1 0:00:00 --> 0:00:10 Anna is a senior lawyer and crucially she's a former military officer, UK military officer, 2 0:00:10 --> 0:00:16 so I think that gives us some discipline. And she's been speaking, how long have you 3 0:00:16 --> 0:00:20 been speaking out Anna, early in 2020? 4 0:00:20 --> 0:00:29 Yeah, well publicly, I guess for about 18 months or so, but before that obviously within 5 0:00:29 --> 0:00:31 my own networks, yeah. 6 0:00:31 --> 0:00:40 Sure, yeah. So when I saw a video of you talking on the streets for half an hour without any 7 0:00:40 --> 0:00:47 problem to whomever, was that October 2020? 8 0:00:47 --> 0:00:50 I honestly can't remember Stephen because I've been out on so many streets and I've 9 0:00:50 --> 0:00:54 had so many conversations I can't remember. 10 0:00:54 --> 0:01:02 Yeah, okay. So Anna if you run out of steam, you know, if you said an hour, you need an 11 0:01:02 --> 0:01:10 hour to tell us the gravity of the situation. And I agree I would need an hour as well. 12 0:01:10 --> 0:01:15 So but if you run out of steam, just let us know and we'll ask you some questions. 13 0:01:15 --> 0:01:22 Okay, fantastic. Thank you. So hello everybody and lovely to see you all, those faces I can 14 0:01:22 --> 0:01:30 see. And sorry for those of you who already know me, but brief introduction. Yeah, Stephen 15 0:01:30 --> 0:01:37 says I'm a senior solicitor. I've been studying law since I was 22 and I'm now 56. And I've 16 0:01:37 --> 0:01:45 been practicing it since I was about 25, 26. So that's how long I've been doing this thing. 17 0:01:45 --> 0:01:53 But at the same time, I was also an army officer, a lieutenant in 51st signals unit in territorial 18 0:01:53 --> 0:02:00 army throughout my 20s. So I was a survival instructor. And my job obviously was to assess 19 0:02:00 --> 0:02:05 risk and look at potential threats and work out what on earth to do about them all. But 20 0:02:05 --> 0:02:11 I also spent 10 years as a management consultant whilst I was also practicing as a lawyer, 21 0:02:12 --> 0:02:21 running my own consultancy, advising companies on flexible working. And one of my clients was 22 0:02:21 --> 0:02:28 Pfizer. So I worked with Pfizer for two years. And one of the jobs that I had to do within Pfizer 23 0:02:28 --> 0:02:34 was to help the business understand why it took so long from the scientists in the laboratory 24 0:02:34 --> 0:02:40 producing a potentially new product and getting it out onto the shelves as a fully licensed, 25 0:02:40 --> 0:02:44 approved, marketed product. And part of my brief was to see if there was any way we could 26 0:02:44 --> 0:02:51 cut down on those timescales. So I worked with the scientists and the regulators, etc. And 27 0:02:52 --> 0:02:59 was taught the whole process about the clinical trials and the hoops that they have to go through. 28 0:02:59 --> 0:03:06 And obviously learned that it was years and not the few months that has been subsequently claimed. 29 0:03:06 --> 0:03:13 So I'm also a mother of three children. So I come to this whole situation with those sort of main 30 0:03:13 --> 0:03:19 skill sets, if you like. And what happened with me was that I actually got diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 31 0:03:20 --> 0:03:25 back in early January 2020. And I did actually think I was going to die, I was really ill. 32 0:03:25 --> 0:03:32 But in hindsight, it was probably just a really bad out of a chest infection or flu, I don't know. 33 0:03:32 --> 0:03:38 But anyway, it meant that I was laid up for six weeks. And I spent those six weeks researching 34 0:03:38 --> 0:03:43 everything I possibly could about what this so-called virus was and how it was released. 35 0:03:43 --> 0:03:49 And immediately my hackles went up because I suspected it was a bioweapon. And I suspected 36 0:03:49 --> 0:03:57 that it was biowarfare to introduce a whole load of agendas that I was already acutely aware of, 37 0:03:57 --> 0:04:06 such as the Agenda 21, Agenda 2030 with the UN, the World Economic Forum agendas, etc. 38 0:04:06 --> 0:04:13 So my hackles were up very early on. And I contacted a retired army officer that I trained with 39 0:04:14 --> 0:04:20 at Sandhurst all those years ago. And he was on the ground in Beijing and had lived in China for 40 0:04:20 --> 0:04:27 10 years. So he knew what the China propaganda machine was like, etc. So we spent about four 41 0:04:27 --> 0:04:35 hours swapping intel and comparing notes and agreed, this was in about mid-January, I think, 42 0:04:35 --> 0:04:42 agreed that we needed to raise the alarm bells within the military network, because all the 43 0:04:42 --> 0:04:46 flags were there that this was biowarfare and a bioweapon had just been released. 44 0:04:47 --> 0:04:54 So we then went back to our respective networks. One of the people I contacted was a captain in the 45 0:04:54 --> 0:05:01 SAS. And I briefed him for an hour and a half. And at the end of that, he said, two or three other 46 0:05:01 --> 0:05:08 senior officers had also contacted him with their concerns. And most of what I said had told him he 47 0:05:08 --> 0:05:14 had been given us intel from other trusted sources. And some of it was new to him. But the we agreed 48 0:05:14 --> 0:05:20 at the end of the conversation that he would take it into the intelligence network in the military 49 0:05:20 --> 0:05:27 and ask them to start investigating the concerns. In the meantime, I raised my concerns with various 50 0:05:27 --> 0:05:32 other people in the military as well. But didn't really get got anywhere. It was kind of falling 51 0:05:32 --> 0:05:36 on deaf ears. People at that stage were saying, oh, don't be so stupid, Anna. It was a pangolin. 52 0:05:36 --> 0:05:43 It was a pangolin and it's all completely natural. So then what happened was that the Coronavirus Act 53 0:05:43 --> 0:05:53 came out and that put massive flags up for me as a lawyer, because it was a 329 page complex piece of law 54 0:05:53 --> 0:06:01 that you don't draft in a couple of days. And so I went on having seen that they'd downgraded the 55 0:06:02 --> 0:06:09 having seen that they'd downgraded the virus to a non-infectious disease on the 19th of March. 56 0:06:09 --> 0:06:13 The fact that they were talking about locking down the country and producing this, you know, 57 0:06:13 --> 0:06:20 emergency law didn't add up. So then when I looked on Hansard to see about the debates in Parliament, 58 0:06:20 --> 0:06:28 I saw that I think it was the second debate, Matt Hancock let slip that it had taken the months 59 0:06:28 --> 0:06:33 to draft that piece of law. So again, that was another flag because I thought, well, 60 0:06:33 --> 0:06:39 why were they drafting this before they even knew that this virus existed? And indeed, 61 0:06:39 --> 0:06:46 I'd already been concerned about noises being made from Hancock the previous year, because in around 62 0:06:47 --> 0:06:55 May or June 2019, Hancock had taken had sought and received legal advice on mandating vaccines. 63 0:06:55 --> 0:07:00 Something I had raised with a judge at the time and saying, why on earth is Matt Hancock trying 64 0:07:00 --> 0:07:06 to seek advice on mandating vaccines? So clearly, flags were going up about whether this was a 65 0:07:06 --> 0:07:13 conspiracy and whether it was all planned, etc. I then heard Lord Sumption speaking out. He was the 66 0:07:13 --> 0:07:18 first lawyer I heard speak out, I think in about end of March or April. And he was saying that, 67 0:07:18 --> 0:07:24 and he was saying that, you know, the Coronavirus Act was ultra virus, in other words, 68 0:07:24 --> 0:07:32 outside the powers that Parliament has, because a, they already had the necessary powers contained 69 0:07:32 --> 0:07:38 in the Contingency Act 2004, which indeed the government did already have those powers. 70 0:07:39 --> 0:07:47 And B, the Public Health Control of Diseases Act 1984 also covered the situation. And it doesn't 71 0:07:47 --> 0:07:53 allow the powers that the government were claiming it was allowing, and the basis on which they were 72 0:07:53 --> 0:08:00 claiming the right to create this coronavirus act. So when I heard Lord Sumption, who's a former 73 0:08:01 --> 0:08:07 Supreme Court judge in the UK, give his analysis, which unbeknownst to him was exactly the same as 74 0:08:07 --> 0:08:14 mine. So that gave me confidence that my legal analysis was correct. And I then started reaching 75 0:08:14 --> 0:08:19 out to other lawyers who at that time were raising concerns, one of whom was Francis 76 0:08:19 --> 0:08:26 Haw, the barrister who was instructed by Simon Dolan, to bring a judicial review of the Coronavirus 77 0:08:26 --> 0:08:36 Act. So I started to work with a team of lawyers, I think in around, oh, May, June, July time, 78 0:08:37 --> 0:08:43 where we were starting to brainstorm, you know, what was going on and what legal action we could 79 0:08:43 --> 0:08:51 bring to claim the, as we saw them, ultra virus powers and the massive overreach of the government. 