The 11 June 1999 Garnock Court fire in Irvine, Scotland, in which a disabled man died, led to an inquiry by the Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Committee into cladding fire safety:

theriveroflife.com/wp-content/plu… Bob Moore of the Fire Safety Development Group warned the Committee of the inadequacy of the Class 0 requirement for high rise cladding:

'you can cover up combustible material.. with a metal sheet.. and you may even meet the requirements for.. Class 0'

theriveroflife.com/wp-content/plu…

Many thanks to @grenfellinquiry for releasing this document: assets.grenfelltowerinquiry.org.uk/CTAR00000018_I…

Sadly, it turns out that @BRE_Group were trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the government as much as of the public. The following sentence is very 'economical with the truth': 'Cavity

https://twitter.com/AndrewChapman50/status/1451173467215306757

barriers were not fitted... and under DOE/BRE guidance at the time could be omitted where the cladding system was non-combustible.' Both clauses are true in themselves, but their being brought into connection naturally causes a trusting reader to assume that the Knowsley cladding

Israel, 11-17 July 2021: more covid 'cases' (= +ve PCR) among double vaccinated (> 14 days post-vacc.) per 100k double vacc. population, than among non-vacc. per 100k non-vacc. pop. in 2 age groups (20-29, 60-69). My calculations are here:

docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d…

Sources.. 1/ Case data: data.gov.il/dataset/covid-… where one immediately see that case numbers are many times greater for double vacc. (penultimate column) than non-vacc. (last column). 2/

Dr Charles Hoffe, a general practitioner in British Columbia, has been testing recently vaccinated people for blood clotting. So far 62% have an elevated D-dimer level, indicating (probable?) blood clotting.

(4:00 following)

bitchute.com/video/A6GbcUl6…

@MHRAgovuk Professor Sucharit Bhakdi reports that a German doctor has been doing similar research, and finding about 30% of vaccine recipients with elevated D-Dimer levels indicating blood clotting.

rumble.com/vie6yz-suchari…

Blood clotting starts 7:00
D-Dimer testing starts 10:05

3) Mayra Romera, Florida licensed paralegal, registered Democrat.

courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…

Observer at Marietta, Cobb County:

'hundreds of these ballots seemed impeccable, with no folds or creases. The bubble selections were perfectly
made.. all [were] selections for Biden.' 4) Susan Voyles, poll manager, Sandy Springs, Fulton County. Auditor in recount, GWCC Atlanta.

courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…

'one batch stood out. It was pristine.

the markings..on these ballots were unusually uniform, perhaps even with a ballot-marking device.. [≈]98% for.. Biden'

1/ Report by @StuteeMishra related to the battle for an independent audit of the Detroit election fails to explain the two main arguments of the members of the Board of Canvassers who have changed their minds about certifying the results. They say a) that
independent.co.uk/news/world/ame… 2/ they were advised by Wayne County counsel Janet Anderson-Davis that they were legally obliged to certify (affidavit of William Hartmann):

justthenews.com/sites/default/…

Please read the Affidavit by Zachary Larsen, an attorney and former Assistant Attorney General in the State of Michigan. On 3 November he visited 20-30 precincts and was able to confirm that the election process was being conducted according to law.

greatlakesjc.org/wp-content/upl…

1/ Next day, 4th Nov, Larsen visited the TCF Center, Detroit. He found that the process for maintaining secrecy, requiring 4 separate officials for each mail-in ballot, was not being followed. On the contrary officials were peeking into the envelopes to observe the ballots:

#ElectronicVotingSecurity An early (2007) evaluation of electronic voting security, 'EVEREST', was conducted on behalf of the State of Ohio by 3 teams, 2 from universities, one private sector cybersecurity.

cise.ufl.edu/~butler/pubs/e… It was highly critical of the 3 systems evaluated, ES&S, Hart, and Premier.

All failed to adequately defend an election from insiders, prevent virus infection, and protect cast votes:

Thread on the #GrenfellCoverup. By a grotesque post-Grenfell reinterpretation of the Approved Document guidance, the government has been seeking to evade its responsibility for the fire and put the blame on others. Labour, who share approximately equal responsibility from 1/ their time in government, especially from 1999-2010, are complicit in the cover-up. The essence of the matter is that combustible cladding on high rise was always allowed in the national building regulations from their inception in 1965 until 18 June 2017, 4 days after Grenfell,

Back in December 2017, with the aid of a useful graphic, Michel Barnier explained that under a UK-EU FTA, the UK would have 'regulatory autonomy' - which is to say that we will not be bound to follow any EU rules and regulations.

ec.europa.eu/commission/sit… He pointed out the UK's red lines: no ECJ jurisdiction, no free movement, no substantial ongoing financial contribution, independent trade policy, and regulatory autonomy, and observed that neither the EEA-EFTA, nor the Swiss, nor the Ukraine, nor the Turkey model were compatible

Farage claimed Wednesday that Barnier said the FTA negotiations will continue 3 years beyond end 2020. In fact it was @Nigel_Farage himself in the European Parliament who said they will take 3 years. Barnier, in response, corrected him. Thread:

https://twitter.com/brexitparty_uk/status/1192013071377739778

First, in passing, see that Farage first refers to us 'leaving' the EU at the end of the transition, while claiming it will take longer.

But then he claims that we don't leave the EU at all under the deal:

A thread on the transition, and the difference between a withdrawal period extension, and a transition period extension.

The three extensions to the withdrawal period were granted under Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union: 1/ There is no limit on the length of extension which can be agreed, nor is there any explicit limit on the number of extensions granted.

At the end of the withdrawal period, the EU Treaties 'cease to apply', which means in effect that the former Member State has left the Union. 2/

Farage proposes another Article 50 extension to 30 June 2020. The plan seems to be to negotiate a CETA type FTA during this period, to come into force on 1 July 2020. As an alternative, the UK and EU could agree to follow GATT Article 24 (!) telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/… @KTHopkins has just asked whether @Nigel_Farage has taken some sort of psycho-active substance. Potential problems with his plan:

1) Will the EU grant an extension to 30 June for this purpose?

2) Will they be overjoyed to jettison the Withdrawal Agreement?

In particular,

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl…

The government has published its Unilateral Declaration on Consent: as required by Article 18(2) of the new Protocol:

Oxford Law Professor John Finnis on the Supreme Court Judgement, not mincing his words:

'wholly unjustified by law... no plausible reason for transferring the conventions about prorogation into the domain of justiciable law... a historic mistake..'

policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/upl… Finnis: Prorogation is 'self-evidently' a proceeding in Parliament. By nullifying it, the Supreme Court acted against the Bill of Rights 1689, which provides that such proceedings ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court:

Michael Detmold, Emeritus Professor of Law at the University of Adelaide argues that the European Union (Withdrawal)(No. 2) Act is unconstitutional in its requirement for the PM to write a wholly dictated letter seeking an Article 50 extension: ukconstitutionallaw.org/2019/09/20/mic… He doubts whether the 'supposed law' is an Act of Parliament at all. What if a law was passed requiring Smith to write a love letter to a stranger Jones? Would this be a valid law?

#WithdrawalAgreement In the Withdrawal Agreement, the UK agrees to develop a long term 'economic partnership' with the EU with a customs union similar to the EU-Turkey CU. That is, we would be forced to align our tariffs with EU tariffs. We would have no say in the negotiation of new EU FTAs. The Commission would of course be negotiating on behalf of EU member states, not the UK. Moreover we would have no guarantee that the third country would agree an FTA with us also. It is the worse of all worlds.