The four defendants will be Matt Hancock, Chris Whitty, Patrick Vallance and Neil Ferguson, each of whom has inextricable and ultimately incriminating connections with Bill Gates and Big Pharma.
Latest update from @TheBernician
1/19
Hancock, Whitty, Vallance & Ferguson Stand Accused of Pandemic Fraud.
After yet more damning evidence arose last week, further additions had to be made to the court papers, which we are now aiming to lay in the coming week.
The four defendants will be Matt Hancock, Chris Whitty, Patrick Vallance and Neil Ferguson, each of whom has inextricable and ultimately incriminating connections with Bill Gates and Big Pharma.
As well as three counts of fraud by false representation and seven counts of fraud by non-disclosure, under sections 2 and 3 of the Fraud Act 2006, we can now also prove that the entire worldwide scamdemic originated on these shores.
In fact, we can show that, without the dishonest statements and non-disclosures of the four defendants we are initially proceeding against, COVID-1984 would not have transpired.
Furthermore, the 1st defendant, Matt Hancock, cannot rely upon the defence of Parliamentary Privilege, on the ground that none of the evidence relied upon by the prosecution is capable of preventing parliamentarians from carrying out their lawful business in Parliament.
The motive for conspiring to commit the heinous crimes alleged was paradoxically simple despite the complexity of the deceptions perpetrated - the maximisation of 'vaccination' uptake, as per the UN's Sustainable Development Goal of 'immunising' the entire world population.
Just imagine, if you will, a man charged with poisoning people to death with lethal pharmaceuticals being tried before a jury rigged with people who have direct links to the companies who researched, developed, manufactured and distributed the poisons which killed...
...the alleged victims.
The prosecution barrister would no doubt successfully apply for a mistrial, on the ground that the jurors were prejudiced by blatant conflicts of interest, which would more than hamper the delivery of a just decision, upon the evidence.
Now transpose those circumstances to COVID-1984, change the defendant to 'vaccine' and change the jury for the secretary of state for the DHSC, the chief medical officer, the chief scientific officer and the WHO's senior advisor on 'pandemic' identification...
...and response, and you will begin to comprehend how Big Pharma hijacked government policy, for the sole purpose of maximising 'vaccination' uptake, whatever the cost.
Furthermore, evidence has also arisen which demonstrates that Facebook and Google met with...
...the UK Government & agreed to censor any content which exposes this nefarious agenda.
Which naturally means the individuals concerned are complicit in the conspiracy to commit the criminal frauds alleged in the PCP, as well as being jointly and severally liable for...
...the consequences of them.
Given that Facebook deleted my last PCP Update and banned me from posting for 24 hours, then went on to do the same for simply sharing my own blog posts on the TGBMS page, we will hold those actions as evidence of...
...conspiracy to commit fraud, along with any other similar acts of censorship which precede and follow this public notice.
However, before I end this brief dispatch from the frozen north, once again I must pay tribute to the tens of thousands of people who have...
...never wavered in supporting this endeavour, since the moment you knew of its existence.
Take heart that our ever-growing number is about to explode exponentially, when the details of the utterly compelling prima facie evidence we have amassed become public knowledge.
For those of you who have been following my work for a decade or more, this moment of sudden widespread realisation will be akin to the moment people heard, in the summer of 2014, that a certain stubborn Geordie recalcitrant, against all the might of the...
...rigged system, proved mortgage fraud in the high court and had a fraudulent mortgage cancelled by the Land Registry.
Until that happened, even most of those who supported my work at the time never believed it would actually happen, until it did.
From my own perspective, this stage of the PCP feels identical in nature, but I have absolutely no problem with the doubts, skepticism and nihilism of others, which can easily cloud the mind at terrifying, tumultuous and tyrannical times such as these.
More from Culture
You May Also Like
1/OK, data mystery time.