80 0:08:53 --> 0:09:01 And then the face masks regulations came out in July, as did the armies, the army going into 81 0:09:01 --> 0:09:08 schools to test. And those, both of those really raised alarm bells for me, because they were both 82 0:09:08 --> 0:09:18 bio weapons on the evidence. And so once again, I reached out to the military. I was, I trained with 83 0:09:18 --> 0:09:26 at University and at Santos with the then back in July 2020, standing the commander of the British 84 0:09:26 --> 0:09:32 standing army, Colonel H Jones. And I reached out to Reaper and I said, you know, you've known me 85 0:09:32 --> 0:09:38 all my life, and you know that I'm not lying to you. I'm telling you that if you go into the 86 0:09:38 --> 0:09:44 schools and you, you know, aid in a bet or perpetrate the testing of these children, 87 0:09:44 --> 0:09:50 it is not going to be with their informed consent. They cannot consent to these measures. 88 0:09:50 --> 0:09:55 And therefore it's a breach of their bodily and psychiatric integrity. It will harm them 89 0:09:55 --> 0:10:01 and you will be held liable for any damage that's caused to them. And I sent him a whole 90 0:10:01 --> 0:10:07 load of evidence about the harms of masks and the harms of testing, et cetera, and the hydrogel and 91 0:10:08 --> 0:10:14 the ether oxide. And I warned him off and said cease and desist. Do not deploy the military. 92 0:10:14 --> 0:10:17 If you do, you'll be held responsible. It's a breach of the Nuremberg code. 93 0:10:19 --> 0:10:23 I didn't hear anything from him. I then sent him more evidence and another cease and desist. 94 0:10:23 --> 0:10:31 Didn't hear anything. The army went ahead and deployed, as you know. So then I reached out to 95 0:10:31 --> 0:10:37 various other pressure groups. And the first one was called recovery. And they said, oh, well, 96 0:10:37 --> 0:10:42 we're going to deal with the politicians about all of this. And I said, no, no, no, these are 97 0:10:42 --> 0:10:47 breaches of the Nuremberg code. They're now talking about injecting people with an experimental 98 0:10:47 --> 0:10:53 bioweapon. And we've got to bring serious legal proceedings now to stop all this. 99 0:10:55 --> 0:11:01 And I was ejected out of those groups because I was told that nobody wanted to take legal action 100 0:11:01 --> 0:11:07 and they certainly didn't want the lawyers to. And I said, you don't get to tell me that because 101 0:11:07 --> 0:11:15 my job is to bring legal action. So I then found another group. The health advice research team 102 0:11:15 --> 0:11:21 asked me to join them. And in fact, Mike Keaton was already a member, Dr. Claire Craig, 103 0:11:22 --> 0:11:30 Joel Smalley, Jonathan Engler, a number of very serious, you know, experts had got together and 104 0:11:30 --> 0:11:36 said, we need some legal minds on this as well. Please join us and give us an analysis on our 105 0:11:36 --> 0:11:42 evidence about what's going on. So by this time I was pretty much seething because I could see 106 0:11:42 --> 0:11:47 that these were multiple breaches of the Nuremberg code, multiple breaches of human rights, 107 0:11:48 --> 0:11:54 domestic and international, civil and criminal. So I was pulled no punches when I joined heart. 108 0:11:54 --> 0:11:59 And I told them straight away that this was a breach of the Nuremberg code and that we needed 109 0:11:59 --> 0:12:04 to start action. And Mike Keaton and various others messaged me and said, thank you so much. 110 0:12:04 --> 0:12:11 We've been saying the same, you know, what can we do about it? Now that was, I would say, December 111 0:12:11 --> 0:12:20 2020, January 2021. And then I joined the Lawyers for Liberty. And ever since then, basically, 112 0:12:20 --> 0:12:27 I've been working in these teams, both here and abroad, looking at all the different legal issues 113 0:12:27 --> 0:12:33 that have been raised from all these different measures, looking at whether they are civil, 114 0:12:33 --> 0:12:38 criminal breaches, whether the burden of proof has been satisfied in relation to each of the 115 0:12:38 --> 0:12:44 civil and criminal offences, and, you know, basically what we can do about it as lawyers, 116 0:12:44 --> 0:12:50 you know, what our plan of action is going to be. Now, at the same time, clearly, working within 117 0:12:50 --> 0:12:55 the military network, what we've been trying to do is raise the alarm bell within all the military 118 0:12:55 --> 0:13:02 networks about the fact that these are breaches of not only the Nuremberg code, but of the war 119 0:13:02 --> 0:13:10 conventions, because each of these experimental measures amounts to a breach of someone's 120 0:13:10 --> 0:13:17 psychiatric or bodily integrity. And they are not being, you know, people's informed consent 121 0:13:17 --> 0:13:23 is not being obtained, typically, and I'll go into more detail about that. And in fact, because 122 0:13:23 --> 0:13:28 these go to the right to life and the right not to be tortured or receive cruel, inhumane, 123 0:13:28 --> 0:13:36 or degrading treatment or punishment, not only does it breach all the civil human rights laws, 124 0:13:36 --> 0:13:44 but it breaches the warfare conventions. Specifically, it breaches the Geneva conventions, 125 0:13:45 --> 0:13:52 common Article 3, and amounts to the great, the grave breaches. These are prohibited acts of 126 0:13:52 --> 0:13:59 unlawful warfare. And again, I'll go into that in more detail. But given that, 127 0:13:59 --> 0:14:05 clearly, the alarm bells were ringing amongst all of us, military people who actually understood 128 0:14:05 --> 0:14:11 that situation. Now, what alarmed me when I went to the military and said, listen, you know, these 129 0:14:11 --> 0:14:16 are grave breaches being committed by our own police force, our own military, our own government, 130 0:14:17 --> 0:14:21 and not only here, but abroad, and all governments are doing this. And so therefore, the whole 131 0:14:22 --> 0:14:30 framework is a joke, because nobody's upholding it. And to my horror, as I dug down more and more 132 0:14:30 --> 0:14:36 and more into this, what I came across was that none of the lawyers I spoke to had actually read 133 0:14:36 --> 0:14:45 any of the warfare conventions, not a single one. Now, when I spoke to my, the soldiers that I've 134 0:14:45 --> 0:14:51 been working with, and I took them through my examination of their evidence, not a single one 135 0:14:51 --> 0:14:57 of them had read the warfare conventions either. And in fact, when I said to them, well, 136 0:14:58 --> 0:15:05 the Joint Services Manual 383 specifically says you must read all of these conventions. And in fact, 137 0:15:06 --> 0:15:13 it says you must read this book here, which is back to front, but it says it's the manual of the 138 0:15:13 --> 0:15:18 law of armed conflict. And that's the Ministry of Defence's own book. And what that does 139 0:15:18 --> 0:15:26 specifically in Chapter 7, is it deals with medical treatment. And what it says is that this is the 140 0:15:26 --> 0:15:36 UK's interpretation of the law. Okay. And Chapter 7, the Wounded, Sick and Dead and Medical Services 141 0:15:37 --> 0:15:46 sets out, first of all, introduction 7.1, definition of wounded and sick 7.2, protection 142 0:15:46 --> 0:15:55 of and care of wounded and sick. And that goes into permitted medical treatment, which is in 143 0:15:56 --> 0:16:03 paragraph 7.5. Now, the reason I'm going to start here before I go into more detail about 144 0:16:03 --> 0:16:11 the informed consent is because I want to make it very clear to people that this is a prohibited 145 0:16:11 --> 0:16:20 act of unlawful warfare that we are talking about here. Okay. So civil human rights, yes, 146 0:16:20 --> 0:16:25 it's breaching all of those, but this is how serious it is. Permitted medical treatment, 147 0:16:25 --> 0:16:32 okay. The physical or mental health and integrity of persons who are in the power of an adverse party 148 0:16:32 --> 0:16:39 or who are interned, detained, or otherwise deprived of liberty as a result of armed conflict 149 0:16:39 --> 0:16:45 shall not be endangered by any unjustified act or omission. Okay. Well, that's the same for 150 0:16:45 --> 0:16:50 everybody. We can't harm each other by any unjustified act or omission, whether you're in 151 0:16:50 --> 0:16:57 armed conflict or not. Okay. But it goes on to say, any medical procedure, which is not indicated by 152 0:16:57 --> 0:17:03 the state of health of the person concerned, and which is not consistent with generally 153 0:17:03 --> 0:17:08 accepted medical standards, which would be applied under similar medical circumstances 154 0:17:09 --> 0:17:14 to persons who are nationals of the party conducting the procedure and who are in no way 155 0:17:14 --> 0:17:19 deprived of liberty is prohibited. Now, I know that's a horribly long-winded sentence, 156 0:17:19 --> 0:17:28 and basically what it's saying is, unless the state of the person necessitates medical treatment, 157 0:17:28 --> 0:17:33 so it has to be absolutely necessary for that individual. So not for the collective, 