spitfire
Walty McWaltface
Yes Mr A was not happy about that and that was the context for mentioning 'face nappies'.
Ebeneezer Bad
Wotta wanker.
Yes Mr A was not happy about that and that was the context for mentioning 'face nappies'.
Ebeneezer Bad
There's a guy in the place won't put a mask on his faceWotta wanker.
Family win high court battle against nutbobbin who accused Manchester Arena bombing victims of being actors. Apols for Mail link. I know some of you don’t like it but that’s all who are reporting it at the moment.
Bombing victims win High Court victory over conspiracy theorist
Richard Hall had claimed that no-one died in the 2017 attack, which killed 22 people at an Ariana Grande concert, alleging that it was faked by Government agencies.www.dailymail.co.uk
Fucking piece of shitA non-Mail link to the article - https://archive.ph/4p8vt
Richard Hall had claimed that no one died in the 2017 attack, which killed 22 people at an Ariana Grande concert, alleging that it was faked by Government agencies.
He even visited the homes of survivors - including Eve Hibbert, who suffered brain damage when suicide bomber Salman Abedi detonated his homemade device – and secretly filmed them.
In a video shared online, Mr Hall demonstrated setting up a camera disguised in fake plant foliage which he planned to use to film Eve, now 21, to see whether she could walk.
He later claimed he left 'a camera rolling' in his van which was 'parked in a public place'.
I do not propose to engage with the detail of the defendant’s evidence. Suffice it to say that, although his beliefs may be genuinely held, his theory that the Manchester bombing was an operation staged by government agencies in which no one was genuinely killed or injured is absurd and fantastical and it provides no basis to rebut the conviction.
I have already referred to the inherent implausibility of the defendant’s “staged attack” hypothesis. Whilst acknowledging that issues as to the claimants’ presence at the attack and the attack itself are separate and distinct, once the defendant’s general hypothesis has been rejected (as I have rejected it) it is unrealistic to maintain that the claimants were not there and were either not severely injured at all or acquired their injuries earlier and by a different mechanism than the bombing. Indeed, the latter points are simply preposterous.
The claimants’ injuries and how they came by them are described by Martin Hibbert, by Eve’s mother and in medical evidence from Mr Hibbert’s treating consultant and Eve’s GP. The defendant’s own analysis and observations on these topics are of no value because he is not qualified to comment. [....] As I have already observed, to maintain that the claimants “visibly injured, were likely harmed before the attack and recruited but did not attend the concert” (paragraph 89 of the defendant’s witness statement) is preposterous and untenable.
Paragraphs 39 and 40Exhibit RDH 1 to his witness statement, running to approximately 100 pages, contains a section headed “Evidence which refutes the official Manchester narrative and justifies an independent investigation”. Sub-headings include “Type of explosive allegedly used”, “Lack of building damage”, “Apparently unharmed victims” and so on. I will not embark on a more detailed description. They all tend to the same conclusion, which is that the Manchester bombing was a staged and therefore fake event involving conspiracy on a grand scale orchestrated by malign UK government agencies and in which the (“recruited”) claimants were complicit. I will not repeat the epithets that I have already applied to this hypothesis.
For these reasons, I find that the defendant has not discharged the evidential burden which rests on him. He has no real prospect, indeed no prospect at all, of success on the Issues and I will resolve them in the claimants’ favour.
The defendant’s applications for third party disclosure are also dismissed.
I'm proving:So you're literally going to ignore the studies I posted up?
What Big Point are you trying to prove here?
His influence has clearly not passed neither is it 'negligible' . You are deluding yourself, presumably to push some weird agenda or another.I'm proving:
A. Wakesfield's historical influence was less than expected and has now passed.
B. During covid the "AV"s had negligible influence on outcome.
C. Thus the hysterics around the words "Wakefield" and "antivax" is unjustified.
MMR vaccine pop-up clinics to be set-up in schools in bid to thwart measles outbreak as officials urge 'Wakefield generation' to come forward for jabs in unprecedented catch-up campaign
The NHS has sent letters to parents of six to 11-year-olds in England urging them to make an appointment with their GP if their child has not had both doses.
They have also issued reminders to 1million people aged 11 to 25 in London and the West Midlands, the two epicentres of the outbreak, encouraging them to get jabbed if they have not already done so.
Low uptake of the MMR vaccine has triggered a resurgence of the illness, which can be deadly.
The downward trend has been blamed on the discredited Dr Andrew Wakefield, who falsely linked the MMR injection to autism in the 90s. A rise of anti-vaxx beliefs in the wake of Covid may have also fuelled the crisis, experts say.
Health leaders today warned there is a 'very real risk' of fresh outbreaks across the country and urged people to come forward for jabs as soon as possible.
