Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
The real life James Bond Villan Aka ( Bill Gates ) plans to block out the Sun π
Forwarded from Mel Ann
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Any attempts of mandating an experiment or any medical procedure for that matter is a crime against humanity.
The coercive suggestions of βNo Jab, No Travel, job seekerβ etc is nothing short of coercion.
Itβs a crime against humanity and it needs to stop.
ANYONE pushing this experiment onto the general public wanting to implement this coercive policy are nothing short of terrorists.
Thatβs right. You heard me.
Terrorists.
That goes for you lot above, you paid propaganda pushing puppets.
#CrimesAgainstHumanity
https://t.me/mellyann0
The coercive suggestions of βNo Jab, No Travel, job seekerβ etc is nothing short of coercion.
Itβs a crime against humanity and it needs to stop.
ANYONE pushing this experiment onto the general public wanting to implement this coercive policy are nothing short of terrorists.
Thatβs right. You heard me.
Terrorists.
That goes for you lot above, you paid propaganda pushing puppets.
#CrimesAgainstHumanity
https://t.me/mellyann0
π1
Forwarded from Tiff
1_5721836430519435282.mp4
5.1 MB
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Smart kid πβοΈ
Looking like History will repeat β£οΈπ
https://vaccineimpact.com/2018/did-military-experimental-vaccine-in-1918-kill-50-100-million-people-blamed-as-spanish-flu/
https://vaccineimpact.com/2018/did-military-experimental-vaccine-in-1918-kill-50-100-million-people-blamed-as-spanish-flu/
Vaccine Impact -
Did a Military Experimental Vaccine in 1918 Kill 50-100 Million People Blamed as βSpanish Fluβ? - Vaccine Impact
The βSpanish Fluβ killed an estimated 50-100 million people during a pandemic 1918-19. What if the story we have been told about this pandemic isnβt true? What if, instead, the killer infection was neither the flu nor Spanish in origin? Newly analyzed documentsβ¦
Forwarded from β¨βοΈπ½ππππ πΎππππβοΈβ¨
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
DOCTORS REFUSING TO TREAT MAN WITH BROKEN NECK BECAUSE HEβS REFUSING TO TAKE A COVID TESTπ‘π‘
Forwarded from β¨βοΈπ½ππππ πΎππππβοΈβ¨
Agenda21.pdf
1 MB
Agenda21.pdf
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Bill Gates Favourite books π
The Root Of All Evil
40K Tons Of Gold and Silver Under the Ground in the city of London. T.me/WeAreAwake/1780
She want more
40K Tons Of Gold and Silver Under the Ground in the city of London. T.me/WeAreAwake/1780
She want more
Forwarded from JONATHAN LAW CHANNEL
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), also known as the Strasbourg Court, is an International Court of the Council of Europe which interprets the European Convention on Human Rights 1950.
In a landmark yet fundamentally detrimental ruling on compulsory vaccinations, the corrupt ECtHR rules in favour of mandatory pre-school jabs for Children. The Highest Court in the World, has sold our beautiful children's souls to the devil.
This ruling may now pave the way for the UK Government and Parliament to plough ahead and potentially legislate mandated vaccinations upon our children, to be vaccinated for pre-school, given that the Court has set a precedent.
Moreover, under section 2 of the Human Rights Act 1998, if you were to challenge the legality/lawfullness before our Domestic Courts, in refusing your Child to be vaccinated in order to attend school, the Domestic Courts are required to "take into account" rather than be bound to follow the jurisprudence of the ECtHR. The good news is, our Domestic Courts are not bound under S.2 of the HRA 1998, to follow any ECtHR jurisprudence and in particular, this new and landmark mandated vaccination precedent.
Interestingly, given there is no Statute or Law in place to mandate vaccinations in the UK, and failing any Statute being passed to either legislate or a Law being passed for the requirement of mandated vaccinations upon our Children, the good news is, everyone has the Convention Right to private and family life, namely self development, personal autonomy and personal relationships, for you and your child to refuse being vaccinated, under Art 8(1) of the HRA 1998, whether mandated or not.
However, the first justification needed for the State to satisfy the interference before the Domestic Courts to vaccinate the Children, is enshrined under Art 8(2) of the HRA 1998, is the interference in accordance with the law. The interference is categorically not, in accordance with the law as there is no statutory provision or laws in place for the requirement of mandated vaccinations upon our Children, to justify the States interference and therefore, without any Statutory provison or laws in place, the State would ultimately fail at the first hurdle in Court β€β€β€.
Now, can you see how important the Human Rights Act 1998 is. β€β€β€
Czech vaccines: European rights court backs mandatory pre-school jabs - BBC News
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-europe-56669397
In a landmark yet fundamentally detrimental ruling on compulsory vaccinations, the corrupt ECtHR rules in favour of mandatory pre-school jabs for Children. The Highest Court in the World, has sold our beautiful children's souls to the devil.
This ruling may now pave the way for the UK Government and Parliament to plough ahead and potentially legislate mandated vaccinations upon our children, to be vaccinated for pre-school, given that the Court has set a precedent.
Moreover, under section 2 of the Human Rights Act 1998, if you were to challenge the legality/lawfullness before our Domestic Courts, in refusing your Child to be vaccinated in order to attend school, the Domestic Courts are required to "take into account" rather than be bound to follow the jurisprudence of the ECtHR. The good news is, our Domestic Courts are not bound under S.2 of the HRA 1998, to follow any ECtHR jurisprudence and in particular, this new and landmark mandated vaccination precedent.
Interestingly, given there is no Statute or Law in place to mandate vaccinations in the UK, and failing any Statute being passed to either legislate or a Law being passed for the requirement of mandated vaccinations upon our Children, the good news is, everyone has the Convention Right to private and family life, namely self development, personal autonomy and personal relationships, for you and your child to refuse being vaccinated, under Art 8(1) of the HRA 1998, whether mandated or not.
However, the first justification needed for the State to satisfy the interference before the Domestic Courts to vaccinate the Children, is enshrined under Art 8(2) of the HRA 1998, is the interference in accordance with the law. The interference is categorically not, in accordance with the law as there is no statutory provision or laws in place for the requirement of mandated vaccinations upon our Children, to justify the States interference and therefore, without any Statutory provison or laws in place, the State would ultimately fail at the first hurdle in Court β€β€β€.
Now, can you see how important the Human Rights Act 1998 is. β€β€β€
Czech vaccines: European rights court backs mandatory pre-school jabs - BBC News
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-europe-56669397