158 0:17:33 --> 0:17:40 not for anybody else's benefit, but for that individual. And it has to be given with generally 159 0:17:40 --> 0:17:47 accepted medical standards, i.e. the Nuremberg Code and the informed consent process, which would 160 0:17:47 --> 0:17:53 be applied under similar medical circumstances to persons who are nationals of the state. So in other 161 0:17:53 --> 0:17:59 words, it doesn't matter who you've got in your custody or detained, you must treat them to the 162 0:17:59 --> 0:18:04 same medical standards as you would to nationals of your own state. Okay. So that provides some 163 0:18:04 --> 0:18:11 kind of check on it. And it says, if they are not deprived of liberty. Okay. So what it also 164 0:18:11 --> 0:18:18 recognizes there is that if you are a prisoner of war and deprived of your liberty, your ability to 165 0:18:18 --> 0:18:24 give freely voluntary consent is very, very limited. And therefore, even if a prisoner is 166 0:18:24 --> 0:18:30 apparently consenting, the chances are they're not. And that's why there's this limit there, 167 0:18:30 --> 0:18:39 that it has to be necessary, etc. Now, the point about all of that is it goes on to say that in 168 0:18:39 --> 0:18:43 dealing with medical treatment on the basis of real medical need on the part of the patient, 169 0:18:43 --> 0:18:51 the law repeats fundamental medical ethics. The aim is to prevent experiments or unjustified medical 170 0:18:51 --> 0:18:58 operations on persons who are in no position to give their free consent. This protection extends 171 0:18:58 --> 0:19:03 to all those in the hands of the enemy or other party, and even to citizens of the detaining power 172 0:19:03 --> 0:19:08 who are interned for reasons related to the armed conflict. In the absence of real medical 173 0:19:08 --> 0:19:14 justification, all persons are protected from physical mutilations, medical or scientific 174 0:19:14 --> 0:19:21 experiments, or removal of tissue or organs for transplantation, even with their consent. And 175 0:19:21 --> 0:19:28 that's put in italics, you know, emphasized, unless these acts are justified under the general 176 0:19:28 --> 0:19:35 principles outlined in paragraph 7.5, which I've just read out. So now, it also goes on to say the 177 0:19:35 --> 0:19:41 right to refuse consent. Persons have the right to refuse any surgical operation. In cases of 178 0:19:41 --> 0:19:46 refusal, medical personnel must try to obtain a written statement to that effect, etc. The 179 0:19:46 --> 0:19:51 right still exists to carry out surgery necessary to save life in an emergency, but otherwise than 180 0:19:51 --> 0:19:57 that is completely prohibited. And it goes on to say non-renunciation of rights. The wounded and 181 0:19:57 --> 0:20:04 sick, as well as medical personnel and chaplains, may in no circumstances renounce in whole or in 182 0:20:04 --> 0:20:12 part the rights secured to them by the convention or by the additional protocol. Okay, now, if I 183 0:20:12 --> 0:20:19 take a step back from all of that, the reason I start there, as I say, is because if you don't get 184 0:20:19 --> 0:20:27 to conduct medical experimentation on your enemy prisoners, the idea, and you don't get to give them 185 0:20:27 --> 0:20:33 medical treatment, even with their consent, unless it's necessitated by their own health, 186 0:20:33 --> 0:20:39 and you don't get to do that to your enemy prisoners, the idea that governments or anybody 187 0:20:39 --> 0:20:44 does it to anybody else in a so-called public health emergency is completely ridiculous, 188 0:20:45 --> 0:20:52 as you can see. And the whole point about that is that, and this is why it's so personal to me, 189 0:20:52 --> 0:20:56 because my own uncle was in one of those German prisoner of war camps. He was an 190 0:20:56 --> 0:21:03 infanteer, and he was caught. And he, I don't know to what extent he personally was experimented on, 191 0:21:03 --> 0:21:08 but he would have witnessed all those other people being experimented on. And he escaped 192 0:21:08 --> 0:21:14 with two of the other, you know, prisoners, and they escaped back through France and Germany, 193 0:21:14 --> 0:21:19 Spain, rather. And because he knew it was so horrific, once he got back to England, 194 0:21:19 --> 0:21:26 he went back over there to release them. And my father, aged 18, was sent to Berlin to release 195 0:21:26 --> 0:21:31 them as well. And when I was a child, I was dragged around Auschwitz. I was dragged around 196 0:21:31 --> 0:21:38 the fields of the Somme and the battlefields, and I was made to promise never, ever, ever to forget 197 0:21:38 --> 0:21:45 what happened in those camps, how those people were treated, and the Nuremberg trials. And I 198 0:21:45 --> 0:21:51 was brought up to study the Nuremberg trials to understand exactly why it was so important 199 0:21:52 --> 0:21:59 that those trials were held, why the Nuremberg code was created, why we must never, ever forget, 200 0:21:59 --> 0:22:06 and why we must make sure it never happens again. And, you know, Stephen pointed out in one of our 201 0:22:06 --> 0:22:11 meetings that, you know, he was told at medical school that it was the most important document 202 0:22:11 --> 0:22:18 of the century. And I agree as a lawyer, because when you look at the historical context legally, 203 0:22:18 --> 0:22:26 what happened up until that point was this. We already had our civil laws and our criminal laws, 204 0:22:26 --> 0:22:33 which prohibited killing each other clearly and maiming each other. So, for example, in the UK, 205 0:22:33 --> 0:22:39 we have God's laws, thou shalt not kill. We had the Magna Carta, which prohibited harming each other. 206 0:22:40 --> 0:22:45 We had the Bill of Rights. We had the law and ordinances of war, if it was a warfare situation. 207 0:22:45 --> 0:22:51 And then in 1861, we had the Offenses Against the Person Act, which details things like administering 208 0:22:51 --> 0:22:59 a noxious or poisonous substance or wounding with intent, etc. Right. So we had a whole body of laws 209 0:22:59 --> 0:23:07 to govern how people interact and don't wound, harm, kill each other. But when it came to warfare, 210 0:23:07 --> 0:23:15 what happened was that that was expanded upon. So in 1863, Abraham Lincoln instructed, I think 211 0:23:15 --> 0:23:22 Charles Lieber, it was his name, to draft a, I think it was General Regulation 100, the Lieber 212 0:23:22 --> 0:23:30 Code, after the author, to the American soldiers to ensure that they did not behave like savages, 213 0:23:31 --> 0:23:38 even in times of war. And so there are several prohibitions placed on the soldiers, including 214 0:23:38 --> 0:23:43 that they weren't allowed to administer a poison and they weren't allowed to give medical treatment, 215 0:23:43 --> 0:23:49 etc. without consent. And the whole idea of the Warfare Convention was that you aimed to disable 216 0:23:49 --> 0:23:58 your enemy, not to go on a wanton killing spree. So there then came out various other war regulations, 217 0:23:58 --> 0:24:03 including the Hague Convention, the Hague Regulations, and I think 1906. And that was 218 0:24:03 --> 0:24:10 what the Germans were accused of breaching in the First World War, those warfare conventions that 219 0:24:10 --> 0:24:16 existed up until that point. But due to the horrors of the First World War, they started 220 0:24:16 --> 0:24:22 introducing weapons conventions, because means and methods of warfare are not unlimited, including 221 0:24:22 --> 0:24:28 weapons of mass destruction. So in 1925, they came out with a convention against asphyxiating 222 0:24:28 --> 0:24:35 gases, etc. And the intention was that any weapons that caused unnecessary suffering 223 0:24:35 --> 0:24:43 were prohibited. And then we have the Second World War. And what wasn't expected were all of those 224 0:24:43 --> 0:24:51 different types of crimes against humanity that weren't specifically necessarily covered under the 225 0:24:51 --> 0:24:58 existing war regulations, may have been covered under the individual countries criminal or civil 226 0:24:58 --> 0:25:05 codes, but weren't necessarily encapsulated in a single sort of treaty type document that everybody 227 0:25:05 --> 0:25:13 could refer to. So what the lawyers did before Nuremberg was that they sat down and they drafted 228 0:25:13 --> 0:25:19 out definitions of crimes, so war crimes, crimes of aggression, crimes of humanity, crimes against 229 0:25:19 --> 0:25:25 humanity rather. And I think it was genocide was the other one. And then they tried the war 230 0:25:25 --> 0:25:32 criminals against those definitions of those crimes. Those definitions of those crimes have 231 0:25:32 --> 0:25:38 now become Article 678, and I think it's nine of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. 