But there’s also an underrated danger in the capital: London’s high population of young adults. Strangely, this is one of the groups now most susceptible to developing — and then spreading — measles. Boomers tend to be fine: most will have had measles when young. Generation X and Millennials also tend to be fine: they were the lucky lot born after the vaccine programme started. It’s Generation Y we have to worry about — many of them were not vaccinated. And when 19 to 25-year-olds interact with under-vaccinated children, there’s a real problem.
Why? It all comes down to a small, speculative study published in the Lancet in 1998 by a doctor at the Royal Free Hospital in London. Dr Andrew Wakefield drew a link between children who had been vaccinated against measles, mumps and rubella — the MMR jab — and childhood autism. The study didn’t attract much notice at first, but newspapers like scare stories, and the little study soon caught national attention. Politicians failed to reassure. When then prime minister Tony Blair refused to tell the media whether his newborn son Leo would have the vaccine, the story caught fire. Perfectly rational people who vaccinated their kids for everything else refused to give them the MMR jab. Herd immunity meant most of these children didn’t get measles.
Low coverage of the Measles, Mumps, and Rubella (MMR) vaccine has become a pressing issue globally due to various influencing factors. One significant factor is the impact of the so-called ‘Wakefield generation’, named after the discredited former doctor, Andrew Wakefield, whose fraudulent research caused significant damage to public confidence in the MMR vaccine.
The Wakefield Generation and Measles Outbreaks
The consequences of the Wakefield scare are still being felt today, with the UK facing a measles emergency due to low MMR vaccine coverage. Since October 2023, there have been 347 laboratory-confirmed measles cases in England. This situation is attributed to the decreased number of children receiving vaccines during the pandemic and unvaccinated children now mixing with young adults who were not vaccinated due to the MMR scare. The tragic story of Rebecca Evans, who lost her son to measles after declining the MMR vaccine due to autism concerns, is a stark reminder of the potential consequences of vaccine hesitancy.
Forced to have Covid jab at 32, the autistic son of antivaxers who still believe Andrew Wakefield
How the discredited MMR study is still impacting lives 25 years on
The court case shows the lasting, toxic legacy of Wakefield’s fraudulent study, which caused a sharp decline in vaccination uptake and led to a number of outbreaks of measles around the world.
While government campaigns to restore confidence in the MMR vaccine did initially help, the past ten years have seen a decline across all child vaccinations programmes for those aged up to five.
Ahmed said that Wakefield had had a profound effect worldwide as the “godfather of the modern American antivax movement”.
the ineffective AVs of the pandemic
Clearly an outsider introducing a bit of reality using data & graphs into this thread is ruffling some feathers, but the obsession with the AV movement simply isnt rational.
Quite why are people so obsessed with either the elapsed effect of Wakefield or the ineffective AVs of the pandemic is in some ways more baffling than the obsession over Soros, WEF etc.
Don't flatter yourself.Clearly an outsider introducing a bit of reality using data & graphs into this thread is ruffling some feathers,
Given your tenacious hold on this kind of thread, it's rather a case of the pot calling the kettle black when you start going on about "obsession".but the obsession with the AV movement simply isnt rational.
Quite why are people so obsessed with either the elapsed effect of Wakefield or the ineffective AVs of the pandemic is in some ways more baffling than the obsession over Soros, WEF etc.
Classic case of “if you spot it you got it”. I love a bit of obvious projection.Given your tenacious hold on this kind of thread, it's rather a case of the pot calling the kettle black when you start going on about "obsession".
Damn all those obstinate real-life people out there still overwhelmingly opting for MMR and C19 vax despite the AVs best effortsI tell you what isn't rational: your head in the sand, obstinate inability to absorb and understand clear facts when presented to you.
There is overwhelming evidence from multiple sources that prove beyond reasonable doubt that Wakefield has played a part in the recent growth of measles and anti-vaxx fuckwits.
Has anyone ever told you that you are obsessed?Damn all those obstinate real-life people out there still overwhelmingly opting for MMR and C19 vax despite the AVs best efforts
Wakefield may well have inspired an niche group,but there is NO overwhelming evidence of their influence on real life. There is a net inspired paranoia about them though....
Damn all those obstinate real-life people out there still overwhelmingly opting for MMR and C19 vax despite the AVs best efforts
Wakefield may well have inspired an niche group,but there is NO overwhelming evidence of their influence on real life. There is a net inspired paranoia about them though....
Damn all those obstinate real-life people out there still overwhelmingly opting for MMR and C19 vax despite the AVs best efforts
Wakefield may well have inspired an niche group,but there is NO overwhelming evidence of their influence on real life. There is a net inspired paranoia about them though....
They're not arguing anything. They're just arguing.what are you arguing btw ?
measles , mumps and other infections that are currently on the rise because Thier parents are sceptical of vaccines and you saying it had no effect on the real world
look at any medical journal or reporting ya plank