ๆญฃๅœจๅŠ ่ฝฝ่ง†้ข‘...

่ง†้ข‘ๅŠ ่ฝฝๅคฑ่ดฅ

๐™‰๐™š๐™ซ๐™š๐™ง ๐™—๐™š๐™›๐™ค๐™ง๐™š ๐™๐™–๐™™ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™จ๐™ฉ๐™–๐™ ๐™š๐™จ ๐™—๐™š๐™š๐™ฃ ๐™ฉ๐™๐™ž๐™จ ๐™๐™ž๐™œ๐™... BT Sport Films presents The Grudge, remembering the legendary 1990 Calcutta Cup match as Scotland met England in a winner takes all encounter at Murrayfield. Friday 20 January | BT Sport 1, 10.15pm

427,290 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 3 ๅนดๅ‰ โ€ขvia X (Twitter)

10 ๆก่ฏ„่ฎบ

PKS ็š„ๅคดๅƒ
PKS3 ๅนดๅ‰

I was there. The atmosphere in Edinburgh was electric. The English fans thought it was a foregone conclusion with some guys from Gloucester wearing England Grandslam 1990 pullovers in the Rose Street Tavern on the Friday evening before the match

smsmith70 ็š„ๅคดๅƒ
smsmith703 ๅนดๅ‰

Queued overnight for two of the 200 put on sale by the sports shop on Nicholson Street. Worth every cold, wet, miserable minute.

Jamie Baird ็š„ๅคดๅƒ
Jamie Baird3 ๅนดๅ‰

Loved it that day. I played in the pipe band and couldnโ€™t hear my bass drum when the team walked out. First time weโ€™d played two verses of national anthem and had the words in the match program. Great, great day.

iMac ็š„ๅคดๅƒ
iMac3 ๅนดๅ‰

I was there, one of the most exhilarating sporting moments I've ever experienced

Tracey Denny ๐Ÿ’โšช๏ธ ๐ŸŽช๐Ÿ๐Ÿ‘๐Ÿ‰๐Ÿš˜๐Ÿ‹๏ธโ€โ™€๏ธ๐Ÿ‘ฉโ€๐Ÿซ ็š„ๅคดๅƒ
Tracey Denny ๐Ÿ’โšช๏ธ ๐ŸŽช๐Ÿ๐Ÿ‘๐Ÿ‰๐Ÿš˜๐Ÿ‹๏ธโ€โ™€๏ธ๐Ÿ‘ฉโ€๐Ÿซ3 ๅนดๅ‰

I bought my first ever England rugby shirt ready for this match. Watched it at a friends house - they were Scottish fans ๐Ÿ™ˆ

Justin Champion ็š„ๅคดๅƒ
Justin Champion3 ๅนดๅ‰

Canโ€™t wait for thisโ€ฆI was on rugby in Scotland at the time, and ended watching the game in a slightly dodgy snooker hall in Edinburgh. Great night if not my preferred result!

Pamela McIntosh ็š„ๅคดๅƒ
Pamela McIntosh3 ๅนดๅ‰

@RugbySco @shooders40 this will be good!

Ailsa Wylie ็š„ๅคดๅƒ
Ailsa Wylie3 ๅนดๅ‰

@Highland_Exile

Larry's World ็š„ๅคดๅƒ
Larry's World3 ๅนดๅ‰

@TelegraphRugby @brianmoore666 @JoeMarler Sledging in Scottish or English Brian?

Susan R ็š„ๅคดๅƒ
Susan R3 ๅนดๅ‰

This book was full of hate , didnโ€™t like it one bit.

็›ธๅ…ณ่ง†้ข‘

๐Ÿ“๐ŸŸ Hopefully not long till we're back at our beloved Ibrox - Named on numerous occasions as Britain's number 1 & one of Europes top stadiums, with works now currently underway to enhance it even more and further cement it as Britain's best. ๐Ÿ’ก It was designed by renowned football stadium architect Archibald Leitch. ๐Ÿ‘Œ The red-brick facade main stand is a Category B listed building with Simon Inglis describing it as "exuding prestige and power." ๐Ÿ‘‘ King George V & Queen Mary visited Ibrox Park on 17 September 1917, to thank Glasgow and Clydeside for its efforts in the First World War. In the first ever public investiture in Scotland, and in front of 100,000, the King awarded medals to servicemen including three Victoria Crosses, 46 Military Medals and 33 Military Crosses ๐Ÿ˜ฒ Ibrox set a British record crowd of 118,567 gathering in January 1939 for an Old Firm league match with Celtic. ๐Ÿ”ฆ The first floodlit Scottish league match was played at Ibrox, in March 1956. ๐Ÿ‘ In 1997, after undergoing a huge makeover, Ibrox gained a UEFA five-star status ๐ŸŽซ The introduction of computerised ticketing, zonal public address systems and closed-circuit television for monitoring turnstile areas meant that Ibrox was at the forefront of stadium management ๐ŸŒŸ A UEFA category four stadium, hosting the Scotland national team when Hampden Park was being redeveloped in the 1990s, and three Scottish cup finals in the same period. ๐Ÿคฉ It even has also been used for athletics competitions, Empire Games and Ibrox sports days ๐ŸŽ™ It's hosted concerts, including performances by Simple Minds (1986), Frank Sinatra (1990), Elton John (1998), Billy Joel (also 1998), Bon Jovi (1996, 2003 & 2007) and Harry Styles (2022). ๐ŸฅŠ In 1980, Ibrox hosted a world championship boxing match between Jim Watt and Howard Davis. ๐Ÿ‰ It also hosted the rugby sevens event at the 2014 Commonwealth Games, won by South Africa.There was a total attendance of 171,000 for the four sessions of play, which set a new record for a rugby sevens tournament. These are just a few of many proud occasions and facts about our Stadium which we are humbled to call home. We're sure we speak for us all when we say we can't wait till they.. "Open the gates and let me rejoin my mates" ๐Ÿค

Oswalds Bar

155,829 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 1 ๅนดๅ‰

.Scott Nolan started his career as employee 30 at SpaceX. He left to join Founders Fund after Peter Thiel recruited him personally in 2011, and spent the next 12 years backing companies like SpaceX, Anduril, Radiant, and Crusoe Energy. The through line across all of it, and the worldview Thiel built Founders Fund around, was finding important problems that incumbents have no incentive to solve. Scott's version of that thesis was physical-world companies in a decade when venture capital had largely decided not to fund them. Before starting General Matter, Scott met nearly every advanced reactor company in America. They all were constrained by the same problem - no one was enriching uranium domestically at scale. He spent 2023 looking to invest in a company solving it and found none. The US once led the world in enrichment. But it let its enrichment plants calcify and shut down its last domestically owned facility in 2013. Today Russia supplies about 25% of the enriched uranium that fuels 20% of the country's electricity. Congress has already passed a ban on those imports that takes full effect in 2028. So Scott started General Matter, the first private American uranium enrichment company, built on DOE land in Kentucky where the country's last enrichment plant once operated. In January, the DOE awarded it a $900 million contract. Thiel sits on almost no boards, yet he joined General Matter's. Enjoy this great conversation with Scott Nolan. Timestamps: 0:00 Intro 1:00 Finding Important Problems 6:18 Lessons from Peter Thiel 9:32 Spotting Underappreciated Companies 21:46 The Danger of Falling in Love with Ideas 25:12 The Nuclear Energy Bottleneck 30:44 Why America Needs to Vertically Integrate 37:55 AI, Data Centers, and the Energy Squeeze 45:41 Advanced Nuclear Reactors 49:27 The Bring Your Own Energy (BYOE) Concept 53:45 Navigating America's Nuclear Fuel Cliffs 1:15:32 The Trade-offs Between Investing and Operating 1:18:00 Kindest Thing

Patrick OShaughnessy

343,175 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 3 ไธชๆœˆๅ‰

Back in January when Megan and I charted out the year, the dream of the Leadville 100 course record was overwhelming. But big dreams should be overwhelming. It was time to get to work. Our plan started from 3 principles: 1. Iโ€™d need to be capable of running a 13:xx 5k at altitude, or around sub-4 min mile fitness. 6-minute mile pace would need to be a jog on race day, and that all came from improving my running economy. 2. I had to get stronger to handle the unknown distance, both in terms of threshold climbing and actual muscular strength. 3. Iโ€™d have to run every step of the race, including Hope Pass. Most interestingly, none of those goals required lots of training volume. I did 8-12 hours of aerobic training most weeks with very few doubles given life constraints, usually around 60-75 miles of running and 1-2 bike rides (pulsing up and down for adaptations, with some bigger weeks and a longer down period for my accident). You donโ€™t need to do consistent 100+ mile weeks to be good at this sport. I have been building endurance bricks for 18 years, and every brick counts. With that time, we applied 6 ideas: 1. Most weeks had a speed workout (often pacing Allie Ostrander ahead of the Olympic Trials ๐Ÿ”ฅ), culminating in 12 x 400 on short rest in 63-64 seconds at altitude in June 2. Iโ€™d do threshold sessions approximately every other week, often on the uphill treadmill at 8% or 15% grade, culminating in a massive 12 x 5 minute session a few weeks before race day 3. I did uphill treadmill runs in Z2 at 20% grade all year, including for 10 min after as many aerobic runs as I could 4. I did 3-4 days of strides every single week. My strength is my speed. 5. I biked once per week in place of a run, often using Zwift races for hard sessions (A+ racing category in Zwift!) 6. Every week, I did Ultra Legs strength + squats and took a rest day, plus did heat training Big takeaway: you donโ€™t need to do wild volume to have success in ultras. Get fast, stay fast year round, spend time in Z2, and stack some fun bricks in the context of your life. The record may have shocked the ultra world. But as Megan said, it only shocked people who havenโ€™t been following my Strava for the last decade ๐Ÿงก

David Roche

158,587 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 1 ๅนดๅ‰

Remembering Cary Grant on his Birthday. Born | January 18, 1904 in Horfield, Bristol, England, UK. Died | November 29, 1986 aged 82 in Davenport, Iowa, USA. Video | Cary Grant and Grace Kelly in a scene from Alfred Hitchcock's โ€œTo Catch a Thiefโ€ (1955). Once told by an interviewer, โ€œEverybody would like to be Cary Grantโ€, Grant is said to have replied, โ€œSo would I.โ€ Cary Grant was born Archibald Alec Leach on January 18, 1904 in Horfield, Bristol, England, to Elsie Maria (Kingdon) and Elias James Leach, who worked in a factory. His early years in Bristol would have been an ordinary lower-middle-class childhood, except for one extraordinary event. At age nine, he came home from school one day and was told his mother had gone off to a seaside resort. However, the real truth was that she had been placed in a mental institution, where she would remain for years, and he was never told about it (he would not see his mother again until he was in his late 20s). He left school at age 14, lying about his age and forging his father's signature on a letter to join Bob Pender's troupe of knockabout comedians. He learned pantomime as well as acrobatics as he toured with the Pender troupe in the English provinces, picked up a Cockney accent in the music halls in London, and then in July 1920, was one of the eight Pender boys selected to go to the United States. Their show on Broadway, โ€œGood Timesโ€, ran for 456 performances, giving Grant time to acclimatise. He would stay in America. Mae West wanted Grant for She Done Him Wrong (1933) because she saw his combination of virility, sexuality and the aura and bearing of a gentleman. Grant was young enough to begin the new career of fatherhood when he stopped making movies at age 62. One biographer said Grant was alienated by the new realism in the film industry. In the 1950s and early 1960s, he had invented a man-of-the-world persona and a style โ€• โ€œhigh comedy with polished wordsโ€. In To Catch a Thief (1955), he and Grace Kelly were allowed to improvise some of the dialogue. They knew what the director, Alfred Hitchcock, wanted to do with a scene, they rehearsed it, put in some clever double entendres that got past the censors, and then the scene was filmed. His biggest box-office success was another Hitchcock 1950s film, North by Northwest (1959) made with Eva Marie Saint since Kelly was by that time Princess of Monaco. Although Grant retired from the screen, he remained active. He accepted a position on the board of directors at Faberge. By all accounts this position was not honorary, as some had assumed. Grant regularly attended meetings and traveled internationally to support them. The position also permitted use of a private plane, which Grant could use to fly to see his daughter wherever her mother Dyan Cannon, was working. He later joined the boards of Hollywood Park, the Academy of Magical Arts (The Magic Castle โ€• Hollywood, California), Western Airlines (acquired by Delta Airlines in 1987) and MGM. Grant expressed no interest in making a career comeback. He was in good health until almost the end of his life, when he suffered a mild stroke in October 1984. In his last years, he undertook tours of the United States in a one-man-show, โ€œA Conversation with Cary Grantโ€, in which he would show clips from his films and answer audience questions. On November 29, 1986, Cary Grant died at age 82 of a cerebral hemorrhage in Davenport, Iowa. In 1999, the American Film Institute named Grant the second greatest male star of Golden Age of Hollywood cinema (after Humphrey Bogart). Grant was known for comedic and dramatic roles; his best-known films include Bringing Up Baby (1938), The Philadelphia Story (1940), His Girl Friday (1940), Arsenic and Old Lace (1944), Notorious (1946), An Affair to Remember (1957), North by Northwest (1959) and Charade (1963). - IMDb mini biography by: Dale O'Connor.