232 0:25:39 --> 0:25:45 Okay, but the first charter governing it was the London Charter. And that's what governed the 233 0:25:45 --> 0:25:53 trials held at Nuremberg. Now what happened at Nuremberg was that the medics were brought to 234 0:25:53 --> 0:25:59 trial, as well as the judges and the lawyers, as well as the military people and the media and 235 0:25:59 --> 0:26:04 bankers, various people were brought to trial. But the medics were brought to trial under a series 236 0:26:04 --> 0:26:11 of cases known collectively as the medical cases. And in the first set of medical cases, what happens 237 0:26:11 --> 0:26:20 is that the tribunal goes through what was already the accepted medical standards. So the bit I just 238 0:26:20 --> 0:26:24 read out to you here where it says that it has to be medical treatment has to be given in in 239 0:26:25 --> 0:26:31 accordance with generally accepted medical standards. That point was picked up by the 240 0:26:31 --> 0:26:40 tribunal before going on to assess the crimes. And what you'll find, I think it was at page 181 or 241 0:26:40 --> 0:26:48 182 of the medical cases judgment, the first one is it says permissible medical experiments. 242 0:26:49 --> 0:26:56 And what it does is it says that there is already a body of medical ethics and criminal law that, 243 0:26:56 --> 0:27:03 you know, binds the physician, which sets out how a physician is meant to conduct medical treatment 244 0:27:03 --> 0:27:08 in according with generally accepted medical ethics. And I think I'm correct in saying that 245 0:27:08 --> 0:27:13 there was already a code of generally accepted medical ethics produced by the American Medical 246 0:27:13 --> 0:27:20 Association in around 1847, which was what the tribunal was referring to and saying, look, 247 0:27:20 --> 0:27:24 you know, there's already been a huge body of medical ethics, notwithstanding, we've had the 248 0:27:24 --> 0:27:30 Hippocratic oath since, you know, 500 BC, which also says you shall not administer a poison, 249 0:27:31 --> 0:27:38 and you shall not encourage such a course, etc. Right. First do no harm. So there's been a body 250 0:27:38 --> 0:27:45 of medical ethics since at least 500 BC on record. So they go through that at the beginning, and then 251 0:27:45 --> 0:27:50 they look at the medical experiments and the medical treatment that was being inflicted on 252 0:27:50 --> 0:27:59 the prisoners of war and other nationals in various hospitals, etc. And they judged the medics that 253 0:27:59 --> 0:28:04 were brought to trial on the basis of whether or not they'd uphold those laws and those medical 254 0:28:04 --> 0:28:09 ethics. And of course, several of them were found guilty and the death penalty was handed down, 255 0:28:09 --> 0:28:15 and they were executed. Some of them were imprisoned, some of them were found not guilty. 256 0:28:16 --> 0:28:20 But what it does on that page, permissible medical experiments, is it sets out 10, 257 0:28:23 --> 0:28:30 you know, principles that must be applied in all cases. And that becomes known as the Nuremberg 258 0:28:30 --> 0:28:37 Code. And the Nuremberg Code itself was published in 1947 as a separate code, 259 0:28:37 --> 0:28:44 saying this is binding on all physicians. Now bearing in mind the Nuremberg Code itself arose 260 0:28:44 --> 0:28:51 out of those medical trials, which were and are international binding criminal case law. 261 0:28:52 --> 0:28:58 And therefore the fact that those medics were up were held to those standards at that time, 262 0:28:59 --> 0:29:05 meant that they had failed the standards at that time to a criminal level, such that they were 263 0:29:05 --> 0:29:12 found guilty of crimes against humanity because they had not obtained informed consent freely given, 264 0:29:12 --> 0:29:20 etc. Now what happens after the Nuremberg Code is published in 1947 is that the World Medical 265 0:29:20 --> 0:29:26 Association does an audit of the medical schools of the Third Reich and finds out that most of them 266 0:29:26 --> 0:29:34 had not required their graduates to swear an oath of any form. And indeed the evidence showed 267 0:29:34 --> 0:29:40 that the graduates didn't know the law and were blindly following orders. And as far as they were 268 0:29:40 --> 0:29:45 concerned, they were perfectly entitled just to blindly follow orders. And that was obviously 269 0:29:45 --> 0:29:50 part of their defence, which was rejected ultimately because following orders is no defence. 270 0:29:50 --> 0:29:59 Sorry, Pete, I'm right in the middle of something. Yeah, sorry. So then what happens is that the 271 0:30:00 --> 0:30:07 Universal Declaration of Human Rights is issued in 1948, which specifically says that everyone 272 0:30:07 --> 0:30:14 has the right to life and everyone has the right not to be tortured or given cruel, inhumane, 273 0:30:14 --> 0:30:22 degrading treatment or punishment. And then it sets out all kinds of other rights. But then in 1950 274 0:30:22 --> 0:30:27 you have the European Convention of Human Rights, which also enshrines the right to life and the 275 0:30:27 --> 0:30:33 right not to receive cruel, inhumane, degrading treatment or punishment, etc., including medical 276 0:30:33 --> 0:30:40 treatment without consent. In 1950, the World Medical Association produces the Declaration of Geneva, 277 0:30:40 --> 0:30:48 which binds all physicians. It specifically says it binds all physicians. And it is basically the 278 0:30:48 --> 0:30:54 Nuremberg Code on steroids, together with a whole bunch of other human rights and criminal code 279 0:30:55 --> 0:31:04 points that governs a physician. And it's pages long. And then in 1964, the Hippocratic Oath was 280 0:31:05 --> 0:31:12 updated. And in 1964, the Declaration of Helsinki was put in place. And the Declaration of Helsinki 281 0:31:12 --> 0:31:20 is the Nuremberg Code and the Declaration of Geneva on steroids. And so it's pages and pages 282 0:31:20 --> 0:31:27 of finer detail about how to conduct human experimentation on live human subjects in 283 0:31:27 --> 0:31:33 accordance with international ethics and the law, both criminal and civil law, and clearly 284 0:31:34 --> 0:31:41 getting informed consent, fully informed consent, freely given, is a critical part of all of that. 285 0:31:42 --> 0:31:49 So then what you have is the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, 286 0:31:49 --> 0:31:53 which again, enshrines the right not to receive medical treatment without consent, the right to 287 0:31:53 --> 0:31:59 life. You have the International Covenant on Economic and Civil and Cultural Rights, which 288 0:31:59 --> 0:32:06 again, enshrines those rights. And then you have the Oviedo Convention in 1997, which again, 289 0:32:06 --> 0:32:12 provides even more detail about the informed consent process and live human experimentation. 290 0:32:12 --> 0:32:19 And you have the Human Rights and Bioethics Act of 2005, which again, enshrines the Declaration of 291 0:32:19 --> 0:32:26 Helsinki and all of those other declarations. And in the UK, we have the Human Medicines for 292 0:32:26 --> 0:32:33 Clinical Trial, used 2004, which specifically enshrines the Declaration of Helsinki, which 293 0:32:33 --> 0:32:41 specifically enshrines the Nuremberg Code, etc. So when you actually look at those on top of the 294 0:32:41 --> 0:32:47 Geneva Conventions and all the additional protocols that came out after the Second World War, 295 0:32:48 --> 0:32:58 the whole body of law leaves absolutely no doubt whatsoever that those fundamental principles of 296 0:32:58 --> 0:33:05 the Nuremberg Code, i.e. the informed voluntary consent freely given, etc., forms part of domestic 297 0:33:05 --> 0:33:12 and international law across the world. And I challenge any lawyer to say that it doesn't, 298 0:33:13 --> 0:33:18 and to prove to me in which part of all of those laws that it specifically says it doesn't. 299 0:33:19 --> 0:33:22 And Stephen and I were talking about this earlier, because there's a whole load of 300 0:33:22 --> 0:33:26 misinformation going around the internet about people saying, oh, the Nuremberg Code doesn't 301 0:33:26 --> 0:33:33 apply. But that's just nonsense. And it sounds like controlled opposition to me, because 302 0:33:34 --> 0:33:40 the Nuremberg Code is at the heart of this pandemic, because all of the measures have been 303 0:33:40 --> 0:33:49 experimental, apart from hand washing. On the empirical evidence of the public health studies 304 0:33:50 --> 0:33:58 from the last, well, since 1890s, I've gone back to 1870, and I've actually done the due diligence 305 0:33:58 --> 0:34:04 myself, and I've searched for all the research studies on hand washing, on lockdowns, on masks, 306 0:34:04 --> 0:34:12 on all the rest of it. And the only measure that consistently shows reduction in viral spread is 307 0:34:12 --> 0:34:21 hand washing. Right? So that means all the rest of these measures are live human experiments using 308 0:34:21 --> 0:34:27 live human subjects. And the evidence shows that people are not giving their informed consent 309 0:34:27 --> 0:34:33 being locked down, to being socially distanced, to being masked, tested, injected, 310 0:34:34 --> 0:34:41 denied early medical treatment, etc. We could go on. These are all experimental measures. 