THE UK Government will launch its net-zero strategy in Aberdeen next week, signalling plans to extend drilling for oil and gas.
The revamped Conservative proposals will see what was being referred to as “green day” by Whitehall staff rebranded to “energy security day”, with more of a focus on fossil fuels.
The proposals will also fail to bring in a 2025 flaring ban for oil and gas firms despite it being one of the 130 recommendations made by Tory MP Chris Skidmore earlier this year.
There will be no office for net zero – also one of Skidmore’s calls – and no compulsion for solar panels on new housing. Plans for a UK-wide programme of home insultation improvements, campaigned for by groups like Insulate Britain, will not be included.
…
[and the BS continues … an expansion of oil and gas destroying the planet spun as it’s exact opposite.]
Many European countries have halted using the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine over concerns about blood clots and related medical conditions. It causes difficulties since this vaccine is the only one many of these countries have.
The UK government is desperate that its population gets vaccinated and there is so much total BS in the media pursuing this objective. While I am not an anti-vaxxer people have the right to make an informed decision which – of course – requires that they are informed. All Covid-19 vaccines are licenced only for emergency use since they have not finished their testing.
I am quite impressed by this analysis which I consider appears reasonable and measured. It appears reasonable that adverse events are grossly under-reported through the Yello Card Scheme, which is supported by the fact that many reports are from medical staff.
Now you may have heard the argument by those in authority that the adverse reactions reported are not showing cause for concern as they are in line with what would be expected in the population without the vaccine being administered. The Government even claim this in their own report –
‘It may be difficult to tell the difference between something that has occurred naturally and a suspected adverse reaction. A range of other isolated or series of reports of non-fatal, serious suspected ADRs have been reported. These all remain under continual review, including through analysis of expected rates in the absence of vaccine.‘
The thing is, there is a way to prove that the vaccines are the cause of the adverse reactions and that is to compare the adverse reactions to the Pfizer jab and the adverse reactions to the Oxford jab side by side.
If there is no difference between what we would expect to see in the general population without the vaccine being administered then the rate of reported reactions should be pretty similar for both jabs, shouldn’t they?
…
Finally we come to deaths. There have been 94,809 adverse reactions as a result of the Pfizer / BioNTech vaccine reported to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme with 227 sadly resulting in death as of the 28th February 2021.
However, even though there have been one million less doses administered than the Pfizer jab, there have been a total of 201,622 adverse reactions to the Oxford / AstraZeneca vaccine reported to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme, with 275 sadly resulting in death as of the 28th February 2021.
So there you have it. We have just proven that the Government are talking utter nonsense when they claim there is nothing to worry about as the adverse reactions to the Covid vaccines are in line with what would we would expect to see in the general public who have not had the vaccine.
Three weeks ago the Tory-led House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee advised that intervention in Syria was not a good idea. Peter Oborne – until recently chief political columnist of the Daily Telegraph – has described Cameron’s strategy as “Bomb and hope for the best.” And concludes; “We should not go ahead until we have a better idea of what we are doing.” Right-winger and iconoclast Peter Hitchens wrote yesterday; “On the basis of an emotional spasm and a speech that was illogical and factually weak, we are rushing towards yet another swamp, from which we will struggle to extract ourselves and where we can do no conceivable good.” And he says the former ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford energetically opposes what he calls ‘recreational bombing’. The Observer believes expanding military action into Syria is a mistake – so too does the Daily Mail which writes “It sickens the Mail to find ourselves in the same camp as Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell … even more, it distresses us to know many of our readers may disagree with us. But on balance, and with many misgivings, this paper believes the case for bombing Syria has not yet been made.”
On Saturday, the Egypt-led investigation committee issued a statement, according to which the reason for the Russian Kogalymavia plane crash in Sinai is yet to be determined. The following day, Reuters reported, citing a unidentified member of the inquiry, that investigators into the plane crash in Egypt were “90 percent sure” the noise heard on the final seconds of a cockpit recording was an explosion caused by a bomb.
“News and media claims, quoting an anonymous source, allegedly one of the members of the Commission, are incorrect, and should not prevail,” Ayman Muqaddam was quoted in the statement published by the Egyptian Ministry of Civil aviation.
…
We’ve had an absolute deluge of bullshit from corporate media about the Sinai plane crash being a terrorist act. It appears that it was aided by UK authorities claiming that “chatter” was identified. This incident has been a wonderfull illustration of deliberate deception, of fake, manufactured terrorism.
The Russian Ministry of Emergency Situations sent three of its aircraft to the crash site. The Investigative Committee also started a legal case against Kogalymavia under legislation regulating “violation of rules of flights and preparations.”[55]
…
Natalya Trukhacheva, the ex-wife of co-pilot Sergei Trukachev, said in an interview with NTV that her ex-husband had complained to their daughter about the aircraft’s technical state.[52][65]
The aircraft involved in the crash had suffered a tailstrike while landing in Cairo fourteen years earlier.[30][64][66] Some have drawn comparisons to Japan Airlines Flight 123, which crashed into a mountain in 1985, seven years after the plane had suffered a tailstrike while landing.[64] Flight 123 suffered catastrophic damage in mid-air while climbing to its cruising altitude. The crash of Flight 123 was caused by an incorrect repair of the aircraft’s tail section following the tailstrike, which left the rear pressure bulkhead of the plane vulnerable to metal fatigue and ultimately resulted in explosive decompression.[64] Reports on the wreckage of Flight 9268 have suggested that a “clear break” occurred near the plane’s rear pressure bulkhead, possibly indicating failure of the bulkhead.[66]
…
Doesn’t the Wikipedia entry strongly suggest the real cause of this accident? Why is corporate media so keen to deliberately deceive and support governments in their bullshit terrorism narrative? Is it that they are partners in the deception – two cheeks of the same arse?*