MSI | Movie Star Icons

31,124 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 6 ไธชๆœˆๅ‰

In Remembrance of Carole Lombard Born | October 6, 1908 in Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA Died | January 16, 1942 aged 33 at Potosi Mountain, Nevada, USA Video | Carole Lombard Tribute Carole Lombard was born Jane Alice Peters in Fort Wayne, Indiana, on October 6, 1908. Her parents divorced in 1916 and her mother took the family on a trip out West. While there they decided to settle down in the Los Angeles area. After being spotted playing baseball in the street with the neighborhood boys by a film director, Carole was signed to a one-picture contract in 1921 when she was 12. The film in question was A Perfect Crime (1921). Although she tried for other acting jobs, she would not be seen onscreen again for four years. She returned to a normal life, going to school and participating in athletics, excelling in track and field. By age 15 she had had enough of school, though, and quit. She joined a theatre troupe and played in several stage shows, which were for the most part nothing to write home about. In 1925 she passed a screen test and was signed to a contract with Fox Films. Her first role as a Fox player was Hearts and Spurs (1925), in which she had the lead. Right after that film she appeared in a western called Durand of the Bad Lands (1925). She rounded out 1925 in the comedy Marriage in Transit (1925) (she also appeared in a number of two-reel shorts). In 1926 Carole was seriously injured in an automobile accident that resulted in the left side of her face being scarred. Once she had recovered, Fox canceled her contract. She did find work in a number of shorts during 1928 (13 of them, many for slapstick comedy director Mack Sennett), but did go back for a one-time shot with Fox called Me, Gangster (1928). By now the film industry was moving from the silent era to โ€œtalkiesโ€. While some stars' careers ended because of heavy accents, poor diction or a voice unsuitable to sound, Carole's light, breezy, sexy voice enabled her to transition smoothly during this period. Her first sound film was High Voltage (1929) at Pathe (her new studio) in 1929. In 1931 she was teamed with William Powell in Man of the World (1931). She and Powell hit it off and soon married, but the marriage didn't work out and they divorced in 1933. No Man of Her Own (1932) put Carole opposite Clark Gable for the first and only time (they married seven years later in 1939). By now she was with Paramount Pictures and was one of its top stars. However, it was Twentieth Century (1934) that showed her true comedic talents and proved to the world what a fine actress she really was. In 1936 Carole received her only Oscar nomination for Best Actress for My Man Godfrey (1936). She was superb as ditzy heiress Irene Bullock. Unfortunately, the coveted award went to Luise Rainer in The Great Ziegfeld (1936), which also won for Best Picture. Carole was now putting out about one film a year of her own choosing, because she wanted whatever role she picked to be a good one. She was adept at picking just the right part, which wasn't surprising as she was smart enough to see through the good-ol'-boy syndrome of the studio moguls. She commanded and received what was one of the top salaries in the business โ€• at one time it was reported she was making $35,000 a week. She made but one film in 1941, Mr. & Mrs. Smith (1941). Her last film was in 1942, when she played Maria Tura opposite Jack Benny in To Be or Not to Be (1942). Tragically, she didn't live to see its release. The film was completed in 1941 just at the time the US entered World War II, and was subsequently held back for release until 1942. Meanwhile, Carole went home to Indiana for a war bond rally. On January 16, 1942, Carole, her mother, and 20 other people were flying back to California when the plane went down outside of Las Vegas, Nevada. All aboard perished. The highly acclaimed actress was dead at the age of 33 and few have been able to match her talents since. โ€• IMDb mini biography by: Denny Jackson Video footage courtesy of Saxon Brack Music | Dances with Wolves [1990] โ€• โ€œThe John Dunbar Themeโ€

Hollywood Golden Age of Cinema

17,680 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 6 ไธชๆœˆๅ‰

๐Ÿ”ฅ๐Ÿ”ฅ 31st of July 2026, important update and developments regarding covid, vaccine and Government related crimes. ๐Ÿ”ฅ๐Ÿ”ฅ Please watch the below video it explains it all. We do understand itโ€™s all part of the same system, however, if everyone gets on board that genuinely feels they are a victim, the Police will have no choice but to act and those responsible must be held to account. Itโ€™s all being exposed in the US, it needs to be exposed here too. Share this with everyone you know, millions will have been affected. It is my summation this will apply worldwide where the Covid 19 vaccines were and continue to be administered. Be mindful Scotland and Northern Ireland police might have different crime recording procedures to that of England and Wales. Some forces may re-direct you to the Counter Terrorism Police. All forces do collaborate with this specialist police force. Documents I refer to attached as follows. 1, Terrorism act 2000/2006. 2, Dr Francis Boyle affidavit confirming Covid 19 vaccinations are a biological weapon of mass destruction. This has also recently been submitted to The Metropolitan Police by South Wales Police on behalf of Dale Vincent 3, The Biological weapons anti terrorism act of 1989. Drafted by Dr Professor Francis Boyle and signed into law in May 1990 by President George H.W. Bush. 4, my complaint submission March 2026 with some of the supporting evidence, this is now being actively investigated by The Metropolitan Police Professional Standards Directorate. The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) were consulted and they have directed The Metโ€™s PSD to carry out the investigation into the closure and handling of crime reference number 6029679/21. A number of the high profile experts, professionals, witnesses and victims involved in the original crime report, at my request, have made contact with The Met PSD. They have been acknowledged and in some cases identified as complainants. 5, the home office crime recording rules 2026/2027. These are specific to England and Wales, for Scotland and Northern Ireland be guided by those forces. Page 6, The Standard directs a victim focused approach to crime recording. The intention is that victims are believed and benefit from statutory entitlements under the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime (CPVC). This seeks to ensure that those reporting crimes will be treated with empathy and their allegations will be taken seriously. Any investigation which follows is then taken forward with an open mind to establish the truth. THE POLICE CANNOT IGNORE YOUR COMPLAINT BY SAYING THE GOVERNMENT APPROVAL AND ROLL OUT OF THE VACCINE IS LAWFUL. THE ALLEGATIONS BEING MADE ARE AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. OPERATION TALLA STYLE DIRECTIVES ARE UNLAWFUL AND CURRENTLY UNDER INVESTIGATION BY THE SCOTTISH POLICE AUTHORITY AND FORMS PART OF THE METROPOLITAN POLICE PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS DIRECTORATE REGISTERED COMPLAINT. THE POLICE HAVE STATUTORY DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS TO INVESTIGATE THE CRIMES REPORTED AND MUST REMAIN IMPARTIAL, INDEPENDENT, DISPLAY PROFESSIONAL CURIOSITY AND TO KEEP AN OPEN MIND. THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND INVESTIGATIONS ACT 1996 (CPIA 1996) ALL POLICE FORCES MUST ADHERE TO; An investigation conducted by police officers with a view to it being ascertained whether a person should be charged with an offence, or whether a person charged with an offence is guilty of it." It outlines the codes of practice for any investigation set out by the Secretary of State. All investigators have a responsibility for carrying out the duties imposed on them under this code including and in particular recording information and retaining records of information and material. Watch the video, read the documents and then action if this applies to you. Thank you to ETHICAL APPROACH UK Phil Hyland

M.Sexton

98,537 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 8 ๅคฉๅ‰

Messi's ๐Ÿ ALL 9โƒฃ2โƒฃ Goals for Inter Miamiโ€ผ๏ธ Messi ๐Ÿ with Inter Miami 2023-2026โ€ผ๏ธ 1๏ธโƒฃ0๏ธโƒฃ6๏ธโƒฃ Games โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ4๏ธโƒฃ3๏ธโƒฃ Goal Contributions โœ… 9๏ธโƒฃ2๏ธโƒฃ Goals โšฝ๏ธโœ… 5๏ธโƒฃ1๏ธโƒฃ Assists ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธโœ… 6๏ธโƒฃ8๏ธโƒฃ MLS Total Goals โšฝ๏ธโœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ4๏ธโƒฃ Leagues Cup Total Goals โšฝ๏ธโœ… 8๏ธโƒฃ CONCACAF Champions Cup Total Goals โšฝ๏ธโœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ Club World Cup โšฝ๏ธโœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ US Open Cup โšฝ๏ธโœ… 4๏ธโƒฃ8๏ธโƒฃ Man of the Match Awards 2๏ธโƒฃ MLS MVP 1๏ธโƒฃ MLS Golden Boot 1๏ธโƒฃ4๏ธโƒฃ MLS Player of the Matchday โœ… 5๏ธโƒฃ MLS Player of the Month โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ Leagues Cup Best Player Award โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ Leagues Cup Top Scorer Award โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ MLS Cup ๐Ÿ†โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ Leagues Cup ๐Ÿ†โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ Supporters Shield ๐Ÿ†โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ Eastern Conference Championship๐Ÿ†โœ… โšฝ๏ธ vs Cruz Azul โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Atlanta United โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ vs Orlando City โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ vs FC Dallas โšฝ๏ธ vs Charlotte FC โšฝ๏ธ vs Philadelphia โšฝ๏ธ๐Ÿ† vs Nashville SC ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs FC Cincinnati โšฝ๏ธ vs New York Red Bulls ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Los Angeles FC ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Real Salt Lake โšฝ๏ธ vs LA Galaxy โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ vs Orlando City โšฝ๏ธ vs Nashville SC โšฝ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Nashville SC โšฝ๏ธ vs Colorado Rapids ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Monterrey โšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Sporting Kansas City โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Nashville SC โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs New England Revolution โšฝ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs New York Red Bulls โšฝ๏ธ vs Atlanta United โšฝ๏ธ vs St. Louis City SC โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Philadelphia โšฝ๏ธ vs Charlotte FC โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ vs Columbus Crew โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ vs New England Revolution ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Atlanta United โšฝ๏ธ vs Atlanta United โšฝ๏ธ vs Sporting Kansas City ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs New York City FC โšฝ๏ธ vs Sporting Kansas City โšฝ๏ธ vs Cavalier โšฝ๏ธ vs Atlanta United โšฝ๏ธ vs Philadelphia โšฝ๏ธ vs Toronto FC โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ vs LAFC โšฝ๏ธ vs New York Red Bulls โšฝ๏ธ vs Minnesota United โšฝ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Philadelphia โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs CF Montreal โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Columbus Crew โšฝ๏ธ vs FC Porto โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs CF Montreal โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ vs New England Revolution โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ vs Nashville SC โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs New York Red Bulls ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Atlas FC โšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs LA Galaxy โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ vs Orlando City โšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Seattle Sounders โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs DC United โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs New York City FC ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs New England Revolution โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Atlanta United โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Nashville SC โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ vs Nashville SC โšฝ๏ธ vs Nashville SC โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Nashville SC โšฝ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs FC Cincinnati ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs New York City FC ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Vancouver FC โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ vs Orlando โšฝ๏ธ vs DC United โšฝ๏ธ vs Nashville SC โšฝ๏ธ vs New York City FC โšฝ๏ธ vs Austin FC โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ vs Colorado Rapids โšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Orlando โšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Toronto FC โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs FC Cincinnati โšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Portland ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Philadelphia โšฝ๏ธโšฝ๏ธ ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ vs Atlรฉtico San Luis ๐Ÿ† Lionel ๐— essi ๐Ÿ† Record B๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—ธ๐—ฒ๐—ฟ. History M๐—ฎ๐—ธ๐—ฒ๐—ฟโ€ผ๏ธ THE UNDISPUTED GOAT ๐Ÿโ€ผ๏ธ The greatest ๐Ÿ there is, the greatest ๐Ÿ there ever was and the greatest ๐Ÿthere ever will beโ€ผ๏ธ Messi ๐Ÿ is basically Pele with multiple UCLs, Maradona with over 900 goals, Cruyff with a World Cup, Zidane with Golden Boots, and R9 with multiple Playmaking Awards. The complete footballer. FAITH + HUMILITY + EXCELLENCE + CONSISTENCY = SUCCESS Here are some of Messiโ€™s official unbeatable and unprecedented club, country and personal career records (excluding unofficial and friendly games and tournaments): 1๏ธโƒฃ1๏ธโƒฃ6๏ธโƒฃ6๏ธโƒฃ Games 1๏ธโƒฃ3๏ธโƒฃ4๏ธโƒฃ0๏ธโƒฃ Career Goal Contributions โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ1๏ธโƒฃ5๏ธโƒฃ0๏ธโƒฃ Club Goal Contributions โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ9๏ธโƒฃ0๏ธโƒฃ Country Goal Contributions โœ… 9๏ธโƒฃ2๏ธโƒฃ1๏ธโƒฃ Career Goals โšฝ๏ธ โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ2๏ธโƒฃ5๏ธโƒฃ Goals for Argentina โœ… 7๏ธโƒฃ9๏ธโƒฃ6๏ธโƒฃ Club Goals โœ… 6๏ธโƒฃ7๏ธโƒฃ2๏ธโƒฃ Goals for Barcelona โœ… 3๏ธโƒฃ2๏ธโƒฃ Goals for PSG โœ… 9๏ธโƒฃ2๏ธโƒฃ Goals for Inter Miami โœ… 8๏ธโƒฃ0๏ธโƒฃ7๏ธโƒฃ Non-Penalty Goals โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ1๏ธโƒฃ4๏ธโƒฃ Penalties โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ0๏ธโƒฃ9๏ธโƒฃ Outside the Box (Excluding Free-Kicks) โœ… 3๏ธโƒฃ1๏ธโƒฃ Headers โœ… 7๏ธโƒฃ2๏ธโƒฃ Free-kicks โœ… 6๏ธโƒฃ1๏ธโƒฃ Hat-tricks โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ8๏ธโƒฃ2๏ธโƒฃ Braces โœ… 4๏ธโƒฃ1๏ธโƒฃ9๏ธโƒฃ Career Assists ๐Ÿ…ฐ๏ธ โœ… 6๏ธโƒฃ5๏ธโƒฃ Assists for Argentina โœ… 3๏ธโƒฃ5๏ธโƒฃ4๏ธโƒฃ Club Assists โœ… 2๏ธโƒฃ6๏ธโƒฃ9๏ธโƒฃ Assists for Barcelona โœ… 3๏ธโƒฃ4๏ธโƒฃ Assists for PSG โœ… 5๏ธโƒฃ1๏ธโƒฃ Assists for Inter Miami โœ… 4๏ธโƒฃ6๏ธโƒฃ Countries Scored Against 1โƒฃ2๏ธโƒฃ4๏ธโƒฃ Clubs Scored Against Lionel Messi ๐Ÿ has so far won 4๏ธโƒฃ8๏ธโƒฃ trophies and over 1๏ธโƒฃ0๏ธโƒฃ0๏ธโƒฃ individual awards in his professional football career! ๐Ÿ“ˆ6๏ธโƒฃ ๐Ÿ† TROPHIES WITH ARGENTINA 2๏ธโƒฃ Copa America โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ FIFA World Cup โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ Finalissima โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ Olympics Gold โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ FIFA U-20 World Cup โœ… ๐Ÿ“ˆ3๏ธโƒฃ5๏ธโƒฃ ๐Ÿ† TROPHIES WITH BARCELONA 1๏ธโƒฃ0๏ธโƒฃ La Liga โœ… 4๏ธโƒฃ UEFA Champions League โœ… 7๏ธโƒฃ Copa del Rey โœ… 8๏ธโƒฃ Supercopa โœ… 3๏ธโƒฃ UEFA Super Cup โœ… 3๏ธโƒฃ FIFA Club World Cup โœ… ๐Ÿ“ˆ3๏ธโƒฃ ๐Ÿ† TROPHIES WITH PSG 2๏ธโƒฃ Ligue 1 โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ Trophรฉe des Champions โœ… ๐Ÿ“ˆ4๏ธโƒฃ ๐Ÿ† TROPHY WITH INTER MIAMI 1๏ธโƒฃ MLS Cup โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ Leagues Cup โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ Supporters Shield โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ Eastern Conference Championship โœ… EXAMPLES OF INDIVIDUAL AWARDS 1๏ธโƒฃ4๏ธโƒฃ Argentine Footballer of the Year โœ… 9๏ธโƒฃ La Liga Best Player โœ… 8๏ธโƒฃ Pichichi Awards โœ… 8๏ธโƒฃ Ballon d'Or Awards โœ… 8๏ธโƒฃ FIFA Best Player Awards โœ… 6๏ธโƒฃ World Soccer Player of the Year โœ… 6๏ธโƒฃ European Golden Boot Awards โœ… 3๏ธโƒฃ UEFA Best Player Awards โœ… 2๏ธโƒฃ FIFA World Cup Golden Ball Awards โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ6๏ธโƒฃ FIFA World Cup Man of the Match Awards โœ… 2๏ธโƒฃ Laureus World Sportsman of the Year โœ… 2๏ธโƒฃ MLS MVP 1๏ธโƒฃ MLS Golden Boot 1๏ธโƒฃ4๏ธโƒฃ MLS Player of the Matchday โœ… 5๏ธโƒฃ MLS Player of the Month โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ Leagues Cup Best Player โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ Leagues Cup Top Scorer โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ MARCA America Award โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ CONMEBOL World Cup Qualifiers Top Scorer โœ… 1๏ธโƒฃ Princess of Asturias Award โœ… Messi ๐Ÿ now holds the RECORD of most Goal Contributions (3๏ธโƒฃ3๏ธโƒฃ) in World Cup History: 2๏ธโƒฃ1๏ธโƒฃ Goals = Most Goals 1๏ธโƒฃ2๏ธโƒฃ Assists = Most Assists Leo Messi, the best and most compete footballer of my lifetime and in the history of the game, the Greatest of all Time (GOAT ๐Ÿ), said in an interview in October 2021: โ€œThe truth is I didnโ€™t do anything, it was God who made me play like this. It is evidently Him who gave me that gift, and I have no doubt about that. He chose me, He gave me success and I submit to Him and I cannot live a day without Him or do anything without Him.โ€ It has been an absolute privilege to watch Messi ๐Ÿ for nearly two decades. Moment after moment of spellbinding, breathtakingly joyous football. A gift from God. On December 18, 2022, the greatest to ever do it, became a FIFA World Cup champion ๐Ÿ† and lifted the ultimate prize in my favorite sport - The king ๐Ÿ‘‘ has completed international football. Messi ๐Ÿ is the first man in history to win 2๏ธโƒฃ World Cup โ€œGolden Ballโ€ awards, in 2014 and 2022โ€ผ๏ธ No player had ever won 5๏ธโƒฃ โ€œMan of the Matchโ€ (MOTM) awards at a single World Cup before. Messi ๐Ÿ did it twice, in 2022 and in 2026โ€ผ๏ธ Messi ๐Ÿ is indeed the GOAT. Do not write about him, do not try to describe him, just watch him - he is not from this planet! Unbeatable Records. Legendary - Unparalleled. GOAT STATUS โœ… #InterMiami #InterMiamiCF #Messi๐“ƒต #Messi #LeoMessi #LionelMessi #GOAT