311 0:34:41 --> 0:34:47 And therefore, on the analysis, what that means is that not only are these grave breaches of the 312 0:34:47 --> 0:34:56 warfare conventions amounting to prohibited acts of unlawful warfare, okay, but they also amount 313 0:34:56 --> 0:35:07 to clearly murder if it's with intent. Now, on the analysis, when you, for example, inject someone, 314 0:35:08 --> 0:35:16 you intend to break their skin. That is a wound. So therefore, under section 20 of offences against 315 0:35:16 --> 0:35:23 the person at 1861, you've wounded that person with intent. Anything that flows from that wound, 316 0:35:23 --> 0:35:30 because that wound has included a whole vial of substances that you've just injected into that 317 0:35:30 --> 0:35:37 person, anything that flows from that wound is your liability, the individual who has wounded 318 0:35:37 --> 0:35:45 that person with that substance. Now, if they are maimed or injured or died, die from it, 319 0:35:46 --> 0:35:51 it only won't be your criminal responsibility. If you have obtained prior 320 0:35:51 --> 0:36:01 freely informed, freely given rather, fully informed consent. Now, on the evidence, that's 321 0:36:01 --> 0:36:09 not happening with any of these measures. If we go to the injections in particular, on the evidence, 322 0:36:09 --> 0:36:18 none of us know what are in those injections because the, in this country, June Raine of the MHRA 323 0:36:18 --> 0:36:26 has confirmed that she accepts Pfizer's submission, that they are entitled to withhold 324 0:36:26 --> 0:36:30 the full list of ingredients on the basis that it's a commercial trade secret. 325 0:36:32 --> 0:36:38 Therefore, de facto, we do not know what are in those injections. Therefore, de facto, 326 0:36:39 --> 0:36:46 you cannot give informed consent and you cannot obtain informed consent. So if you're not telling 327 0:36:46 --> 0:36:51 people what's in the injections because you don't know, it doesn't matter if they're consenting, 328 0:36:51 --> 0:36:57 you haven't obtained lawful, legal, moral, ethical consent. Therefore, anything that happens to that 329 0:36:57 --> 0:37:04 person will be your personal, civil and criminal liability. And this is a serious point I've been 330 0:37:04 --> 0:37:11 trying to get across to anyone who's conducting these injections because the evidence is that 331 0:37:11 --> 0:37:17 none of us are taught law at school. The medics are not taught law at medical school apart from 332 0:37:17 --> 0:37:22 a very small amount. The people administering the injections aren't necessarily even medics. 333 0:37:23 --> 0:37:35 So the NHS apparently gives three hours of training on informed consent before these people are 334 0:37:35 --> 0:37:41 required to give these injections. But in fact, the application form from the NHS 335 0:37:41 --> 0:37:48 for the vaccinators specifically says you can assume informed consent has been obtained. 336 0:37:50 --> 0:37:55 And when you go into these clinics and the evidence from the clinics is that these 337 0:37:55 --> 0:38:01 injectors are therefore assuming informed consent has already been obtained. They don't run them 338 0:38:01 --> 0:38:06 through the individuals through an individual clinical risk assessment to find out their 339 0:38:06 --> 0:38:12 individual risks. They are not complying with the requirements of the patient information leaflet, 340 0:38:12 --> 0:38:19 which specifically say you must give this leaflet to somebody several weeks before because they must 341 0:38:19 --> 0:38:27 have an allergy test to all the ingredients. And these leaflets are not even being given to people 342 0:38:27 --> 0:38:31 or if they are there being given after the injection, the allergy tests aren't being 343 0:38:31 --> 0:38:39 conducted, I could go on. But basically the informed consent procedure is not being followed. 344 0:38:39 --> 0:38:47 Virtually every principle of the Nuremberg Code is being breached. And that applies also to the 345 0:38:47 --> 0:38:56 face masks. It applies to the tests. And so what this means is that these are on an international 346 0:38:56 --> 0:39:04 level crimes against humanity. They are causing genocide and they are bio warfare using bio weapons. 347 0:39:04 --> 0:39:11 And that's on the definitions of Article 6, Article 7 and Article 8 of the Rome Statute of 348 0:39:11 --> 0:39:19 the International Criminal Court. So that's how serious this is. And as I say, the evidence is 349 0:39:19 --> 0:39:23 that the people who are administering these injections or putting masks on children or, 350 0:39:24 --> 0:39:30 you know, the companies telling their staff that they have to test and mask, none of these people 351 0:39:30 --> 0:39:39 know the law. And they're not reading the law. And when you point the law out to them, they simply go 352 0:39:39 --> 0:39:44 into, oh, it's government guidance, it's company policy, we're doing as we're told, we're following 353 0:39:44 --> 0:39:50 orders basically. And they think they're entitled to absolve themselves of any responsibility or 354 0:39:50 --> 0:39:57 liability by simply parroting that. And the rude awakening that many, many, many people are having 355 0:39:57 --> 0:40:04 to have is that no, no, no, no, no, this is an individual, civil and criminal, personal 356 0:40:05 --> 0:40:12 and private liability that you will bear as the individual who is either perpetrating, 357 0:40:12 --> 0:40:18 aiding and abetting or complicit in these crimes. Because either you are demanding that someone 358 0:40:19 --> 0:40:24 has these measures or you're the person putting the mask on someone or putting the test up someone's 359 0:40:24 --> 0:40:31 nose or injecting them. So either you're the person committing the actual act in law, we call it the 360 0:40:31 --> 0:40:40 actus reus. And if you have the necessary intent, the mens rea, then you know, you've committed the 361 0:40:40 --> 0:40:47 crime on the face of it. So this is where people are really seriously falling down because they have 362 0:40:47 --> 0:40:52 not been taught law at school, they haven't taken responsibility to teach themselves law when they 363 0:40:52 --> 0:41:00 leave school. And so they're walking around clueless. And the point I made to Stephen earlier is this, 364 0:41:00 --> 0:41:06 and it's a very crucial point, because I'm an employment lawyer as well. Now, any employment 365 0:41:06 --> 0:41:14 contract or code of conduct specifically says you must uphold the rule of law. And yet most people 366 0:41:14 --> 0:41:21 have told their employer, yes, I can accept this contract. And yes, I can comply with my your code 367 0:41:21 --> 0:41:27 of conduct, because yes, I know the law and I can uphold it. Whereas in fact, they've just committed 368 0:41:27 --> 0:41:33 a fraud on their employer and misrepresented their capability and competence to their employer. 369 0:41:33 --> 0:41:37 And in fact, if they've taken money from the public purse, they've defrauded the public purse 370 0:41:37 --> 0:41:43 on the evidence, because they knew damn well that they weren't taught law at school. 371 0:41:44 --> 0:41:48 They knew damn well, for example, they didn't learn much school at medical school. 372 0:41:49 --> 0:41:54 And so what the hell are they doing? Saying, yes, I can do that. I can do that job, give us a job, 373 0:41:54 --> 0:42:01 give us the money, and I won't bother telling my employer I don't know the law. I won't then bother 374 0:42:01 --> 0:42:06 teaching myself the law. And I'll just carry on doing this job as a lawless individual. 375 0:42:08 --> 0:42:13 And unfortunately, that's what the evidence is showing is coming out of most professionals, 376 0:42:13 --> 0:42:18 including the MPs, including the medics, including the teachers, including all these people, 377 0:42:18 --> 0:42:25 they don't know the law. And so what we have is an absolutely tragic situation, 378 0:42:26 --> 0:42:32 where we basically have a society full of people who don't know the law and who are committing 379 0:42:32 --> 0:42:40 prohibited acts of unlawful warfare on each other in grave breach of the warfare conventions. 380 0:42:42 --> 0:42:51 And not even realizing. And I laugh because it's just so crazy to me that actually we went through 381 0:42:51 --> 0:42:58 all of that Nuremberg trials, we went through all of those years, 70 odd years since, of bringing 382 0:42:58 --> 0:43:03 people to trial, even in the 60s, nurses and doctors were brought to trial for the crimes 383 0:43:03 --> 0:43:09 that they committed against people in the third right. Right. And we've had 70 years more evidence 384 0:43:09 --> 0:43:15 and law to make sure this never happens again. And here we are with the worst set of crimes 385 0:43:15 --> 0:43:21 against humanity ever committed in the history of humankind, literally repeating the Nuremberg trials 386 0:43:21 --> 0:43:28 all over again, because clearly nobody's learned anything and they've forgotten the whole lot. 387 0:43:29 --> 0:43:35 So what I would like to do at another time, because I'll wrap up now and we can take questions, 388 0:43:35 --> 0:43:43 but I've been drafting and I continue to draft this huge long notice of liability, 389 0:43:43 --> 0:43:50 which I've been sending out for people. And in that I can take you through all the law in more 390 0:43:50 --> 0:43:58 detail in a separate session for those who want to go through it. But what we found was that if we 391 0:43:58 --> 0:44:04 serve short form notices of liability to people saying you're breaking the law, stop it. Well, 392 0:44:04 --> 0:44:09 as I've just shown you, people don't know the law. So they just think, oh, well, this is all silly. 