@mrjamesob.bsky.social have you seen what Hegseth has said about ‘Greater North America’?
Have a look at this…
www.port.ac.uk/news-events-...
06.03.2026 09:56
👍 0
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
@mrjamesob.bsky.social have you seen what Hegseth has said about ‘Greater North America’?
Have a look at this…
www.port.ac.uk/news-events-...
Plenty had a suspicion the printers was taking the hit for Reform so they could dodge a massive fine. If it holds up the forensic evidence proves intent to commit fraud and evade electoral law. Oopsies someone may be going to jail.
@samcoatessky.bsky.social See below re the Reform letter in G&D - my reply to Rob Ford's post.
This is a bigger story than not having an imprint. I believe it was a deliberate attempt to deceive voters, and then the printer had to come up with a story to cover for being found out. It's not an error
@mrjamesob.bsky.social See below re the Reform letter in G&D - my reply to Rob Ford's post.
This is a bigger story than not having an imprint. I believe it was a deliberate attempt to deceive voters, and then the printer had to come up with a story to cover for being found out. It's not an error.
5/5
...communication was on the result. The agent/publisher and the candidate could face serious fines, disqualification from holding elected office and possible jail.
In my career running and organising elections, I have overseen the print of millions of items. They are not telling the truth.
4/5
...4.
So now it is a conspiracy, involving the agent/publisher and the printer, and arguably the candidate as he has posted the statement and argued that it was all an error.
If Reform win the election, this will end up in an election court, with an argument as to how influential this...
3/5
... the fall for it by pretending they inadvertently cut off the imprint on previously authorised legitimate artwork. But miraculously, they managed to cut off the imprint without making the finished letter shorter than A4. Which means that the proofs could not have included the imprint...
2/5
...authentic, Reform chose to sign off artwork without the legally required imprint of candidate, agent/publisher and printer. So that is deliberate deception of voters. And very illegal.
2.
They were found out
3.
In order to extricate themselves, Reform have got the printer to take...
The printers are can't be telling the truth. The imprint wasn’t trimmed off. It wasn’t on the proof. If it was, the letter would be shorter, or the imprint was outside the print area. It’s a cover-up.
This is what happened in 5 posts:
1.
In order to make the ‘neighbour-to-neighbour’ letter...
And the other Inquiry is by the UK Government Work and Pensions Select Committee
Here is the link to the Inquiry, which includes a link to submit evidence. Closing date is 12 February 2026
3/3
committees.parliament.uk/committee/16...
One Inquiry is being run by the UK Government Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and is chaired by former Health Secretary Alan Milburn.
Here is the link to submit evidence. Closing date is 30 January 2026.
2/3
www.gov.uk/government/c...
There are two official UK Inquiries currently asking why so many young people are not in work, education or training; and why so many of them are sick these days.
Both Inquiries have calls for evidence. There are links to each in the tweets linked below.
If you have evidence, please submit it
1/3
Why no change in WHO guidance?
Why no change in Government position?
Simple!
Too many big backs to cover.
Too many reputations at stake.
Too much concern about pending litigation.
@mrjamesob.bsky.social
I think the advert from Progress Action Fund in the post below summarises ICE nicely…
@mrjamesob.bsky.social
Have you come across 'Technocracy'? And the American Technate? (Musk's grandfather had an involvement.)
Look at the map in this link...
www.port.ac.uk/news-events-...
Research by the Health and Safety Executive in 2008 (“Evaluating the protection afforded by surgical masks against influenza bioaerosols”) categorically ruled out FRSMs as being effective against influenza bioaerosols.
That’s *2008*
webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/202412...
...whereas baggy blues don't. see this research below from 2008.
(and I have so much to tell you re masks in hospitals - there is a huge scandal to be uncovered there - please get in touch.)
@mrjamesob.bsky.social one reason people don't like masks (apart from the politicisation by bad actors) is that the 'baggy blues, apart from not working and being illegal as PPE, are a bit uncomfortable to wear because they slip down etc.
FFP3 masks are so much more comfortable, and they work...
@mrjamesob.bsky.social
Research from Maryland School of Public Health in 2018 found that people with an infectious virus, such as the influenza virus, contaminate the air around them by merely breathing.
www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2018...
@mrjamesob.bsky.social
When Addenbrooke’s Hospital in Cambridge upgraded its face masks for staff working on COVID-19 wards to filtering face piece 3 (FFP3) respirators, it saw a dramatic fall – up to 100% – in hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infections among these staff.
www.cam.ac.uk/research/new...
@mrjamesob.bsky.social
The Astounding Physics of N95 masks
www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBJp...
They should stand up to senior managers & IPC numpties who insist on FRSMs being used.
These are as useful as chocolate fireguards for protection against inhalation of vapours or virus-laden aerosols (aka respiratory droplets) as IPC prefer to call them i.e. anything under 100 microns.
#21/21 #End
How can NHS get away with continued widespread use of this carcinogen with such appalling safety standards!
Near the top of the COSHH ‘hierarchy of controls’ is "substitute"
i.e. replace hazardous substances/chemicals with safer alternatives where reasonably practicable.
#13/21
They should be shouting from the rooftops that that is immoral (and just plain wrong) to deceive healthcare workers, tell them they're being protected by 'PPE' when in fact they are not.
This lulls them to a false sense of security and puts them at serious risk of death or serious illness.
#20/21
I hate to slam into fellow H&S professionals but where have they been since 2020?
No self-respecting H&S practitioner would stand by while staff are given surgical masks (FRSM) to ‘protect’ against formalin and airborne viruses such as SARS-CoV-2, flu, RSV etc.
#19/21
I say to them: stand up against any IPC numpties who tell you that surgical masks are suitable for anything requiring respiratory protection - viz the example of Robert Mifflin cited in the above news item.
He was given surgical masks as “PPE” for work with formalin!
Unbelievable!
#17/21
What I don't understand is this...
Where on earth are the Health and Safety professionals in NHS premises?
Why are they not doing something about this?
They are abrogating their professional & ethical duty by allowing surgical masks to be used as "PPE" (for Covid and formalin)
SHAMEFUL.
#16/21
This is exactly what happens when a novel seasonal influenza strain meets a population with Covid-induced immune dysregulation; it's not 'like Covid again', it's the ongoing and continuous effects of Covid.
www.bbc.com/news/article...
And if you can’t believe the NHS would publish something categorically stating that “it would be a waste of public health resources & capacity” to attempt to halt the spread of a new pandemic virus…
…then here’s the link so you can read it for yourself:
england.nhs.uk/long-read/fr...