๐Ÿ…ฑ๐Ÿ…ธ๐Ÿ…ฒ๐Ÿ…ทโšฝ๏ธ๐Ÿ†ˆ

565,968 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 2 ๅคฉๅ‰

In Remembrance of Marilyn Monroe on her 100th Birthday Born | June 1, 1926 in Los Angeles, California, USA Probably the most celebrated of all actresses, Marilyn Monroe was born Norma Jeane Mortenson on June 1, 1926, in the charity ward of the Los Angeles General Hospital. Her mother, Gladys Pearl (Monroe), was born in Piedras Negras, Coahuila, Mexico, to American parents from Indiana and Missouri, and was a film-cutter at Consolidated Film Industries. Marilyn's biological father has been established through DNA testing as Charles Stanley Gifford, who had been born in Newport, Rhode Island, to a family with deep roots in the state. Marilyn grew up not knowing for sure who her father really was. Gladys gave Norma Jeane the name of Baker. Poverty was a constant companion to Gladys and Norma. Gladys, who was extremely attractive and later worked for R.K.O. Studios, suffered from mental illness and was in and out of mental institutions for the rest of her life, and because of that Norma Jeane spent time in foster homes. When she was nine, she was placed in an orphanage where she was to stay for the next two years. Upon being released from the orphanage, she went to yet another foster home. In 1942, at sixteen years old, Norma Jeane married twenty-one-year-old aircraft plant worker James Dougherty. The marriage lasted only four years, and they divorced in 1946. By this time, Marilyn began to model swimsuits and bleached her hair blonde. Various shots made their way into the public eye, where some were eventually seen by R.K.O. Pictures head Howard Hughes. He offered Marilyn a screen test, but an agent suggested that 20th Century-Fox would be the better choice for her, since it was a much bigger and more prestigious studio. She was signed to a contract at $125 per week for a six-month period and that was increased by $25 per week at the end of that time when her contract was lengthened. Her first film was in 1947 with a bit part in The Shocking Miss Pilgrim (1947). Her next production was not much better, a bit in the forgettable Scudda Hoo! Scudda Hay! (1948). Two of the three brief scenes in which she appeared wound up on the cutting room floor. Later that same year, she was given a somewhat better role as Evie in Dangerous Years (1947). However, Fox declined to renew her contract, so she went back to modeling and acting school. Columbia Pictures then picked her up to play Peggy Martin in Ladies of the Chorus (1948), where she sang three numbers. Notices from the critics were favorable for her, if not the film, but Columbia dropped her. Once again Marilyn returned to modeling. In 1949, she appeared in United Artists' Love Happy (1949). It was also that same year she posed nude for the now famous calendar shot which was later to appear in Playboy magazine in 1953 and further boost her career. She would be the first centerfold in that magazine's long and illustrious history. The next year proved to be a good year for Marilyn. She appeared in five films, but the good news was that she received very good notices for her roles in two of them, The Asphalt Jungle (1950) from MGM and All About Eve (1950) from Fox. Even though both roles were basically not much more than bit parts, movie fans remembered her dizzy but very sexy blonde performance. In 1951, Marilyn got a fairly sizable role in Love Nest (1951). The public was now getting to know her and liked what it saw. She had an intoxicating quality of volcanic sexuality wrapped in an aura of almost childlike innocence. In 1952, Marilyn appeared in Don't Bother to Knock (1952), in which she played a somewhat mentally unbalanced babysitter. Critics didn't particularly care for her work in this picture, but she made a much more favorable impression later in the year in Monkey Business (1952), where she was seen for the first time as a platinum blonde, a look that became her trademark. The next year, she appeared in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953) as Lorelei Lee. It was also the same year she began dating the baseball great Joe DiMaggio. Marilyn was now a genuine box-office drawing card. Later, she appeared with Betty Grable, Lauren Bacall, and Rory Calhoun in How to Marry a Millionaire (1953). Although her co-stars got the rave reviews, it was the sight of Marilyn that really excited the audience, especially the male members. On Thursday, January 14th, 1954, Marilyn wed DiMaggio, then proceeded to film There's No Business Like Show Business (1954). That was quickly followed by The Seven Year Itch (1955), which showcased her considerable comedic talent and contained what is arguably one of the most memorable moments in cinema history: Marilyn standing above a subway grating and the wind from a passing subway blowing her white dress up. By October 1954, Marilyn announced her divorce from DiMaggio (though the divorce was not finalised until October 31, 1955). In 1955, she was suspended by Fox for not reporting for work on How to Be Very, Very Popular (1955). It was her second suspension, the first being for not reporting for the production of The Girl in the Red Velvet Swing (1955). Both roles went to others. Her work was slowing down, due to her habit of being continually late to the set, her illnesses (whether real or imagined) and generally being unwilling to cooperate with her producers, directors, and fellow actors. However in Bus Stop (1956), Marilyn finally showed critics that she could play a straight dramatic role. It was also the same year she married playwright Arthur Miller. (They divorced January 20, 1961.) In 1957, Marilyn flew to Britain to film The Prince and the Showgirl (1957), which proved less than impressive critically and financially. It made money, but many critics panned it for being slow-moving. After a year off in 1958, Marilyn returned to the screen the next year for the delightful comedy, Some Like It Hot (1959) with Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon. The film was an absolute smash hit, with Curtis and Lemmon pretending to be females in an all-girl band, so they can get work. This was to be Marilyn's only film for the year. In 1960, Marilyn appeared in George Cukor's Let's Make Love (1960) with Tony Randall and Yves Montand. Again, while it made money, it was critically panned as stodgy and slow-moving. The following year, Marilyn made what was to be her final film, The Misfits (1961), which also proved to be the final film for the legendary Clark Gable, who died later that year of a heart attack. The film was popular with critics and the public alike. In 1962, Marilyn was chosen to star in Fox's Something's Got to Give (1962). Again, her absenteeism caused delay after delay in production, resulting in her being fired from the production in June of that year. It looked as though her career was finished. Studios just didn't want to take a chance on her because it would cost them thousands of dollars in delays. She was only 36 years old. Marilyn remains a pop culture icon, with the American Film Institute ranking her as the sixth-greatest female screen legend from the Golden Age of Hollywood. Marilyn acted in only thirty films, but her legendary status and mysticism will remain with film history for ever.