393 0:44:09 --> 0:44:14 It means nothing. And that's what they're saying. These notices have no legal meaning. They're a 394 0:44:14 --> 0:44:18 complete nonsense. Well, you would say that, wouldn't you, if you had no idea about the law 395 0:44:18 --> 0:44:25 and you read it and it meant nothing to you. So I've been a big fan of actually, this is 170 or 396 0:44:25 --> 0:44:33 pages, my notice of liability, because this sets out the law in black and white with hyperlinks 397 0:44:33 --> 0:44:40 and all the references so that nobody can deny, having read this, that they didn't know the law. 398 0:44:41 --> 0:44:46 But also, of course, our job is to educate people and to do try and save people from 399 0:44:46 --> 0:44:50 themselves and to save everyone else from being harmed by those people. So obviously, 400 0:44:50 --> 0:44:55 it's a huge educational document as well. And for those people who have actually read it, 401 0:44:55 --> 0:45:03 they've been gobsmacked because they really didn't know the law that's contained in this document. 402 0:45:04 --> 0:45:08 But if we can get this out to people so that the good people read it, 403 0:45:08 --> 0:45:12 realising, realise they're breaking the law, they will cease and desist. 404 0:45:14 --> 0:45:21 Right. But the bad guys will either put it in the bin or they'll read it and think, well, I don't 405 0:45:21 --> 0:45:26 care. I'll carry on doing it anyway. But then we've gradually found out who the people are 406 0:45:27 --> 0:45:32 who are intending to carry on committing these horrendous crimes and who are those who are 407 0:45:32 --> 0:45:38 simply ignorant. Because whilst ignorance of the law is no defence, and it won't defend them from 408 0:45:38 --> 0:45:45 what they've done to date, at least they could then stop killing and harming people going forward. 409 0:45:45 --> 0:45:53 And that's the intention. So I've said an awful lot. As I say, I haven't gone into the actual 410 0:45:53 --> 0:46:02 real details of the case law and the articles, etc. to cite them at you in detail. But I'm happy 411 0:46:02 --> 0:46:07 to send out this notice to any of you so that you can read it all for yourself. And as I say, 412 0:46:08 --> 0:46:14 reconvene for another session where we go through the finer detail of the law if people are interested. 413 0:46:16 --> 0:46:23 So, yes, there we go. I'll take a breath. Wonderful, wonderful, Anna, for you. 414 0:46:25 --> 0:46:35 Almost 10 o'clock on Sunday night. Thank you for that masterful expose. And I got this quote for 415 0:46:35 --> 0:46:43 your notice of liability, which I've shared with people. Detail prevents denial. There you are. 416 0:46:43 --> 0:46:50 Detail prevents denial. So I would practice law for 20 years. I just want everybody, you know, 417 0:46:50 --> 0:46:57 I've shared this numerous presentations and what Anna has taken us through is a frame is a framework 418 0:46:57 --> 0:47:04 for thinking about this. But many doctors and others, they just want simple answers. Well, 419 0:47:04 --> 0:47:12 the human body is complex and so is the law. And there are seven layers. So just to summarize 420 0:47:12 --> 0:47:16 what Anna just said and her notice of liability goes through this. I'm just giving you a chance 421 0:47:16 --> 0:47:21 to breathe that in while the questions are coming. There are seven layers that apply. There's God's 422 0:47:21 --> 0:47:26 law or natural law. Then there's international treaties. Then there's a nation's constitution. 423 0:47:26 --> 0:47:30 Then there's national laws. Then there's state laws. There's regulations. And then there's 424 0:47:30 --> 0:47:37 contract law. Seven layers of laws. And people are gaily going along and absolutely ignoring them. 425 0:47:37 --> 0:47:41 And give you one example of how practically this operates. Someone came to me and said, 426 0:47:41 --> 0:47:47 I was injured by the jab. And I said, okay, how were you injured? I said, well, I suffered this. 427 0:47:47 --> 0:47:54 Good. Who administered the jab? I don't know. Where did you do it? At some centre. People have 428 0:47:54 --> 0:48:00 got no idea who's administering. I haven't read the notice of the informed consent document. 429 0:48:00 --> 0:48:07 And I just urge all of us on this call to take what Anna says on board and start recording 430 0:48:07 --> 0:48:14 details. And everyone you speak to, get them to record details. Because the first thing a lawyer 431 0:48:14 --> 0:48:18 says to you is, well, what happened? And people say, I don't know, I got jabbed. And that's all 432 0:48:18 --> 0:48:24 they know. So over to you, Stephen, for your first questions. Anna, Stephen, as we know, 433 0:48:25 --> 0:48:30 it's a first go at the questions here. As the convener of this wonderful group. 434 0:48:34 --> 0:48:37 And if you unmute yourself, Stephen, that would be grand. 435 0:48:39 --> 0:48:44 No, I'm just having it says low system resources. So it's keeping I was just trying to close a few 436 0:48:44 --> 0:48:51 things because you keep breaking up. Okay, Stephen, are we still breaking up on it? 437 0:48:52 --> 0:48:54 No, that's better. I've closed out a few things now. 438 0:48:55 --> 0:49:02 Okay. So that was the best presentation we've had, I think we've had some really good ones, 439 0:49:02 --> 0:49:10 including from Robert Kennedy. And he was pretty good. So it was absolutely brilliant what you said. 440 0:49:10 --> 0:49:21 And I wonder whether if we edit it and edit the video of you speaking, and, and then offer it to 441 0:49:21 --> 0:49:31 you to okay, would you agree to us publishing? You know, that presentation or? Oh, yes, please. Yes. 442 0:49:31 --> 0:49:36 Because lots of people have asked me to try and sum it all up. And quite often when I'm out and 443 0:49:36 --> 0:49:41 about on talks, they can't hear what I'm saying very well. So it's wonderful that we've been able 444 0:49:41 --> 0:49:51 to do it capture it on a platform like this. And also, in the camera as we as discussed this 445 0:49:51 --> 0:49:57 morning, could could we work together? Because I would really, I can see that, you know, your 446 0:49:57 --> 0:50:04 notices of liability extremely detailed and and Charles has explained why that's important. I 447 0:50:04 --> 0:50:11 I agree. And but I think that we ought to serve them on the police, who are conducting a criminal 448 0:50:11 --> 0:50:18 investigation. And they've also been put on notice on the 20th of December, that they are to stop, 449 0:50:18 --> 0:50:25 they are to stop the vaccination program in the UK, while they investigate while they conduct a 450 0:50:25 --> 0:50:33 criminal investigation. And the intent from us is to drown them with evidence every week, 451 0:50:33 --> 0:50:38 so that they can never finish their criminal investigation. But obviously, they should have 452 0:50:38 --> 0:50:43 stopped the vaccination program and they haven't. Now we need to really put pressure on them 453 0:50:43 --> 0:50:48 to stop it once and for all in the UK to show the rest of the world how to behave. 454 0:50:50 --> 0:50:57 Absolutely. And if I may update people on that, actually, is that basically one of the things 455 0:50:57 --> 0:51:03 we've been doing as veterans is engaging with local stand in the park communities and other 456 0:51:03 --> 0:51:11 concerned groups of people and going to local police stations to try and obtain crime references 457 0:51:11 --> 0:51:16 from other police stations, because the point we're making to the police is this, you know, 458 0:51:16 --> 0:51:23 if you're injured in Wales or Dundee or whatever, you can't travel all the way down to Hammersmith 459 0:51:23 --> 0:51:29 in London to report your injuries to the Metropolitan Police there. And yet that's 460 0:51:29 --> 0:51:36 the Metropolitan Police's strategy that they're saying, that they've told other police stations 461 0:51:36 --> 0:51:41 around the country not to get involved and not to accept reports of any injuries, etc., because 462 0:51:41 --> 0:51:46 it's all being dealt with out of Hammersmith. Well, of course, that's a nonsense. You know, 463 0:51:46 --> 0:51:52 that doesn't work for people. So what people have been doing is going to various, you know, 464 0:51:52 --> 0:51:57 police stations around the country and West Yorkshire has now issued a crime reference. 