This New York Times feature shows China with a Gini Index of less than 30, which would make it more equal than Canada, France, or the Netherlands. https://t.co/g3Sv6DZTDE
That's weird. Income inequality in China is legendary.
Let's check this number.
2/The New York Times cites the World Bank's recent report, "Fair Progress? Economic Mobility across Generations Around the World".
The report is available here:
3/The World Bank report has a graph in which it appears to show the same value for China's Gini - under 0.3.
The graph cites the World Development Indicators as its source for the income inequality data.
4/The World Development Indicators are available at the World Bank's website.
Here's the Gini index: https://t.co/MvylQzpX6A
It looks as if the latest estimate for China's Gini is 42.2.
That estimate is from 2012.
5/A Gini of 42.2 would put China in the same neighborhood as the U.S., whose Gini was estimated at 41 in 2013.
I can't find the <30 number anywhere. The only other estimate in the tables for China is from 2008, when it was estimated at 42.8.
This New York Times feature shows China with a Gini Index of less than 30, which would make it more equal than Canada, France, or the Netherlands. https://t.co/g3Sv6DZTDE
That's weird. Income inequality in China is legendary.
Let's check this number.
2/The New York Times cites the World Bank's recent report, "Fair Progress? Economic Mobility across Generations Around the World".
The report is available here:
3/The World Bank report has a graph in which it appears to show the same value for China's Gini - under 0.3.
The graph cites the World Development Indicators as its source for the income inequality data.
4/The World Development Indicators are available at the World Bank's website.
Here's the Gini index: https://t.co/MvylQzpX6A
It looks as if the latest estimate for China's Gini is 42.2.
That estimate is from 2012.
5/A Gini of 42.2 would put China in the same neighborhood as the U.S., whose Gini was estimated at 41 in 2013.
I can't find the <30 number anywhere. The only other estimate in the tables for China is from 2008, when it was estimated at 42.8.
Trending news of The Rock's daughter Simone Johnson's announcing her new Stage Name is breaking our Versus tool because "Wrestling Name" isn't in our database!
Here's the most useful #Factualist comparison pages #Thread 🧵
What is the difference between “pseudonym” and “stage name?”
Pseudonym means “a fictitious name (more literally, a false name), as those used by writers and movie stars,” while stage name is “the pseudonym of an entertainer.”
https://t.co/hT5XPkTepy #english #wiki #wikidiff
People also found this comparison helpful:
Alias #versus Stage Name: What’s the difference?
Alias means “another name; an assumed name,” while stage name means “the pseudonym of an entertainer.”
https://t.co/Kf7uVKekMd #Etymology #words
Another common #question:
What is the difference between “alias” and “pseudonym?”
As nouns alias means “another name; an assumed name,” while pseudonym means “a fictitious name (more literally, a false name), as those used by writers and movie
Here is a very basic #comparison: "Name versus Stage Name"
As #nouns, the difference is that name means “any nounal word or phrase which indicates a particular person, place, class, or thing,” but stage name means “the pseudonym of an
Here's the most useful #Factualist comparison pages #Thread 🧵
What is the difference between “pseudonym” and “stage name?”
Pseudonym means “a fictitious name (more literally, a false name), as those used by writers and movie stars,” while stage name is “the pseudonym of an entertainer.”
https://t.co/hT5XPkTepy #english #wiki #wikidiff
People also found this comparison helpful:
Alias #versus Stage Name: What’s the difference?
Alias means “another name; an assumed name,” while stage name means “the pseudonym of an entertainer.”
https://t.co/Kf7uVKekMd #Etymology #words
Another common #question:
What is the difference between “alias” and “pseudonym?”
As nouns alias means “another name; an assumed name,” while pseudonym means “a fictitious name (more literally, a false name), as those used by writers and movie
Here is a very basic #comparison: "Name versus Stage Name"
As #nouns, the difference is that name means “any nounal word or phrase which indicates a particular person, place, class, or thing,” but stage name means “the pseudonym of an