Hollywood Golden Age of cinema

35,552 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 2 ไธชๆœˆๅ‰

2017 Capitulation Tour โš”๏ธ The plan to save the world has been in the making for many years. To the casual onlooker, the outworking of that plan may have looked a whole lot more sinister. This plan required precision and had to be designed carefully. It was the only way to stop the incredible crimes being carried out around the world. These crimes involved the children. It had to stop. Andโ€ฆ stop it did. Follow through as The Q White Hat Military Alliance With The Commander in Chief takes down one world leader after another. Sometimes he managed whole groups at one time. I thank Charlie Freak for the information given on his video. View below. Before we get into this post, letโ€™s make sure we understand the meaning of the word โ€˜capitulateโ€™ taken from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary: Definition of โ€˜capitulateโ€˜ intransitive verb a: to surrender, often after negotiation of terms The enemy was forced to capitulate unconditionally. b: to cease resisting : ACQUIESCE The company capitulated to the labor union to avoid a strike. CAPITULATE stresses the fact of ending all resistance and may imply either a coming to terms (as with an adversary) or hopelessness in the face of an irresistible opposing force. Some Synonyms for โ€˜capitulateโ€™ bow, concede, give in, knuckle under, quit, relent, submit, succumb, surrender, yield Why is this important? Itโ€™s important because this is exactly what the heads of each country around the world did when faced with dossiers of factual information about their โ€˜misdemeanorsโ€™. When ๐ŸŽ–๏ธThe Commander In Chief ๐ŸŽ–๏ธwas inaugurated, there was something keeping him busy for about 18 months. During that time he traveled the world visiting the country heads. On arrival, he presented them with huge dossiers: Definition of โ€˜dossierโ€˜ Taken from Merriam-Webster Dictionary A file containing detailed records on a particular person or subject. Examples: The patientโ€™s medical dossier Police began compiling a dossier on him. These huge dossiers contained damning information against the recipients. More often than not, the information related to one or more of the following: โ–ถ๏ธHuman Trafficking โ–ถ๏ธSatanic Rituals โ–ถ๏ธPedophilia โ–ถ๏ธSex Trafficking Regarding children (Notice: I tried to use these words in a different order but continually ended up with an error/warning that wouldnโ€™t allow it! Interesting!) and other abominations! A choice: To capitulate to President Trump. Or refuse to concede and therefore be arrested on the spot! Q plan to save the world Itโ€™s important that you realise that this is not just President Trumpโ€™s plan alone. There is a complete team of White Hats (good people who only want good for this world) working alongside him. He acts as the face to these people, and was chosen because of his tenacity and determination to see a job through to the end. Every country, because of the sheer amount of damning evidence against them, capitulated. It happened either immediately, or by the next morning, after they had had time to peruse the contents. Step #1 Saudi Arabia๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ (July 2017) During President Trumpโ€™s visit, the Saudiโ€™s capitulated to him. They had to show everyone else that they had done so: They had just performed the Sword Dance. Only the King is allowed to hold the sword during the Sword Dance Ritual, but here we see it being held by President Trump. That was the sign. The new Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (now King) works very closely with President Trump and Team in aiding to drain the swamp. Step #2 Israel๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ Some of the Saudiโ€™s then went with President Trump to his next destination. They were earning points towards their own salvation, so they wouldnโ€™t be as harshly punished as they could have been. These Saudiโ€™s, because of the capitulation, are now a part of the White Hats, helping ferret out others they know are involved in the same kind of abominations. The Israeliteโ€™s really balked at what President Trump was saying. It took an extra day before they finally gave in. They were the hardest country of all. How do we know they capitulated? That was when they agreed to allow the movement of U.S.Aโ€™s embassy to Jerusalem. This symbolizes who is in power in Israel. It was a symbolic act. Step #3 โ€“ Vatican City๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ His next move, a few days later, was to turns up at the Vatican to see Pope Francis. The dossier they had was so very huge! Vatican โ€“ Pope Francis (very sad) capitulates to President Trump (very happy)! Why did they have to concede? Actually, there were many reasons why, but thatโ€™s a story for another time. Please do your own research. The Pope would certainly not have surrendered unless the evidence against him and the church was solid and true! The plan to save the world from this evil stranglehold: Step #4 โ€“ Brussels European Parliament for the EU NATO ๐Ÿณ๏ธ President Trump called everyone together, then he purposefully arrived late, causing them to sweat it out as to what was going on! He walked in late and threw the big folder on the table. He said โ€œWe have it all!โ€ In a very short time, they all capitulated! In the days after this, the EU backed down on Brexit, and other issues were taken care of. From this point on, the United States no longer paid for NATO. He told them they could now pay. They obeyed, because now he was in charge! Trumpโ€™s visit to Brussels paid off wellโ€ฆ they were all there! All these officials would not have capitulated if the evidence against them wasnโ€™t as solid as a rock. Step #5 CEO's From Major Corparations ๐Ÿณ๏ธ Google Twitter Microsoft Apple Facebook Black Rock Vanguard etc These people are all minions, or puppets, for the New World Order (One World Government). He showed them all the documentation the NSA (National Security Agency) had against them. Bin Salman said they either come onboard and play for Team Trump, (as he is in total control of these corporations), or declass! All of the information would be declassified, one by one, and each one of them would be shown to the masses as a child-murderer! They all capitulated! ๐Ÿณ๏ธ Bin Salman sees Jack Dorsey (Twitter) Bin Salman sees Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook) The interesting thing is that President Trump is the owner of all these Media outlets now, even though itโ€™s kept quiet. All the troubles people experience with them today is not because of these โ€˜headsโ€™. Itโ€™s because President Trump is trying to get us all to see what these people have been up toโ€ฆ and to take a stand! Interesting Note: Itโ€™s the same with each country. He wants the people within the country to see just how bad their leaders wereโ€ฆ and to take a stand against them. Gradually itโ€™s happening, as more and more people take to the streets in peaceful protests etc. Asian Tour (November 2017) Step #6 Japan๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ This is the symbolic gesture where President Trump presents the winnerโ€™s trophy. This is done only by the highest figure in the land! Japan is now in submission to President Trump, the NSA and the *Q* Team. Step #7 South Korea/North Korea ๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ One of the biggest procurers of Adrenochrome has always been Asia, and South East Asia. They were deeply involved with Hollywood and Washington DC politicians. These people needed children for their drugs and have leaned heavily on the South East Asian governments. Itโ€™s been going on for many years. As he showed them all the documents, and because they knew their crimes were capital punishment acts, they all capitulated. In secret, he went to the North Korean border and began his peace talks with Kim Jong-un. Step #8 China๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ Soon after President Trump became president, the Chinese president paid him a visit. This was largely ignored by the mainstream media. Chinese President Xi Jinping vists Trump. In the Forbidden City at Trumpโ€™s request. The method used by China to show they had surrended to Trump was to allow him into the Forbidden City. By the Chinese president allowing this, it is bigger than we can possibly understand or imagine! One of the biggest surprises was to learn how the Chinese wanted communism kicked out of their country! They met Trump with open arms. Many terrible things were going on in China. Step #9 Vietnam ๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ In a very public ceremony, President Trump was placed slightly in front of the Vietnamese president, and to the right. The Vietnamese promised to stop their participation in procuring children, human tracking and such-like. They gave in easily. Step #10 Davos, Switzerland๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ (Early January, 2018) President Trump called this meeting in Davos, Switzerland. It contained the โ€˜Whoโ€™s Whoโ€™ of all the major companies, including George Soros. Much evil was in attendance. Remember, President Trump was outworking his plan to save the world! All these people were all presented with envelopes the day before. At the meeting above, they were given folders which stated all the NSA information collected on them. Underneath these mountains were a great many very deep tunnels. It was a very brave move by President Trump to even go there. He so easily could have disappeared forever โ€˜down belowโ€™! But of-course, he wouldnโ€™t have gone there alone. They very quickly capitulated, after a night of sweating it out. They were told they would be made public, one by one, with all they had done if they didnโ€™t surrender. Step #11 India Prime Minister of India๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ โ€ฆ Narendra Modi, after capitulating to Trump. He was the first of many Prime Ministers to hold hands in such a way that suggested their hands were tiedโ€ฆ It said: โ€˜Iโ€™m sorry, my hands are tied.โ€™ Central America Step #12๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ Mexico President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrado (AMLO) of Mexico really resisted, but finally surrendered to Trump. Step #13 The rest of the Central American Countries After Mexico, ๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ he went to all the rest of the countries in Central America. They all did as they had to. Once again, they all held their wrists together as if they were being bound and forced into doing it. In a way they wereโ€ฆ capitulate and help Team Trump, or be exposed and receive the capital punishment immediately. Step #14 Brazil๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ President Jair Bolsonaro They held a public meeting where once again this president held his wrists together in submission. One of the first acts of Bolsonara was to arrest โ€˜John of Godโ€™ who was running one of the largest child-trafficking rings. Note: This is the kind of thing all the Presidents/Prime Ministers did in all the countries around the world. They arranged the arrest of known pedophilia people within their country. Step #15 Argentina ๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ President Mauricio Macri left standing alone on the stage. President Trump makes a power move showing he believed him to be the scum of the earth! Step #16 Canada ๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ Prime Minister Justin Trudeau capitulated with his hands clasped together as if he were in handcuffs. Step # 17 Germany๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ Chancellor Angela Merkel capitulated Step #18 France๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ President Emmanuel Macron submitted. President Trump made a show of him because he was a real Adrenochromer! Step #19 England๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ Prime Minister Teresa May Here she is crying. Not only because of all the dirt they had on her, but because President Trump was able to inform her that the Phoneticians were planning to assassinate her. Their reason was to be able to put Boris Johnson in. Boris Johnson is a strong character who may simply be playing a role for the White Hats. Not sureโ€ฆ. time will tell. President Trump appears to act extremely rudely with the Queen. He took no care where he walked. This was deliberate and showed the capitulation. Step #20 Russia๐Ÿณ๏ธโคต๏ธ President Vladimir Putin As he famously said โ€˜The ball is in your court now!โ€™ This reference meant that they were now working for Trump. The ball also had reference to Adrenochrome. So there you have it. Not every country is mentioned in Charlieโ€™s video, including Australia and New Zealandโ€ฆ but the truth is, PT didnโ€™t stop until all the world leaders were in agreement to leave behind the filthy use of the little children of this world. All those who did participate in it will either receive capital punishment (death sentence) or spend the rest of their lives inn an inescapable prison. Here The Video Charlie Freak & Bonfire Guy The Take Down Of The Cabal From A to Z

DutchForce17

129,343 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 3 ไธชๆœˆๅ‰

โ€ก The Pacific Classic Result It was unfortunate that Nysos was scratched, but the result was interesting, with Fierceness, the 1.6/1 second-favorite, comfortably handling Journalism, the (overbet) 2/5 choice. That the odds of the remaining five runners ranged between 22/1 and 72/1, underscored the yawning gap in quality between the top pair and the rest. So it was clearly no surprise that the "also-rans" toiled in their wake. What was surprising, at least at first glance, was how well Fierceness appeared to handle less than ideal conditions. But on closer inspection, his trip was actually far less challenging than the vast majority of post-race takes have suggested. His having ducked in soon after the start, almost making contact with the temporary extension rail, could have been a disaster, but it wasn't, and its importance has arguably been overblown. I say that because it was not similar to the trouble that he had encountered early in some of his previous races, in that he was in his own space, and was neither bumped, constricted, nor otherwise intimidated by other runners. This is an important distinction, because the mental weakness that he had previously displayed was related to close encounters with other horses, and his ducking-in after the break did not fall into that category. Inexperienced horses may suffer from that type of self-inflicted event, but given a mature, experienced runner, they are almost always forgotten quickly, which was clearly the case here. The fact that it was a long race also helped to mitigate the event, as there was no need for the rider to panic, or feel pressure to make up ground immediately. It is even possible that the early ground loss actually helped Fierceness, as had he been drawn closer to the pace early, it could have rendered him vulnerable in the late stages of the race. At the same time, due to the inside post, and how the race unfolded, Johnny Velasquez, who has done such a brilliant job keeping Fierceness outside and clear of his rivals in his previous wins, was forced to make the best of racing inside of horses. I understand why some are tempted to argue that Fierceness displayed a new dimension, as there were no obvious signs of him having been intimidated, despite the inside trip. But while I am willing to consider the possibility that he has gained confidence, I remain skeptical of any significant change, in part because it would be highly unusual for a horse to overcome that type of mental weakness midway through its four-year-old season, and/or in its 13th start. I also remain unconvinced for more subtle reasons. First, Fierceness was never bounced around, and with the possible exception of the first turn, he was never forced to race in especially tight quarters. Secondly, the rhythm of the race, after the initial duck-in, was actually smooth, and therefore beneficial to him. To understand why the above points are important, consider that Fierceness was never, so to speak, allergic to racing inside, but was more likely to face contact, be squeezed into a tight space, or have his rhythm thrown off when breaking from an inside post. In contrast, when breaking from an outside post, JV has invariably been able to place him clear of the pack, and in a comfortable, stalking rhythm. Fierceness is also essentially a free-runner, with a "light" mouth, and as such performs best when his rider allows him to dictate his own rhythm and pace. That is why, for example, Johnny V was not at all responsible for his loss in the Breeders' Cup Classic, as he is not the type of horse that a rider can take a strong hold of in order to restrain him further off of the pace, as that would discourage him. And to the great credit of both JV and Todd Pletcher, they picked up on this early on, and have done a superb job mitigating the colt's limitations, and maximizing his potential. In the Pacific Classic, despite racing on the inside, Johnny V remained cool and calm, and gave Fierceness another masterful ride. He and the colt's connections did benefit though, as none of his rivals, either intentionally or not, tightened things up significantly, or otherwise disrupted his rhythm. In fact, quite the opposite. Having tracked comfortably through much of the race, and with space around him, Fierceness displayed his trademark spurt on the final turn. And while the pan shot may suggest that he slipped though a tight opening, it was more like the red sea parting, as the embedded head-on view illustrates. If you are able to view the full head-on replay, you will find that despite racing inside, Fierceness actually enjoyed quite a comfortable trip, after the eventful few strides. A more subtle indication that we were watching the same horse as in his previous races comes :12-14 seconds into the embedded clip. When he was about to take the lead, he cocked his head to the right, as if he may have been worried about the horse outside of him. He was able to draw away from that one so quickly that it was ultimately of no practical consequence, but I would say that it implies that he hasn't suddenly developed the heart of a lion. *** Two qualities that have been crucial to Fierceness' success are his tactical speed, coupled with the separation that he produces on the final turn of his (two-turn) races. His ability to take command at that crucial stage has served him very well, particularly in his narrow win over Thorpedo Anna, and it was again on display in the Pacific Classic. A big part of the reason why that move has been such an important part of his arsenal is that it typically allows his him to take a "breather", before digging deep in an effort to fend off any late dangers. I encourage you to watch the (pan) replay of the Pacific Classic, and focus on Johnny V from around the 3/8th pole to the head of the stretch, as he was sitting like the proverbial statue. So for at least a furlong and a half, Fierceness was on cruise control, while Journalism, his only danger, was under pressure to make up ground, in an attempt to simply reach striking distance. But with all due credit to Fierceness and his rider for having produced fine efforts in the Pacific Classic, was this really an exceptionally outstanding performance, or was it at least partly a reflection of his only serious rival failing to run his best? I'm inclined to argue the latter. Despite Journalism having produced an unusually good 3yo campaign, capped by three Gr. I wins, including a Classic success in the Preakness, and never finishing worse than second, there have been some lingering questions. One of them is whether he is actually as well-suited to 10f. as he is to 8-9f. races. Yes, he was beaten in his two previous tries over 10f. by Sovereignty, a better horse. But in each race he was able to gain first-run on that one, an advantage that is typically difficult to overcome, yet lost ground late to the winner both times, and to Baeza as well, in the KY Derby. Some have suggested that he may have a tendency to loaf when in front, but I haven't seen any compelling evidence of that. And such horses typically dig in when passed, in efforts to re-engage, which we haven't seen, at least overtly, from Journalism. He also drew away from his rivals late in his first three wins. Alex Evers made this interesting comment about the kickback in the Pacific Classic: "I've photographed racing for 20 years, I've never seen kick back knock a jockeys goggles off like this." Here is a link to his supporting photos, which are typically excellent: Could that have discouraged Journalism? I suppose that it could have been an impediment, but he is such a tough and honest horse, that I would be surprised to learn that it was a meaningful factor. By contemporary standards, Journalism has also had a busy campaign, having raced a touch over once per month since March, all but one of which in Grade I events, and four times well away from his home base. So it is possible that he is beginning to feel the effects of those races, and travels. I have also noted that from a Beyer figure standpoint, he hasn't really moved forward, and it's worth noting that in contrast to Sovereignty and Baeza, both of which were late (May) foals, Journalism was a February foal, and may not have had quite as much room to improve. I don't know why he lagged so far behind in the early stages of the Pacific Classic, or if there was any tactical intention behind it. I had previously suggested that it might make sense to ride him more patiently, a tactic that is sometimes adopted when there are questions about a horse staying a trip. But I didn't notice any improved late kick, so it's difficult to interpret the performance. Fierceness earned a 107 Beyer figure for his victory, slower than his best three races last year, and merely equivalent to his comeback victory in the Gr. II Alysheba at Churchill Downs, in May. That doesn't suggest that it was a particularly outstanding performance. Journalism was given a 102, which implies that the return to his home court did not catalyze any notable forward move. *** I would say that there is one relevant pattern that has emerged, namely that Fierceness has an apparent affinity for the faster, high energy return track surfaces in California. He has now contested three races in CA (Beyer): 1st Breeders' Cup Juvenile (105) 2nd Breeders' Cup Classic (111) 1st Pacific Classic (107) It's also interesting to compare the colt's first and last half-mile fractions in his effort in last year's BCC, and the PC, both contested at Del Mar over 10f.: BCC โ€“ :45 1/5 โ€ข :51 3/5 PC โ€“ :46 1/5 โ€ข :50 2/5 Predictably, he finished better in the PC, thanks to more manageable early fractions. But would a repeat of that effort be nearly sufficient to win this year's Classic? Given the various points noted above, coupled with Sovereignty's continued improvement, and seemingly bottomless stamina, I would be inclined to say no. And that's before even factoring Sierra Leone, Mindframe, Forever Young, et al, into the conversation. But setting aside all of the fine parsing, I'm happy to congratulate Repole Stable, and Fierceness' other connections, for having shipped to California, and for being rewarded with an exciting, winning effort. Assuming that the colt makes it to the Breeders' Cup Classic in good order, he should minimally add spice to the race, and who knows, perhaps even provide a serious challenge to knock Sovereignty off of his current throne.