465 0:51:59 --> 0:52:10 Manchester has. Northumbria. Northumbria were issuing an incident reference. They said it wasn't 466 0:52:10 --> 0:52:16 a crime reference. And what you'll hear from all of these pieces of evidence that the community 467 0:52:16 --> 0:52:21 are gathering from when they go to all these different police stations is the same script 468 0:52:21 --> 0:52:27 being read out essentially by the police, which is, oh, we see you're here to protest, and the 469 0:52:27 --> 0:52:33 people say, no, we're serving notices of liability and we're asking you to close down the injection 470 0:52:33 --> 0:52:37 clinics. And then they say, well, this is your opinion. No, no, no, this is a live criminal 471 0:52:37 --> 0:52:42 investigation being run by the police. And we're demanding that you close the clinics down. No, 472 0:52:42 --> 0:52:46 no, no, we're not going to do that. We're not going to do that. And anyway, it's not a live 473 0:52:46 --> 0:52:53 criminal investigation. It's just a crime reference that's been issued. And so they're trying to 474 0:52:53 --> 0:52:57 totally downplay it, minimise it, and they are refusing to close down the clinics. 475 0:52:58 --> 0:53:01 So then what's happening is that the people are trying to close them down themselves. 476 0:53:02 --> 0:53:07 And then the police get called out by the clinic staff and the police turn up, 477 0:53:07 --> 0:53:12 having refused to go down there and close them down. They then turn up and carry on facilitating 478 0:53:12 --> 0:53:19 the clinic remaining open typically. So they are then actively aiding and abetting these crimes 479 0:53:20 --> 0:53:25 happening, which is just shocking. And most of them won't stand under their oath, can't cite 480 0:53:25 --> 0:53:31 their oath. So again, we have a serious problem because these individuals are therefore not 481 0:53:32 --> 0:53:39 legitimately uniformed and weaponised. They are merely men and women impersonating legitimate 482 0:53:39 --> 0:53:47 police officers. And so again, that's part of the process that we're going through is proving on 483 0:53:47 --> 0:53:53 evidence to therefore report it to the police standards and also to the Ministry of Defence, 484 0:53:53 --> 0:53:57 that these individuals are not standing under their oath, they're not standing under their code of 485 0:53:57 --> 0:54:04 conduct. They are perverting the course of justice, et cetera. So that's what groups have been, 486 0:54:04 --> 0:54:09 in terms of evidence, have been gathering for the last two months around the country. 487 0:54:10 --> 0:54:16 Anna, how can the police get away with saying, yes, there is a crime reference number, but 488 0:54:16 --> 0:54:18 there's no criminal investigation. That's just nonsense. 489 0:54:20 --> 0:54:27 Agreed. Agreed. Do you know that Savage, Javid's brother is also- 490 0:54:27 --> 0:54:30 Head of professional standards at the Metropolitan Police. 491 0:54:31 --> 0:54:33 Clear conflict of interest. 492 0:54:33 --> 0:54:38 He's had to recuse himself, I believe. I'm not, I mean, I don't know that, 493 0:54:38 --> 0:54:40 but I've been told that by Mark Sexton. 494 0:54:40 --> 0:54:46 Yeah, he certainly should. So a deplorable, you know, conflict of interest. So yeah, basically, 495 0:54:46 --> 0:54:51 the people here are trying everything they can to ensure that everybody knows that this is a live 496 0:54:51 --> 0:54:55 criminal investigation, because the police were meant to have made a public announcement, they 497 0:54:55 --> 0:55:02 still haven't. The press are doing everything to deny that it's happening, but yes, it is absolutely 498 0:55:02 --> 0:55:07 happening. And as you say, as we were saying, Stephen, earlier, it's about, you know, making 499 0:55:08 --> 0:55:14 sure that the police have as much evidence as possible, so they can't possibly try and close 500 0:55:14 --> 0:55:19 it down as an investigation or claim that they didn't have sufficient evidence, et cetera. 501 0:55:19 --> 0:55:24 But as you know, Mark and Philip are saying that, you know, the police have literally got a tsunami 502 0:55:24 --> 0:55:32 of evidence and that must be the case. Isn't it interesting that Sad- what's his name? 503 0:55:33 --> 0:55:40 I can never remember his name. His brother is the head of professional standards at the Metropolitan 504 0:55:40 --> 0:55:47 Police and the head of the Metro- sorry, the head of professional standards is a key position in any 505 0:55:47 --> 0:55:54 police force. And this is the biggest police force in the UK by a long way. And absolutely, yeah. So 506 0:55:54 --> 0:56:01 it looks to me, it's either a massive coincidence that he's been the Home Secretary in the past 507 0:56:01 --> 0:56:10 for about six months, I think, and he's now the Health Secretary. And yet his brother 508 0:56:10 --> 0:56:16 lands up with a plum job and a key job at the Metropolitan Police because the head of professional 509 0:56:16 --> 0:56:22 standards would be the people who investigate any complaints to the police that they haven't 510 0:56:22 --> 0:56:29 investigated properly after the issuing of a crime number. So it looks to me like they've planned it, 511 0:56:30 --> 0:56:36 or there's been a huge coincidence, you know. Somehow or other, Javid's brother had the 512 0:56:36 --> 0:56:42 capability to become head of the professional standards department. I think it's 31,000 police 513 0:56:42 --> 0:56:50 officers, is it Peter? Wow. He gets to be the head of professional standards. And that's a key 514 0:56:50 --> 0:56:58 position for stopping any criminal investigation. David, that ties into- you mentioned conflict of 515 0:56:58 --> 0:57:04 interest. And Anna, it's worth getting your view on this issue. Just because there is a conflict 516 0:57:04 --> 0:57:10 of interest, unless there's contractual provisions or legislative provisions, that doesn't actually 517 0:57:10 --> 0:57:16 exclude people. You know, we talk about conflicts of interest. It's useful to know, but unless it's 518 0:57:17 --> 0:57:25 legislated, it doesn't have any consequence other, really, other than not believing somebody. So, 519 0:57:25 --> 0:57:27 Anna, what does- you okay? 520 0:57:30 --> 0:57:37 Oh, actually, sorry. I've just, yeah, I've got a client here, funnily enough. He's got a- 521 0:57:37 --> 0:57:40 we've got a four-day tribunal hearing starting at 10 o'clock tomorrow morning. So I've just got to 522 0:57:40 --> 0:57:47 say goodbye to him. Can you give me two minutes, please? But yeah, I'm not entirely sure that 523 0:57:47 --> 0:57:52 I can answer that right this minute. But if you- let me just say goodbye to this person, 524 0:57:52 --> 0:58:02 and then I'll come back. Okay. Okay. Okay. So, Peter, sorry, while we're waiting for Anna to 525 0:58:02 --> 0:58:07 come back, Stephen, I think we can we get an update from Sam Dubay on what's happening in Ottawa? 526 0:58:08 --> 0:58:16 Sure. Sam, are you there? Ready to give us- I haven't prepared him for this. 527 0:58:16 --> 0:58:20 Yes. Hello, Charles. Hello, Stephen. I'm here. Sorry, I'm just sitting like- 528 0:58:22 --> 0:58:29 10 feet away from the computer. But I'll just tell you what I do know. So the police violence 529 0:58:29 --> 0:58:38 against protesters and supporters is real. I've seen it myself. They've overreached significantly. 530 0:58:39 --> 0:58:44 They're going after businesses today. I heard they're entering businesses trying to arrest 531 0:58:45 --> 0:58:51 owners of businesses who have been servicing the supporters. There was an internet cafe, 532 0:58:51 --> 0:58:57 it was reported this morning, where police entered and attempted to shut the business 533 0:58:57 --> 0:59:02 down until they realized they were being videotaped. And then they walked out. Police 534 0:59:02 --> 0:59:06 are being imported, or at least people are being imported from elsewhere, as far as we can tell. 535 0:59:07 --> 0:59:14 There are some hopeful videos online of people actually talking to police officers, and some 536 0:59:14 --> 0:59:20 police officers offering sympathy. There's some videos of a police officer hugging individuals. 537 0:59:20 --> 0:59:25 And then shortly thereafter, there was a video of the same police officer fainting, 538 0:59:25 --> 0:59:32 like literally fainting, falling back and fainting. And I saw that myself on two videos. But 539 0:59:33 --> 0:59:41 in terms of the sympathy from the police, it's very hard to quantify. It's very hard to quantify. 540 0:59:41 --> 0:59:48 Now, you may have heard media reports that somebody threw a bicycle at a police horse, 541 0:59:48 --> 0:59:52 a woman threw a bicycle at a police horse. So there may have been two separate incidents, 542 0:59:52 --> 0:59:58 but the police reports are not completely true. I'll just tell you that right now. 543 0:59:58 --> 1:00:05 So there was a woman, there's two separate videos that I saw, and she was an older woman, 544 1:00:05 --> 1:00:12 and she was pleading with the police. The camera was literally feet from her. She was expressing, 545 1:00:12 --> 1:00:18 she said, there's nothing but love here, and there's nothing but hope here. And then the 546 1:00:18 --> 1:00:23 police horses came charging out. And it was pretty clear from the way the police horses charged out 547 1:00:23 --> 1:00:28 that they didn't care about hitting anybody. And there was already a track of space between 548 1:00:28 --> 1:00:33 the protesters and the police. The horses came out, and one of the people that got trampled was 549 1:00:33 --> 1:00:40 this lady. So if you look at the video, when you look at the photos, you'll see that she is an older 550 1:00:40 --> 1:00:47 woman. She was using a walker. That may have been the bicycle that the police were reporting. 