesale, mandatory vaccinations are unlawful? 

Expanding the theme further and ignoring the first crime , knowing the data was 'creative', knowing the health threat was exaggerated, to then plan to inject the crown's subjects unnecessarily and for gain, must surely be another instance of criminal activity.

Thirdly, being in a position of the crown's servants and agents, where information comes in to one's possession, to use that information as donee to repay a donor or to give benefits or to be able to influence who benefits, seems to be, surely another form of insider trading?  For example imagine knowing cannabis was going to be legalised and then having a family member set up a cannabis farm and factory to supply CBD products ahead of the UK's subjects.  It'd be good wouldn't it?  Seems the same for a vaccine; why would it be pushed when either it was unnecessary of a remedy costing pennies not £000s,  In context, the UK has a population of 66 million.  66,000,000 x (conservatively) £450.00  = £29, 700,000,000.00 for one vaccine pusher alone.

Which brings us back to the first of these questions and what the *PMINO* needs to answer and that is the unlawfulness of 'mandatory vaccines' in the UK because, front-facing we're being told 'it cannot happen, it won't happen because it's unlawful  and secretly, inward-facing the same people on their agenda, are pushing for 'mandatory vaccinations' - Which is it:lawful or unlawful to force a mandatory vaccine on the crown's subject?  An answer is urgently required.








So point (5) from back in April 2020 and we see quite clearly the discrepancy between FACT and the instructions the crown's subjects were given.
5. Risk of outdoor transmission is significantly lower than indoors.

Crown's subjects were, deliberately, at significantly higher risk, shut indoors

This is a deliberate control of the crown's subjects person, knowing that a significant number would succumb to the Covid-19 illness and perish and higher numbers would become ill.  For many, they would become ill without any of their immediate family or carers and had become so because control of their person had been taken away from them.

For me it seems, this action was to deliberate cause people to become sick, to generate and/or continue to be caused panic, to be caused fear of other people, from being outdoors and generally being removed from their normal life. 

The effect of withholding this information seems to be to cause illness to increase.  To cause illness and given the motivational factors of monetarising the crown's entire subjects through unlawfully vaccinating them,  rendering many fearful enough to submit to ongoing unnecessary, harmful biogenics can only have been beneficial to those who seek to or would benefit from the fear. 

This is very grave, for causing harm to a person, is a further unlawful act to boot.







As a footnote, if, as it seems, the charity pushing their vaccines and agenda, has inveigled sufficient influence to control the crown's entire subjects, then have the servants and agents of the crown effectively removed the reigning monarch and installed an autocracy?


5