Tinky

10,516 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 11 ไธชๆœˆๅ‰

They were part of growing up in Canada in the 1990s. We can instantly recognize the theme to their segments, and they inspired Canadians to get out and get active. This is the story of BodyBreak with Hal Johnson and Joanne McLeod! Hal Johnson was raised in North York, ON and excelled at sports. He represented Canada as a first baseman at the World Baseball Championship. He was hired as a sports reporter by TSN but the offer was taken back because the network didn't want two Black reporters. Joanne McLeod grew up in Scarborough, ON, also excelling in athletics. She was a four-time national and seven-time provincial hurdle champion. She also represented Canada at the Pacific Conference Games and the 1978 Commonwealth Games. The couple met at the gym in the 1980s. In 1988, after receiving 40 rejections for sponsorship, including over the mixed-race pairing of the hosts, they self-financed BodyBreak, which cost $4,000. The name BodyBreak came from Hal's sister Lynn. The first BodyBreak was shot on July 13, 1988, which focused on using lunges to combat fatigue while golfing on the back nine. In January 1989, ParticipACTION signed on for additional shows. On April 28, 1989, BodyBreak aired on CBC for the first time. From the pilot until 1994, 128 segments were created, all focusing on how to incorporate exercise into daily life. From 1993 to 1995, Canada's Vitality project partnered with BodyBreak. The segments aired on numerous stations in commercial breaks, including TSN. The couple married in 1999. Since the first segment, over 300 90-second segments have aired. Maclean's has stated, "Trying to explain the cultural significance that Hal and Joanne have taken on...is like trying to explain the cultural significance of Tim Hortons." If you enjoy my Canadian history content, you can support my work with a donation at *** Ils ont grandi au Canada dans les annรฉes 1990. Nous pouvons immรฉdiatement reconnaรฎtre le thรจme de leurs segments, et ils ont inspirรฉ les Canadiens ร  sortir et ร  devenir actifs. C'est l'histoire de BodyBreak avec Hal Johnson et Joanne McLeod ! Hal Johnson a grandi ร  North York, en Ontario, et excellait dans le sport. Il a reprรฉsentรฉ le Canada en tant que joueur de premier but au Championnat du monde de baseball. Il a รฉtรฉ embauchรฉ comme journaliste sportif par TSN, mais l'offre a รฉtรฉ retirรฉe parce que la chaรฎne ne voulait pas de deux journalistes noirs. Joanne McLeod a grandi ร  Scarborough, en Ontario, et excellait รฉgalement en athlรฉtisme. Elle a รฉtรฉ quatre fois championne nationale et sept fois championne provinciale de haies. Elle a รฉgalement reprรฉsentรฉ le Canada aux Jeux de la Confรฉrence du Pacifique et aux Jeux du Commonwealth de 1978. Le couple s'est rencontrรฉ au gymnase dans les annรฉes 1980. En 1988, aprรจs avoir reรงu 40 refus de parrainage, notamment en raison du duo mรฉtis des hรดtes, ils ont autofinancรฉ BodyBreak, qui a coรปtรฉ 4 000 $. Le nom BodyBreak vient de la sล“ur de Hal, Lynn. Le premier BodyBreak a รฉtรฉ tournรฉ le 13 juillet 1988 et se concentrait sur l'utilisation de la fente pour lutter contre la fatigue en jouant au golf sur les neuf derniers. En janvier 1989, ParticipACTION s'est inscrite ร  des spectacles supplรฉmentaires. Le 28 avril 1989, BodyBreak a รฉtรฉ diffusรฉ pour la premiรจre fois sur CBC. Depuis le projet pilote jusqu'en 1994, 128 segments ont รฉtรฉ crรฉรฉs, tous axรฉs sur la maniรจre d'intรฉgrer l'exercice dans la vie quotidienne. De 1993 ร  1995, le projet canadien Vitality s'est associรฉ ร  BodyBreak. Les segments ont รฉtรฉ diffusรฉs sur de nombreuses stations pendant les pauses publicitaires, dont TSN. Le couple s'est mariรฉ en 1999. Depuis le premier segment, plus de 300 segments de 90 secondes ont รฉtรฉ diffusรฉs. Maclean's a dรฉclarรฉ : ยซ Essayer d'expliquer l'importance culturelle que Hal et Joanne ont assumรฉe... c'est comme essayer d'expliquer l'importance culturelle de Tim Hortons. ยป Si vous apprรฉciez mon contenu sur l'histoire canadienne, vous pouvez soutenir mon travail avec un don ร 

Craig Baird - Canadian History Ehx

23,292 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 2 ๅนดๅ‰

The Daily Mailโ€™s Royal Vendetta: A Month of Smears on William and Catherine, Followed by Crocodile Tears In the sweltering heat of August and September 2025, the Daily Mail unleashed a torrent of vitriol against Prince William, Catherine, the Princess of Wales, and even King Charles III. What began as whispers about a family home move quickly snowballed into a full-scale assault: accusations of โ€œcontrol freakโ€ tendencies, โ€œunderwhelmingโ€ duties, a โ€œdark pastโ€ tied to slavery, and hints of irreparable rifts. Collages of headlines tell the story โ€” dozens of pieces from the Mailโ€™s royal โ€œhit squad,โ€ peddling speculation as fact, while royal watchers cried โ€œpropaganda!โ€ after every drop. This wasnโ€™t journalism. It was SEO warfare dressed up as reporting, cynically timed to ride search trends like โ€œWilliam lazy,โ€ โ€œKate health,โ€ and โ€œCharles succession,โ€ while dangling glowing comparisons to bait Sussex fans. The Mailโ€™s royal desk has turned itself into a digital sweatshop where outrage is the currency. Every article is deliberately contradictory โ€” William is โ€œtoo privateโ€ one day, โ€œtoo performativeโ€ the next; Catherine is โ€œinfluential but holding him backโ€; Charles is โ€œweak but meddling.โ€ Why? Because conflict sells. Rage-clicks fill MailOnlineโ€™s coffers. Itโ€™s the business model of chaos โ€” and chaos is the coin of their grubby little realm. Now, in a twist worthy of their own soap-opera scripts, two of the Mailโ€™s most prolific royal scribblersโ€” Rebecca English and Richard Eden โ€”have pivoted to pearl-clutching exposรฉs about a โ€œsinister plotโ€ and โ€œcalculated wedgeโ€ undermining William and Catherine. Itโ€™s laughable. These arenโ€™t brave whistleblowers; theyโ€™re architects of the very narrative theyโ€™re now decrying. The Daily Mail didnโ€™t just report the hateโ€”they manufactured it, weaponised it, monetised it, and now want to wash their hands as if they were bystanders. Itโ€™s the Fleet Street equivalent of throwing petrol on a bonfire, then sobbing that oneโ€™s eyebrows got singed. The Mailโ€™s hypocrisy is breathtaking. For weeks, they ran columns dripping with Sussex apologia โ€” Griffiths acting as Harryโ€™s stenographer and Platell recycling Meghanโ€™s grievances as โ€œconcerns,โ€ and A.N. Wilson psychoanalysing William from his study like some amateur Freud-for-hire. All this while YouTube commenters and even their own readers blasted their Royals channel as โ€œtoxic propaganda.โ€ But rather than adjust course, they doubled down โ€” until subscribers fled and advertisers grew squeamish. Only then did the pivot to victimhood begin. One could almost hear the gnashing of teeth in Kensington High Street. Letโ€™s expose the rot at the heart of this tabloid machine โ€” how they orchestrated the smears, gamed the algorithms, amplified Sussex narratives, twisted facts into weapons, and how their financial decline drives the cruelty. The curtain must be pulled back, and the stagehands caught red-handed, script in one hand, calculator in the other. The Hit Parade: A Catalogue of Calculated Cruelty From 1 August to 27 September 2025, the Daily Mailโ€™s royal desk became a factory for anti-Wales ammunition, deploying a multi-pronged strategy: recycle old grudges into fresh headlines, cherry-pick data to misrepresent workloads, sensationalise historical trivia, and frame every decision as evidence of impending royal collapse. The trigger? William and Catherineโ€™s pragmatic decision to relocate from Adelaide Cottage to Forest Lodge on the Sandringham estate โ€” a โ€œforever homeโ€ for family stability amid Catherineโ€™s cancer recovery and global threats. What should have been a non-story morphed into โ€œproofโ€ of Williamโ€™s fatal flaws: too private, too lazy, too โ€œwoke,โ€ too everything. In short, too damned convenient for the Mailโ€™s search engine tinkering. This was not random. The Mail runs on click-chains: one โ€œexclusiveโ€ generates spinoffs, which are then linked in sidebars, ensuring readers never escape the outrage cycle. Eviction headlines lead into slavery history โ€œrevelations,โ€ which link to workload hit pieces, which in turn promote YouTube debate clips. It is algorithmic entrapment sold as news โ€” a kind of journalistic mousetrap baited with bile. Hereโ€™s the rogueโ€™s gallery of the worst offenders, their pieces dripping with pro-Sussex favoritism and wild conjecture, broken down by tactic: โ€ข Amanda Platell (Columnist): On 20 August, Platell sneered at Williamโ€™s โ€œpunyโ€ 71 engagements, cherry-picking incomplete 2024 figures and ignoring health crises in the family. She compared him unfavourably to Princess Anne and accused him of making the Firm โ€œpure vanilla.โ€ Platellโ€™s column was SEO-stuffed with phrases like โ€œworkshy heirโ€ and โ€œroyal crisisโ€ โ€” all designed to trend on Google and bait shares. Her follow-ups even recycled Meghanโ€™s old โ€œbaby brainโ€ anecdote as if it were fresh ammunition. This isnโ€™t journalism; itโ€™s content farming โ€” and farming in barren soil at that. โ€ข Christopher Wilson (Historian/Columnist): On 23 August, Wilson exhumed Forest Lodgeโ€™s โ€œdark past,โ€ weaponising obscure history to frame William and Catherine as morally negligent. The piece was algorithmically tied to MailOnlineโ€™s โ€œslavery legacyโ€ tag โ€” the same tag used to cover Netflixโ€™s colonial dramas. It wasnโ€™t about informing readers; it was about capturing traffic off unrelated cultural debates. Like a ghoul rifling through parish records for sport. โ€ข A.N. Wilson (Royal Author): On 19 September, he declared William โ€œangry and unhappy,โ€ citing outdated stats and palace whispers. But more insidious was the Mailโ€™s packaging: push alerts framed it as a โ€œshock diagnosis,โ€ with sidebars linking to Sussex puff pieces. Williamโ€™s Earthshot success was buried, Harryโ€™s โ€œfun scampโ€ antics headlined. Manipulation by design, as brazen as a conjurerโ€™s sleight of hand. โ€ข Charlotte Griffiths (Royal Correspondent): On 13 September, Griffiths painted William as the villain blocking Harryโ€™s reconciliation. Her reliance on โ€œanonymous sourcesโ€ was classic Mail โ€” unverifiable quotes crafted to fuel fan wars online. Each story was cross-promoted under MailOnlineโ€™s โ€œSussex comebackโ€ hub, ensuring clicks from both sides of the aisle. Division is profitable, and she is its clerk of works. โ€ข Liz Jones (Columnist): On 5 September, Jones targeted Kateโ€™s โ€œbrondeโ€ hair during a visit to the Natural History Museum gardens, mixing sharp critique with grudging praise. Trolls called the lighter shade โ€œwashed outโ€ or a โ€œwig,โ€ but Jones framed it as smart and empowering, signalling Kateโ€™s post-cancer confidence. Her long history of nitpicking Kateโ€™s hair โ€” from 2012 bangs to post-2024 hospital styles โ€” fits the pattern: personal opinion masquerading as insight, always driving clicks. She also recently editorialised against William as a future king, questioning his temperament and charisma, further stoking debate and subtly undermining the heir apparent. โ€ข Tina Brown (via Mail amplification): Brownโ€™s Vanity Fair critiques were sliced into fragments and drip-fed as โ€œMail exclusives.โ€ This is another trick: repackaging syndicated content as fresh scoops, maximising monetisation while disguising the recycling. In Fleet Street terms, itโ€™s reheated cabbage passed off as coq au vin. โ€ข Rebecca English & Richard Eden: Even before their pivot, both poured fuel on the fire. English questioned the Forest Lodge move as a โ€œtaxpayer gambleโ€ (24 September). Eden mocked it as indecisiveness (18 September). Both columns carried DailyMailPlus paywall teasers, designed to convert outrage into subscriptions. This wasnโ€™t reporting. It was a coordinated content strategy: anonymous sourcing (cheap and unverifiable), data manipulation (engagement cherry-picking), and emotional framing (slavery, evictions, family rifts) โ€” all calculated to maximise page dwell-time and comments. Itโ€™s the cynical mechanics of Fleet Street turned up to eleven, all brass band and no tune. The Asinine Pivot: From Smear-Mongers to Victimhood By late September, the Mail faced a problem: the narrative it had stoked was now boomeranging. Readers began calling out bias, subscribers fled, and Palace Confidential was haemorrhaging viewers. Cue the pivot. โ€ข On 25 September, Eden wailed about a โ€œsinister plot.โ€ โ€ข On 26 September, English warned of a โ€œwedge between Charles and William.โ€ Both pieces were smoke and mirrors. They rehashed earlier reporting โ€” their own reporting โ€” while pretending to be alarmed that anti-Wales narratives were spreading. Classic Mail: start the fire, then play the firefighter. They build the echo chamber, harvest the clicks, and when the backlash hits, shrug and blame โ€œexternal forces.โ€ It is not just hypocrisy โ€” it is fraud. Fraud against readers, against journalism, against public trust. A betrayal wrapped in bunting. YouTube Implosion: Palace Confidentialโ€™s Monarchy Meltdown The nadir came mid-September when the Mailโ€™s Palace Confidential channel speculated if Williamโ€™s reign would โ€œend the monarchy.โ€ The video was a montage of the very print smears their own desk had churned out โ€” workload cherry-picking, rift whispers, Forest Lodge doom-mongering. Within days, subscribers plummeted by the thousands. Comment sections filled with accusations of โ€œhateful propaganda.โ€ Forensic look at the analytics shows watch-time collapsing, click-through rates nosediving. Why? Because even Mail loyalists saw through the con. They were watching for the same reheated slop, dressed up as โ€œexclusive debate.โ€ According to VidIQ data, the Daily Mail Royals YouTube channel currently shows around 482,000 subscribers and has amassed over 313 million total video views. While those are nontrivial numbers, the channelโ€™s estimated monthly earnings do not vindicate the hours of content churn โ€” often in the modest range of ยฃ14,580โ€“44,550 depending on viewership and ad engagement. In other words, the editorial excess is not being rewarded by proportionate audience loyalty or monetisation growth โ€” the metrics are flat or weakening under scrutiny. Tubics data earlier in 2025 had placed the Daily Mail Royals subscriber count at ~464,000 with a view count ~292 million, indicating very slow growth โ€” a channel in stagnation rather than ascendancy. This wasnโ€™t content collapse; it was audience striking back. The vox populi spoke โ€” and it said, enough. Follow the Money: The Mailโ€™s Financial Desperation To understand why the Daily Mail behaves this way, you must follow the money. The pathology of smear campaigns is fed by urgent financial pressure. โ€ข Print decline: As of June 2025, the Daily Mailโ€™s audited daily circulation stood at ~631,191 copies. That figure reflects a dramatic shrinkage over years โ€” the paper, once selling well into multiple hundreds of thousands more, is now hollowed out. โ€ข Yearly comparisons: In 2024, ABC audit figures showed the Daily Mail had a daily circulation of 706,839 โ€” meaning circulation has dropped by over 10% in roughly a year. โ€ข Advertiser exodus: In January 2025, the Mail announced it would merge its print and online teams and initiate cost-cutting, as major advertisers increasingly balk at brand adjacency with toxic, polarising content. The memo revealed that Mail+ (the paywall arm) had achieved 100,000 paying subscribers since its launch โ€” a modest number given the scale of MailOnlineโ€™s reach. โ€ข Staff cuts as symptom: This internal restructuring is not optional โ€” it is a forced retreat. Under the integration plan, job losses are anticipated. โ€ข Parent group pressure: DMG Media, the Mailโ€™s owner, has made it clear that the print-online integration is about survival in a hostile advertising environment and declining print returns. In short, the Mail is bleeding. These royal smear campaigns arenโ€™t just editorial cynicism โ€” theyโ€™re a press outlet in full panic, scrabbling for clicks, subscriptions, and relevance by flogging scandal, outrage, and division. Itโ€™s the frantic thrashing of a swimmer who knows the tide has turned against them. Dirty Hands, No Excuses: Time to Hold the Mail Accountable The Daily Mailโ€™s hands arenโ€™t just dirty โ€” theyโ€™re smeared, ink-stained with the fingerprints of manipulation. This wasnโ€™t an accident, not a slip of the editorial pen. It was deliberate. They gamed algorithms like card sharks stacking a deck, pitted fandoms against one another like gladiators in the Coliseum, and weaponised history, health, and grief as if they were trinkets to be traded for clicks. CharlotteGriffiths , Amanda Platell, A.N. Wilson, Tina Brown, Liz Jones Goddess and the rest dutifully acted as stenographers for Sussex spin; Rebecca English and Richard Eden cried about โ€œplotsโ€ they themselves had stoked; and editors signed off on every exaggeration, knowing that rage pays the bills. And now, when the wind shifts, they dare pivot to victimhood โ€” as if they were the collateral and not the culprits. Itโ€™s theatre. Bad theatre. And the damage? Itโ€™s carved into public trust like graffiti on a listed building. The contrast couldnโ€™t be clearer. William and Catherine ride out the storm with quiet resilience, their 74% approval proving that duty and dignity still matter. The monarchy carries on; the Mail only carries on as long as division sells. Readers arenโ€™t fooled. Legacy media is collapsing under the weight of its own duplicity. Advertisers abandoned The Sun after Hillsborough. News of the World collapsed after phone hacking. And the Daily Mail โ€” drunk on its own poison โ€” is staggering toward the same graveyard. This was never โ€œjust gossip.โ€ It was calculated sabotage dressed up in broadsheet clothing, a smear campaign masquerading as reportage, a racket that hollowed out the very idea of journalism. They didnโ€™t just observe events; they made them happen. They didnโ€™t reflect public opinion; they twisted it. They didnโ€™t hold power to account; they abused it. The case is closed. The Waleses endure โ€” proof that quiet service and real substance always outlast scandal. The Mailโ€™s hit squad, by contrast, are done. History wonโ€™t remember them as kingmakers, only as mercenaries who confused clickbait for craft and outrage for insight, and in the process wrote their own obituaries. They wonโ€™t go down as journalists; theyโ€™ll go down as clickbait casualties โ€” yesterdayโ€™s men and women, swept away by the very tide they tried to ride. #BoycottDailyMail #WeAreTheMediaNow #RoyalSmearCampaign #ExposeTheMail #MediaManipulation #StopTheSpin #TabloidTyranny #FakeNewsFactory #MonarchyVsMedia #FleetStreetFraud #TruthOverClickbait #InkStainedLies