551 1:00:48 --> 1:00:54 And it just came out that she is actually a First Nations, full-blooded Mohawk clan mother. 552 1:00:56 --> 1:01:02 So in other words, she's a First Nations elder. And there's an interview of her. Her name is Candy 553 1:01:02 --> 1:01:07 that appeared, I believe, yesterday, and she seems to be okay. She's got a sore shoulder, 554 1:01:07 --> 1:01:13 and she expressed nothing but love and hope in that short interview. And I'm quite sure the 555 1:01:13 --> 1:01:17 interview occurred after the incident. So the media is doing its best to cover this up, 556 1:01:18 --> 1:01:23 because not only was she physically challenged and in her walker, but she was older, and she is a 557 1:01:23 --> 1:01:31 First Nations elder, which is a terrible combination for the WOCUS and for the regime. 558 1:01:32 --> 1:01:39 So hopefully, we'll see that come out. Mainstream media in different parts of Canada are being 559 1:01:39 --> 1:01:46 escorted away by RCMP, because people are screaming at them, fake news, fake news, fake news. 560 1:01:46 --> 1:01:51 And exactly like Kerry says, terrible optics. That's right. So I don't think the horses are 561 1:01:51 --> 1:01:56 anywhere to be seen right now in downtown Ottawa. They definitely have towed trucks. 562 1:01:57 --> 1:02:03 There's video of trucks having their windows smashed and the police pulling protesters out. 563 1:02:03 --> 1:02:09 There's a video of police using what appears to be excessive force with individuals who are not 564 1:02:09 --> 1:02:14 resisting. There was a claim by the police that they were not using tear gas. And then when videos 565 1:02:14 --> 1:02:19 surfaced showing them launching tear gas, they came out saying that the protesters were using 566 1:02:19 --> 1:02:25 tear gas against them. And then video surfaced of them launching tear gas canisters and the 567 1:02:25 --> 1:02:31 protesters kicking the cans back at the police. And as Anne mentioned here in the chat, they did 568 1:02:31 --> 1:02:38 free 76 bank accounts that they're admitting to of protesters. And I didn't know about the 569 1:02:38 --> 1:02:47 extended family. I don't know how deep that's gone. There may be many more. And TD Bank also 570 1:02:47 --> 1:02:53 has frozen two accounts that had significant funds in them over a million dollars from what's been 571 1:02:53 --> 1:03:02 reported. There was video of two videos of the United Nations plane at Canadian Forces base 572 1:03:02 --> 1:03:08 North Bay that was sitting there without snow on it. We just recently had snow, so it would have 573 1:03:08 --> 1:03:14 had to have arrived recently or it was cleaned off. But that base is known to repair United 574 1:03:14 --> 1:03:19 Nations planes. So they get United Nations planes in regularly. So I'm not convinced that that's an 575 1:03:19 --> 1:03:26 indication that foreign troops or at least United Nations troops have entered the country via those 576 1:03:26 --> 1:03:33 UN planes. But there's other concern about foreign troops. People on the scene have said that 577 1:03:33 --> 1:03:39 they're not acting like normal police. Many of the people there in the uniforms don't have any 578 1:03:39 --> 1:03:46 name tags on. The Velcro patches have been removed. There was messages allegedly leaked from police on 579 1:03:46 --> 1:03:53 the scene who are being held in residence at the Chateau Laurier, one of our big hotels downtown, 580 1:03:53 --> 1:04:00 a historic hotel. And the dialogue between the police and the messages, some of it is quite 581 1:04:00 --> 1:04:06 shocking the way that they're belittling the protesters and the violence, unfortunately. 582 1:04:08 --> 1:04:12 Lisa just put up something in the chat about Dr. Paul Alexander. Poor Paul has been publishing 583 1:04:13 --> 1:04:18 four or five times a day on his substack. He still doesn't know whether there's a warrant out for his 584 1:04:18 --> 1:04:23 arrest. I know that he's moved location with his family. They got him out of the red zone. 585 1:04:24 --> 1:04:29 Roger Hodkinson is not in town, I can tell you that. I don't know where Byron Bridal is right now. 586 1:04:31 --> 1:04:37 Deanne has mentioned here that we got a third police chief. So there was a second interim 587 1:04:37 --> 1:04:42 chief that came in and I believe he quickly resigned and I don't know why. But then we have 588 1:04:42 --> 1:04:49 a new police chief who said that they're going after any protesters financially and will lay 589 1:04:49 --> 1:04:54 criminal charges in the investigation May last months. And he didn't specify how they were going 590 1:04:54 --> 1:04:59 to do that. But I suspect they're probably going to look at cell phone records and video. Oh yeah, 591 1:04:59 --> 1:05:09 he did mention the use of video. I've heard rumors of more trucks coming in but they've established 592 1:05:09 --> 1:05:17 checkpoints in town where on major intersections they've established checkpoints coming into town 593 1:05:17 --> 1:05:22 where you have to declare what your business is coming into Ottawa. I've spoken to friends who 594 1:05:22 --> 1:05:33 were coming in and one was coming to visit her son. So apparently they seem to be quite nice 595 1:05:33 --> 1:05:38 at the checkpoints as long as they think you're telling the truth. But I haven't spoken to anyone, 596 1:05:38 --> 1:05:45 any officers at a checkpoint. Yes, and Daria just put up a Rebel News article about 597 1:05:46 --> 1:05:52 one of the messages in the leaked police discourse there was about 598 1:05:54 --> 1:05:58 time they hear our jackboots or something like that. As I said, the police were really, 599 1:05:59 --> 1:06:06 in some ways they were mocking the protesters and it was quite alarming to see that attitude. 600 1:06:06 --> 1:06:18 And Sam, that's fantastic. Anna's back, that is wonderful. We'll have the opportunity to ask 601 1:06:18 --> 1:06:24 Sam questions a bit later. Sam is on the ground in Ottawa with that truckers convoy giving us 602 1:06:24 --> 1:06:31 great reports twice a week. So Stephen, now that Anna's back, Stephen, do you have any questions 603 1:06:31 --> 1:06:39 for Anna before we go to Heiko? I've asked the ones I actually had an opportunity this morning 604 1:06:39 --> 1:06:47 as well. So yeah, go ahead, Heiko. Wonderful. And everybody please note what Anna has shared with us 605 1:06:47 --> 1:06:54 because Stephen has been constantly hammering in all of these meetings is no informed consent. 606 1:06:54 --> 1:06:59 Just keep saying there's no informed consent, no informed consent, no, and you just keep because 607 1:06:59 --> 1:07:05 that just doesn't matter. No, keep hammering it. You know, Anna, I haven't heard a single doctor 608 1:07:05 --> 1:07:10 making that point and I cannot believe that I'm the only doctor in the world who's been saying 609 1:07:10 --> 1:07:17 that. I just cannot believe it. It's so basic to me as a doctor. You're not the only one. 610 1:07:18 --> 1:07:24 Pardon? You're not the only one. Heiko is another doctor in, he's, I think you're from Germany, 611 1:07:24 --> 1:07:33 Heiko, but you're in Norway. Yeah, spreading the grief. I was recording it from several other 612 1:07:33 --> 1:07:39 doctors that they don't have a clue what's in the jab. That's why I tried to steal my jab. 613 1:07:41 --> 1:07:48 Yes, Heiko's, he took the jab, which was intended for him and walked out with him. 614 1:07:49 --> 1:07:57 Yeah, you got arrested for that, didn't you, Heiko? No, I got a fee and then there was a trial and 615 1:07:58 --> 1:08:07 Dolores should come and while I was ordering the ticket online, I got the text that my, 616 1:08:07 --> 1:08:09 that the case was dropped. 617 1:08:09 --> 1:08:21 Yeah, well, that would have been a super- I tried again together with 15 others. 618 1:08:22 --> 1:08:29 You can hire Anna next time, Heiko. So you can barogue them and then hire Anna and 619 1:08:30 --> 1:08:37 break them with the Nuremberg code. They don't catch him. Well, they better start catching it. 620 1:08:38 --> 1:08:47 Yeah, I tried, as I said last time also, together with 15 others to close down a center or at least 621 1:08:47 --> 1:08:54 get some jabs to deliver to the police and the police, we called the police and they came and then 622 1:08:56 --> 1:09:00 because we didn't leave, you can protest outside. No, that's not a protest. We have to, 623 1:09:00 --> 1:09:06 it's a crime scene and we have to collect evidence. No, you're crazy. Get out of here. 624 1:09:06 --> 1:09:08 And I didn't and so I got arrested.