เผบ๐ป๐‘…๐ป ๐ฟ๐’ถ๐’น๐“Ž ๐’ฅเผป ๐Ÿ‘‘

29,572 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 10 ไธชๆœˆๅ‰

Roger Federer: "Effortless is a myth. I worked very hard to make it look easy." "I left school at age 16 to play tennis full-time. So I never went to college. But I did graduate recently. I graduated tennis. I know the word is 'retire', but retired sounds awful. Like you, I finished one big thing and I'm moving on to the next. Like you, I'm figuring out what that is." Lesson 1: Effortless is a myth. "People would say my play was 'effortless.' Most of the time, they meant it as a compliment. But it frustrated me when they'd say, 'He barely broke a sweat' or 'Is he even trying?' The truth is, I had to work very hard to make it look easy." Roger shares the wake-up call: "An opponent at the Italian Open publicly questioned my mental discipline. He said, 'Roger will be the favorite for the first two hours. Then I'll be the favorite after that.' Everyone can play well the first two hours you're fit, you're fast, you're clear. After two hours, your legs get wobbly, your mind starts wandering, your discipline starts to fade. My parents, my coaches, even my rivals were calling me out. So I started to train harder. A lot harder." He explains the paradox: "I got the reputation for being 'effortless' because my warmups at tournaments were so casual that people didn't think I'd been training hard. But I had been working hard before the tournament when nobody was watching." Roger redefines talent: "Yes, talent matters. But talent has a broad definition. Most of the time, it's not about having a gift, it's about having grit. A great forehand can be called a talent. But discipline is also a talent. Patience is a talent. Trusting yourself is a talent. Embracing the process, loving the process, these are talents too. Some people are born with them. Everybody has to work at them." Lesson 2: It's only a point. "You can work harder than you thought possible and still lose. I have many times. Tennis is brutal. Every tournament ends the same way: one player gets a trophy. Every other player gets back on a plane, stares out the window, and thinks, 'How the hell did I miss that shot?'" Roger shares the statistic that changed his mindset: "In the 1,526 singles matches I played in my career, I won almost 80% of those matches. But what percentage of points do you think I won? Only 54%. Even top-ranked tennis players win barely more than half of the points they play." He explains what this teaches: "When you lose every second point on average, you learn not to dwell on every shot. You teach yourself to think: 'Okay, I double-faulted. It's only a point.' 'I came to the net and got passed again. It's only a point.' Even a great shot, an overhead backhand smash that ends up on ESPN's Top 10, that too is just a point." Roger shares the key mindset: "When you're playing a point, it has to be the most important thing in the world. And it is. But when it's behind you, it's behind you. This frees you to fully commit to the next point with intensity, clarity, and focus." He reflects on losing Wimbledon 2008: "Some call it the greatest match of all time. Okay, all respect to Rafa, but I think it would've been way better if I had won. Looking back, I feel like I lost at the very first point. I looked across the net and saw a guy who just a few weeks earlier crushed me in straight sets at the French Open. And I thought, 'This guy is maybe hungrier than I am.' It took me until the third set to remember 'Hey buddy, you're the five-time defending champion. You're on grass. You know how to do this.' But it came too late." Roger shares what champions understand: "The best in the world are not the best because they win every point. It's because they know they'll lose again and again, and have learned how to deal with it. You accept it. Cry it out if you need to. Then force a smile. Move on. Be relentless. Adapt and grow. Work harder, work smarter." Lesson 3: Life is bigger than the court. "A tennis court is 2,106 square feet. That's where singles matches happen. Not much bigger than a dorm room. I worked a lot, learned a lot, and ran a lot of miles in that small space. But the world is a whole lot bigger than that." Roger explains his philosophy: "Even when I was just starting out, I knew that tennis could show me the world, but tennis could never be the world. I knew that if I was lucky, I could play competitively until my late 30s, maybe even 41. But even when I was in the top five, it was important to me to have a life, a rewarding life full of travel, culture, friendships, and especially family. These are the reasons I never burned out." He shares what matters most: "Tennis has given me so many memories. But my off-court experiences are the ones I carry forward just as much. The places I've travelled, the platform that lets me give back, and most of all the people I've met along the way." Roger concludes: "Tennis, like life, is a team sport. Yes, you stand alone on your side of the net. But your success depends on your team, your coaches, your teammates, even your rivals. All these influences help make you who you are." His final words: "Whatever game you choose, give it your best. Go for your shots. Play free. Try everything. And most of all, be kind to one another, and have fun out there."

Jaynit

250,587 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 4 ไธชๆœˆๅ‰

BOOM!!! ๐Ÿ’ฅ๐Ÿ’ฅ๐Ÿ’ฅ Dr. Aseem Malhotra's testimony was delivered in the Helsinski District Court on April 12, 2024, with the understanding that any deviation from the truth would constitute perjury. This clip was immediately banned by YouTube so please share widely. I've trimmed the clip, removing the interpreter's segment for a smoother listening experience. Here's the first hour of the testimony. ---------------------------------- My name is Doctor Aseem Malhotra. I am a consultant cardiologist. I've been a qualified doctor since 2001. I have held various roles both in academic health policy. In England, in the United Kingdom, and of the various roles, I won't bore you with all the details. I think three of the most relevant and prominent are the fact that I was an ambassador for the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges for six years, which represented every doctor in the UK. I served a full term of six years as a trustee of the King's fund. I was the youngest member to be appointed to this body which advises government on health policy. I was a founding member of Action on Sugar and a first science director. And through that role I'm considered the lead campaigner on bringing about a sugary drinks tax in the UK. And also, finally I served for five years as visiting professor of evidence based medicine at the Bahiana School of Medicine in Salvador, Brazil. In early 2020, at the beginning of the pandemic I was most vocal doctor on the mainstream, making the link very early on between COVID and those who are vulnerable to suffering serious complications from COVID In fact, in March 2020, I was asked to go on Sky News to explain my initial research findings of the link between especially obesity and COVID, but also to give people an opportunity and to suggest to the government this was a great time for them to implement public health policy to help people enhance or optimise their immune system, which could happen within just a few weeks of dietary changes and optimising vitamin D. This was later also backed up by medical journal publications a few months later. And I was first to mention on the back of an article I published in the Daily Telegraph newspaper, which became a front page commentary and was picked up by BBC News and Good Morning Britain, where I had said that it's likely our prime minister, Boris Johnson, was hospitalised because of his weight. As a result of that, the then secretary for health, Matt Hancock, and this was publicised in the news, had asked me to advise him on the link between COVID and obesity. ...before I explain my journey and in many ways U-turn on my understanding in terms of the benefits and harms of the COVID vaccine, my experience in this area over the last couple of years has made me realise more than ever that even for that the greatest barrier to the truth are not factual or intellectual barriers, but psychological. I think all of us as human beings are vulnerable to these psychological barriers and we should have compassion for ourselves. And I will just very briefly summarise those three psychological barriers before I get into my detailed account of what I was involved in in regards to the COVID vaccine. The first psychological barrier is one of fear. And many of us understandably, and I still remember from early on in the pandemic, we were all scared. We did not know what we were dealing with. The issue with fear is that when people and populations are in a state of fear, we are less likely to engage in critical thinking and we are more likely to be compliant. Although COVID was particularly devastating for vulnerable groups in the elderly and I even have managed and still manage people with long COVID, the fear was grossly exaggerated. And one of the examples of that is that when we had good information on the mortality rate of COVID in the United States, one survey in 2020 revealed that 50% of Americans believed that if they caught COVID, the risk of 19 hospitalisation was 50% one and two, when the actual figure, certainly an average for people in middle age, was less than 1%. The second barrier to the truth, which I think is very relevant to the situation we find ourselves in now, is one called willful blindness. This is when human beings, all of us, are vulnerable to this, turn a blind eye to the truth in order to feel safe, avoid conflict, reduce anxiety and to protect prestige and fragile egos. Some examples of this include, on a personal level, willful blindness can occur when a spouse turns a blind eye to the affair of their partner. On an institutional level, some great examples of willful blindness include Hollywood and Harvey Weinstein, the Catholic Church and child molestation. I believe the current situation we find ourselves in, with much of the mainstream narrative and the medical establishment and policy makers not acknowledging quite horrific, serious and common harms from this vaccine, is another example of willful blindness. And I also say this with full empathy, because I was one of those people that was for a very long time, willfully blind to the harms of the COVID vaccine. In January 2021, I was one of the first people to take two doses of the COVID mRNA vaccine because I volunteered in a vaccine centre. I still believe that traditional vaccines are some of the safest amongst all pharmacological interventions in medicine and I could not conceive of any possibility whatsoever of this vaccine causing harm. As a public figure and respected doctor in the UK, I have built relationships across the board with many other public figures, including celebrities and politicians, who often come to me for medical advice. One of those people was film director Gurinder Chadha, who you may be familiar with some of her work, including the movie "Bend It like Beckham", who had asked me whether or not she should take the vaccine and had sent me blogs which I dismissed and regarded as anti vax nonsense. I was then asked to go on good morning, Britain because Gurinder Chadha, the director herself tweeted that I had convinced her to take the vaccine. The main reason for this TV appearance was to help tackle vaccine hesitancy, which was very prominent amongst people from ethnic minority groups in the UK. I made the point on that programme that I understand where vaccine hesitancy was coming from because of the history that I have been involved with over many years in highlighting the shortcomings of pharmaceutical industry influence over medicine. And I even made the point, if I remember correctly, that they have been found guilty of fraud on many occasions, that the third most common cause of death, prepandemic after heart disease and cancer, is prescribed medications. I, however, reassured the public and said that despite these figures, of everything we do in medicine, traditional vaccinations are amongst the safest. I still believe this to be the case. A few months later, in April 2021, I met with a colleague and friend of mine who I regard as one of the brightest cardiologists in the United Kingdom. I was surprised when he told me that he had not taken the COVID vaccine. He explained to me that he had concerns because he had seen in the supplementary appendix of Pfizer's original trial that there were four cardiac arrests in the vaccine group and only one in the placebo. These numbers were small and did not reach statistical significance. So this could be random chance, or his concern was it could represent a signal of problems in the future. And if this was the case, we are going to have a huge problem. He said he'd rather wait and see what happens before taking the vaccine. On July 26, 2021, my father, aged 73, who was a very prominent, well known doctor in the UK, including being the honorary vice president of the British Medical Association and had received honours from the Queen of England with an OBE, suffered an unexpected sudden cardiac arrest. I was particularly devastated by this happening and I was also I find it difficult to understand why my father, who was a fit and well man, I knew his cardiac history and his cardiac status, would suffer a cardiac arrest. But also my initial investigation was to try and understand why there had been a 30 minutes ambulance delay arriving to his apartment. Two weeks later, the deputy chief nurse of NHS England, a government health body, called me up. She was very upset, she knew my father very well and she was crying and she told me, Aseem, there's something I need to tell you. She in effect told me that throughout the country, for the last two months prior to my father's cardiac arrest in most regions of the UK, ambulances were not getting to patients in time for heart attacks and cardiac arrests. And there had been a deliberate, and I will use these words because I mentioned it, I've mentioned it before, a cover up involving the government and the Department of Health to withhold this information from doctors and the public. I worked with an investigative journalist with the I newspaper in the UK to write an article and a news story that became BBC News headlines a few months later, exposing this. Just before I exposed this, I messaged a professor of cardiology who I trust in the UK. He has a leadership role to explain to him what had happened and what I was about to do. I have text message evidence of this. He told me not to do this because it would make me enemies. I explained to him that I had a duty to patients and the public. I'm highlighting this as one example and I'll give you more examples of a cultural problem within medicine. The next part of this story is the post mortem findings of my father. They did not make any sense to me. I am considered a leading expert, maybe in the world, on the development and progression of coronary artery disease. My father had two severe blockages in his coronary arteries. There was no actual evidence of heart attack and likely there was a rhythm disturbance because of reduced blood supply that led to his cardiac arrest. Then in, within the space of a few weeks, around October and November, 3, different sources of information was brought to my attention that made me realise that there was probably a significant problem with the COVID mRNA vaccine. The first in October 2021. I remember I was giving lectures in Stockholm. I was contacted by a journalist with a Times newspaper who reported to me and said, Dr Malhotra, we have reports of an unexplained 25% increase in heart attacks in hospitals in Scotland and asked me what I thought was going on. I explained to her that at that time, with the evidence I knew in my own experience, I said that two likely contributory factors were lockdown stress. We know that when populations undergo severe stress after war, for example, there is an increase in heart attacks and strokes that can last for many years. She asked me whether I thought that there was a contribution. I was surprised when she asked me whether I thought there may be a contribution of the COVID vaccine to these heart attacks. I said to her, a good scientist should never exclude any possibility. But I felt at the time it was unlikely to be related to the COVID vaccine. But we should watch this space and keep our eyes open. A few weeks later, a publication appeared in the Journal Circulation, which is considered the highest impact cardiology journal in the United States that revealed a potentially very strong link between the COVID mRNA vaccines and acceleration in heart attack risk. Very specifically, in several hundred people of middle age, there was a plausible mechanism, by use of inflammatory markers in the blood, that increased the baseline risk of those people having a heart attack in five years, from 11% to 25%, just within two months of having the COVID mRNA vaccines. Of course, this is one bit of data, but even if partially true, that is a huge increase in risk in a very short space of time. And for me now made me think and link back to why my father may have suffered a cardiac arrest six months after having two doses of the vaccine. I remember thinking and speaking to a colleague, that if this was true, then we were going to see an increase in cardiac arrests, heart attacks and excess deaths in heavily vaccinated countries for the next few years. Then within a few weeks, I was called up by a whistleblower at a very prestigious british institution. I will name that institution, which I have not done publicly before as a University of Oxford. This cardiologist explained to me that a group of researchers in his department had accidentally found, through the use of very specialised imaging of the heart, that there was a signal of increased inflammation of the heart arteries, which was there in the vaccinated, but not there in the unvaccinated. The lead researcher of that group had sat down, the juniors, and had said that we are not going to explore these findings any further because it may affect our funding from the pharmaceutical industry. At that point, with these three bits of information, I then felt it was my ethical duty to speak out. And I went on GBNews to talk about what I'd found what I'd heard and I'd asked for the Vaccine Committee of the UK on TV to investigate this, to see whether there was a real problem with the vaccine in relation to heart issues. Around the same time which I found very strange is that the Secretary of State for Health at that stage, who was not Matt Hancock, was Sajid Javid, had announced in parliament that we are going to introduce legislation to ensure that all healthcare workers are mandated to have the COVID vaccine. For me, this, by that stage had no ethical or scientific justification, because certainly after the summer of 2021, it had become very apparent that the COVID mRNA vaccine was not stopping infection and it certainly was not stopping transmission. It was understood that approximately 80,000 NHS workers had refused at this stage to have the COVID vaccine. And now they were threatened with losing their job if by April the following year they had not been fully vaccinated. Many of these people were very concerned and contacted me around that time, I was also conducting many interviews, both through the BBC and Sky News and GBNews in regards to what happened with my father's ambulance delay. And I used it as an opportunity on the mainstream media to call for Sajid Javid, the secretary for health, to U-turn on the introduction of a mandate for healthcare workers based upon the fact that I felt it was not scientific and it was unethical. I also received my own personal backlash from these comments where I was contacted by the Royal College of Physicians who I had an affiliation with, and they asked me to respond to anonymous complaints from doctors that I was spreading, in quotes, antivax disinformation. I felt with my own knowledge and experience of the healthcare system that this was a direct response probably fueled by a combination of willful blindness and institutional corruption. To elaborate a bit further, when I say institutional corruption, I mean that my view was that the complaints were likely being fueled by academics with financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry. I felt very concerned about the potential introduction of the vaccine, well, the vaccine mandate. And therefore I decided there were two things that I decided to do. The first was I made a phone call to the chairman of the British Medical Association in December 2021. I had a good relationship with him and he respected my opinion. And I spent 2 hours on the phone explaining to him everything that I knew up to that stage about my concerns of the COVID mRNA vaccine. He said to me, "Aseem, nobody appears to critically appraise the evidence on the COVID mRNA vaccine as well as you have from our conversation, he said, most of my colleagues are getting their information on the benefits and harms of the vaccine from the BBC". This was replicated by the former chair of the CDC in the United States, Rochelle Walensky, who in an interview later on had said that her initial optimism of the vaccine benefits came from CNN News report. I say this just to emphasise that we should all accept our vulnerabilities to where we receive health information. Even doctors, policymakers, judges and lawyers are all influenced on the public massively by mainstream media. The chairman of the BMA also agreed with me. There was no ethical or scientific justification for mandating the COVID vaccine. He said the BMA also did not support it. And he said because of my conversation with him, he would speak directly to the secretary for health, Sajid Javid. One month later, at the end of January 2022, the COVID vaccine mandate for healthcare workers was overturned. I at that stage, given the fact that there was some backlash happening towards me, I realised that because this is a very big issue and area, and not my initial area of expertise, I needed to carry out my own critical analysis of the COVID mRNA vaccines. I spent six to nine months critically appraising the data, including speaking to two Pfizer whistleblowers, three investigative medical journalists and eminent scientists from the University of Oxford, Stanford and Harvard. The most critical bit, the most critical research that was published on this issue, which I think the whole court should acknowledge in August 2022, was published in the journal Vaccine. That research was conducted by some of the world's top independent of drug industry influence academics. That research, we was able to reanalyze the original randomised control trials conducted by Pfizer and Moderna. They were able to do this because new information was made available on the FDA's website and Health Canada's website. The conclusions of that paper were really very disturbing. The original trials that led to the drug regulatory approval of these vaccines revealed that you were more likely to suffer serious harm from taking the vaccine, specifically hospitalisation, life changing event or disability, than you were to be hospitalised with COVID That rate of harm at two months was very high at 1 in 800. Just to give you some perspective, historically we have suspended other vaccines for much less. In 1976, the swine flu vaccine was pulled because it was found to cause a neurological syndrome called Guillain-Barre syndrome In one in 100,000 people. In 1999, the rotavirus vaccine was suspended because it was found to cause a form of bowel obstruction in children affecting 1 in 10,000. This was 1 in 800. In my view, it was very clear that given this information, published in the highest impact Vaccine journal in the world, peer reviewed, and has not had any significant rebuttals, that this vaccine now, in my view, should never have been approved for use in a single human being in the first place. In my view, this very important court case in some ways, actually is a distraction from the much bigger issue, which is there should be court cases around the world with a full inquiry into the pharmaceutical industry and an inquiry as to how we got this so very wrong. Of course, one could argue this is just one bit of research, but actually, unfortunately, there are different, many different strands of research that are showing a signal of considerable and common serious harm from these vaccines. From pharmacovigilance data that is reporting what we call yellow card reports from the public. We have plausible biological mechanism of harm. We have other research called observational data. We have autopsy data also confirming that certainly with the majority of people who died within a short space of time of having the vaccine in relation to the heart, was definitively caused by the vaccine. This is really a very, very, very horrific situation we find ourselves in. One would hope and expect that the regulators should be independently evaluating all medications. But of course, the evidence reveals this is far from true. There was an investigation by the BMJ, also published in the summer of 2022, which revealed that most of the major regulators across the world were taking most of their money from the drug industry. For example, the MHRA in the UK receives 86% of its funding from the drug industry, and the FDA in America receives 65% of its funding from the drug industry, A fact that most doctors do not know. And therefore, I would not expect members of the court to know this either, is that very, very rarely do drug industry sponsored research get independently evaluated. Clinical trial data can often involve thousands of pages of information on individual patients. The drug companies hold onto that raw data. They then give summary results to the regulator, who are then paying, who have an incentive to approve the drugs, and the drugs are then approved. I made these points in my peer reviewed article published in the Journal of Insulin Resistance in September 2022, where I concluded that we should pause and investigate the issue around the COVID mRNA vaccines. I have since then been campaigning and advocating for a return to ethical evidence based medical practise around the world. Some of the clear solutions moving forward would be changes in the law that are required so that patients, doctors, members of the public can have greater confidence in the information they receive to make decisions about their health. Two very clear, low hanging fruit solutions, which are both ethical, scientific and democratic, would be that the drug industry should be allowed to develop drugs, but they shouldn't be allowed to test them themselves. And they certainly shouldn't be allowed to design their own research to and hold onto the raw data. Their information needs to be independently evaluated. One other clear solution would also be that the medical regulators, again, should not be taking any money from the industry, as this is a gross conflict of interest. I also want to highlight for people to understand the bigger picture. Prior to the pandemic, I had realised that there was a big problem with the reliability of clinical research, where invariably the results of clinical trials on all drugs sponsored by the drug industry, grossly exaggerate their safety and benefits. I have taken this information to the European Parliament, where I spoke in 2019, and I spoke to very senior politicians in the UK government. But although they were sympathetic, they felt that the issue was much bigger than them as individuals, and therefore it also needed media attention to get public awareness on the importance of such an inquiry. Before we continue with further questions, as I've been speaking for quite a long time now I'll just finish with two references just for the court and the judges to understand just how bad this problem is. Prepandemic the man who I call the Stephen Hawking of medicine is Professor John Ioannidis from the University of Stanford. The reason I call him the Stephen Hawking of Medicine is he's the most cited medical researcher in the world and is a mathematical genius. In 2006, he published a paper which was entitled why most published research findings are false. In that paper, he makes a point that the greater the financial interests in a given field, the less likely the research findings are to be true. I say this in context of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine which has made the company $100 billion. The other point that he makes in a further paper in 2017 is, again, the reason the system continues as it is is most doctors are unaware of the information they receive when they make clinical decisions has been corrupted by commercial influence. The other credible name I will mention is the editor of the Lancet, Richard Horton, who I personally know. In 2015, he wrote an article in the Lancet in relation to a secret meeting that had taken place with himself and some of the world's top medical academics. In that, he wrote that possibly half of the medical published literature may simply be untrue. And he said that science has taken a turn towards darkness. But who's going to take the first step to clean up the system? I believe in this case and in this court today, this is going to be a very pivotal potential moment in history for that first step. ---------------------- Dr Aseem Malhotra H/T: Tiina Keskimรคki ๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฎ

aussie17

797,301 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 2 ๅนดๅ‰

The Royal High Courts are certainly a place of grandeur and perhaps some are intimidated by the surroundings. Well that impressive 19th century Gothic architecture is a sight to behold but the Judges less so. Iโ€™ve seen too many judges in the UK and Pakistan and by God, they leave a lot to be desired. Especially when one comes across McGowan the Mediocre. What should have been a straightforward win has turned into a cheating exercise by the very judiciary meant to uphold justice in this country. Why do I say straightforward? Letโ€™s recap. After 3-4 failed complaints to the GMC, the Jewish lobbies upped the ante. First came my loss of contract at South Tyneside and Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust where I was doing some clinics. No investigation. Just blocked from the email and canโ€™t address patient queries. Then started the defamation in the press โ€“ articles in the Jewish News, Jewish Chronicle and Telegraph followed by loss of contract with Medinet with whom Iโ€™d worked since 2018 intermittently and had glowing reviews. The GMC now opens an investigation โ€“ given the pressure from Wes Streeting, elected in July 2024. They wanted an Interim Orders Tribunal (IOT) to decide if any sanction should be imposed whilst I was being โ€œinvestigatedโ€. I had a trip abroad for my brotherโ€™s assassination case and I had clinics. Patients who had waited 12-18 months to see a Neurologist. The GMC and MPTS didnโ€™t care. The Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) is allegedly an independent body to the GMC and runs the IOT panels. They would not move the IOT by 11 working days as the GMC had refused (so much for independence!) โ€“ instead of 20th December I had suggested 13th January 2025. Recall this was over the Christmas period โ€“ people going on holidays and yet I was expected to get legal advice when I was in clinic from 8am โ€“ 6pm. I told them patients came first โ€“ I stand by that. Hurt Jewish feelings arenโ€™t urgent and they donโ€™t come before my patient care. I requested deferment by 11 working days, told them I would defend every single tweet and indeed, looked forward to it. This was all via email. Multiple emails. All ignored โ€“ including the one letter that contained my โ€œdefencesโ€. They would not budge โ€“ the Jewish lobbies were demanding action and the GMC wasnโ€™t going to risk their ire again. Wes Streeting was breathing down their necks. On 20th December 2024, I saw my Neurology patients and on 23rdDecember, I found out that Iโ€™d been suspended for 18 months. No other doctor had an 18-month suspension or got one since โ€“ in their absence. My remaining clinics in December and January all cancelled. Some patients were cancelled as they were making their way to my clinic. I requested the transcript of the IOT hearing โ€“ the GMC had been demanding conditions on my license on public interest grounds yet 3 batty women decided I should be suspended for 18 months for public interest and patient protection! Later, the barrister for the indemnity body stated he โ€œcouldnโ€™t get purchase onโ€ how they came to that decision. In any case, after being misled by my indemnity body โ€“ who suggested that I first ask for an early review, delayed asking for it and then the GMC refused. They were refusing to allow me to be heard after claiming I wouldnโ€™t attend. The indemnity body then reneged on the agreed High Court action. The GMC even send me the Rule 7 letter โ€“ the final โ€œallegationsโ€ against me on 5 February 2025 which they then updated in March. Ordinarily this takes about 9 months to send โ€“ in my case, they managed to do it within 6 weeks! Yet one of the reasons they claimed I needed to be suspended for 18 months was because of the lengthy investigationโ€ฆ. I had to reply by 5 May 2025 which I did via a191-page response. The GMC usually respond within 3-4 weeks. As of 21 January 2026, I have yet to hear from them. I then took matters into my own hand. Let down by cowardly lawyers except one (Yasmin), I filed a High Court application under Section 41 A(10) of the Medical Act 1983 to challenge my unlawful suspension. I requested an urgent expedited hearing as I was being left with no way to earn a living. There were 10 grounds of appeal. The High Court date was set for 10th July 2025. Meanwhile, the MPTS is obliged to give a 6-month review โ€“ 16th June 2025 afternoon was scheduled. I stated I wanted this in person and in public. I flew back from Kashmir on 9th June โ€“ itโ€™s cheaper to live there - and found myself arrested at Holyhead under s12 of the Terrorism Act for โ€œalleged support of proscribed groupsโ€ โ€“ apparently I was โ€œon the wanted list. Iโ€™m released 14 hours later. Theyโ€™d seized my mobile phones and laptop and wait for it, all my GMC documents that Iโ€™d carefully put together. Iโ€™m still not sure why I couldnโ€™t get those back. I learn that the GMC is seeking information about this non-reportable arrest within 24 hours of it โ€“ they know. In any case, I go for the IOT hearing โ€“ and the GMC Counsel attempts to utilise the arrest. I object. The panel agree that it will not be considered. However, the MPTS have set an insufficient amount of time for the hearing โ€“ they would have known. There were over 1000 pages in the bundle of nonsense โ€“ the only worthwhile part of that was my beautifully written 191-page response. I was quite proud of it if Iโ€™m honest. It could be considered my second PhD thesis. As I have to return to Pakistan for hearings and the High Court case was 10thJuly, the IOT hearing was re-scheduled for 14th July 2025. So, fast forward to 10th July 2025. Under 48 hours before the hearing is due, the GMC submit their skeleton arguments โ€“ ordinarily submitted 7-14 days before โ€“ no doubt, to wrong foot me. They finally admit that the IOT panel made an โ€œerror of lawโ€ in not properly applying the Article 10 rights but argue they got to the โ€œright decision but by the wrong routeโ€ (!) I am self-representing in Court 1 at the Royal Courts of Justice โ€“ the GMC have their in-house lawyer, their GMC Counsel and her clerk. But I have the best lawyer (currently abroad) and an excellent McKenzie friend, Sean Naughton and my well wishers who attended to support me. We start at 10 30am โ€“ and I ask the Judge to review the admission of illegality. On that basis alone, my suspension should be revoked. She declines and wants to hear the case. I then detail the IOT powers and how the grounds to sanction me had not been met โ€“ they had not proven public interest or public protection. I discussed the GMC actions, the unfairness, disproportionality, the abuse of process, the outright lies by the GMC, the draconian 18-month suspension, the persecution by the Jewish lobbies and the breach of my rights under Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the ECHR. My opening lines: โ€œI submit that the suspension was political in nature. It was subject to bias and external pressure was clearly evident. It was unlawful and demonstrated seriously flawed reasoning. It was manifestly wrong and the panel erred in law. It was completely unnecessary. Itโ€™s been tainted by marked procedural errors, unfairness and it has demonstrated gross abuse of process by the GMC and the MPTS and the IOT panel and those abuses have continued. The suspension is draconian and disproportionate and inconsistent with other decision makings of the IOT panels. It is a complete violation of my rights under Article 8, 9 and especially Article 10 of the European Court of Human Rights. And it is demonstrated also limitation of the panelโ€™s expertise, both in terms of law, but also, importantly, the context of the rights of the Palestinian people and it brings into serious question whether the GMC should be policing speech of doctors. It should certainly not be policing or interfering in political speech.โ€ I went through each ground in detail giving the relevant case law. I talked openly about the nature of that persecution: โ€œAll of the complaints against me have been made by Jewish and pro-Israeli affiliated organisations and I think itโ€™s necessary to list them โ€“ Lawyers for Israel, in collaboration with Gnasherjew, the Jewish Medical Association twice; the unnamed Jewish Zionist doctor; the Jewish News who defamed me; the reporter is Michelle Rosenberg - who is Jewish and Zionist; the Daily Telegraph defamation - George Chesterton is married to a Jewish woman; Miranda Levy and Jacob Freedland are both Jewish and Zionist. I had the Jewish Chronicle defamation - Jane Prinsley is Jewish and has a home in Israel; Campaign Against Antisemitism by Stephen Silverman, who is Jewish and has submitted three similar tweets in March 2025 to the GMC which have been included in my Rule 7 letter without due process the GMC is obliged to follow on receipt of a new complaint. And then, twice in the Jerusalem Post - Mathilda Heller and Michael Starr are both Jewish Zionists. And despite the suspension, Sabrina Miller, a Jewish Zionist journalist at the Daily Mail attacked a number of pro-Palestinian doctors, including myself. So, these previous complaints that have been dismissed by the GMC included tweets of a similar nature. The tweets have not changed, but I would contend that the priorities of the GMC had and my complaint was clearly being handled by individuals who appeared conflicted. In my witness statement, I have detailed the behaviour of XXX, XXX, XXX who refused to respond to emails on where disclosures from the GMC themselves, since I submitted this appeal, have since revealed that XX XX had made false notes on my record claiming I had prior FTP history. In addition, in July 2024, Wes Streeting became the Health Secretary. I refer Your Honour to pages 327 to 337 of the bundle. Thereโ€™s a Declassified article, incidentally, thatโ€™s been written by a Jewish journalist, Matt Kennard. He has investigated Streetingโ€™s support of Israel since his days at the National Union of Students. It documents that he visited Israel in 2022 paid for by the Labour Friends of Israel. That organisationโ€™s former chair was Joan Ryan, infamously found to be discussing her ยฃ1 million payment from Israel with Shai Masot, the Israeli diplomat. Streeting has taken over ยฃ20,000 from Israeli lobbyist, Trevor Chinn. Trevor Chinnโ€™s father heads the Jewish National Fund which supports illegal Israeli settlements and from Lord Mendelsohn and David Menton. The Jewish Chronicle even ran a profile of him entitled โ€œWes Streeting, our friend at the NUSโ€. So, thereโ€™s little surprise that Wes Streeting made comments in The Telegraph stating he would urge medical regulators to discipline staff expressing views which he, as a pro-Israeli and Zionist, opposed. He stated that regulators had the power to set conditions that a healthcare professional must work under. Suspend them or strike them entirely from the medical register. He made similar comments to The Times. He then met with the Board of Deputies for Community Security Trust, which is also behind my complaint, the Jewish Leadership Council and the Jewish Medical Association, reiterating โ€œI expect employers and regulators to take actionโ€. The idea that this political pressure by the Health Secretary in November 2024 was irrelevant to my suspension is untenable in the face of this clear intervention, which actually represents political interference and undermines the alleged independence of the GMC.โ€ And I made clear the Jewish privilege at play โ€œSo, from what Iโ€™ve just presented, itโ€™s very clear that the red line concerns Israel. Tweets, thatโ€™s words. Criticising an entity, carrying out the mass slaughter against innocent civilians will be punished more severely than malpractice, blatant dishonesty, criminal convictions or even genuine Jew hatred, as long as you are not a Muslim. And if youโ€™re Jewish and you belong to a powerful lobby group like the Jewish Medical Association, then the GMC gives you a clear pass as shown in the case of Liz Lightstone and Justin Stebbing.โ€ I made clear that even the GMC referral to the MPTS explicitly stated โ€œthat there was no evidence of [her] racially discriminating against anyone or discriminating against Jewish people.โ€ I stated in the High Court โ€œAnd I should point out that the Jewish people are not a race; Judaism is a religionโ€ and โ€œIt is my inalienable right to be able to disagree with the narrative from Israeli lobbies and express it. Their free speech does not trump mine.โ€ I made sure that she understood that my patients and even Grok approved of me: โ€œIn fact, Grok is positively glowing โ€“ โ€œDr Rehiana Aliโ€™s tweet carry a fiery, unapologetic tone blending sharp intellect with a raw defiance against injustice echoing the spirit of Malcolm X, mirrors Malcolmโ€™s blend of moral clarity, confrontational rhetoric and distain for oppressive systems.โ€ โ€œI canโ€™t think of a better person to be compared to.โ€ I further stated โ€œI do not believe that legal, that legitimate political commentary or reporting facts can be antisemitic. I do not believe that any groups, be they Jewish, Muslims or Christians, are exempt from criticism where the situation warrants it. I do not believe in hate speech, as thatโ€™s the very antithesis of free speech, but also, importantly, there is no tweet of mine that demonstrates hatred for any group simply by virtue of their religious identity and, indeed, none has been identified as such.โ€ I even quoted the Queen: โ€œI do not accept that stating facts becomes anti-Jewish simply because the majority of those committing the crimes are Jewish. If you take that to the logical conclusion, that would mean that no Jewish person could ever be criticised for their bad behaviour. That cannot be right. I would also point out that the late Queen, according to the Israeli press, and the ex-President of Israel Rivlin, was reported to have viewed every Israeli as a terrorist or the son of a terrorist. Who would have thought that the Monarch would have been so based?โ€ At 1pm, the Judge wants a lunch-break โ€“ I havenโ€™t finished. We continue after lunch break โ€“ and I complete my submission dealing with the GMCโ€™s arguments. โ€œBefore I sum up, Iโ€™ll just briefly address the skeleton arguments that the defence submitted on 8 July. And obviously Iโ€™ve already raised disgruntlement about that but I think itโ€™s important to note, that the GMC has finally conceded, after over two months since receiving my skeleton arguments, that the IOT erred in law. On that basis alone, that suspension should be quashed today. If the GMC was capable of self- reflection, it would have withdrawn its objections to my appeal gracefully but that is probably too optimistic an outcome to expect of this bureaucratic monster which has become a law unto itselfโ€ฆโ€ Then the GMC repeats their arguments and argues that the High Court have broad powers and should take original jurisdiction over the matter: โ€œAnd that is an exercise that this Court can properly make, exercising its original jurisdictionโ€ In fact, the words โ€œoriginal jurisdictionโ€ were repeated about 7-8 times. The GMC Counsel repeated to the Judge โ€œWe accept that you have a free-er handโ€ and again โ€œBecause, as I say, this Court is free-er to exercise the original jurisdictionโ€ and so on. Look at the tweets! She said โ€œMossad did 9/11โ€ and that โ€œIsraelis shouldnโ€™t be allowed near humanityโ€. She said โ€œIsraelis are involved in organ traffickingโ€. All true. I was amused. Ordinarily the High Court usually looks at technical and legal aspects without going into the actual details of the issue itself (e.g. on covid, they wouldnโ€™t debate the merits of the covid vaccine โ€“ the issue was whether the conditions/suspension was legal according to rules and procedural fairness). I reply I have no issue but it wasnโ€™t necessary โ€“ the grounds did not require that. However, if the Judge wanted to look at the tweets she should acquaint herself with the facts that I presented in my 191-page response. I request a judgement that day or the next day. I had no faith in the MPTS and GMC. That review hearing was due a few days later on 14 July 2025. Judge McGowan was fully aware of that review IOT hearing. She stated โ€œWe need to finish this during the course of today. It cannot go part heard and I understand that your review hearing is listed on Monday next.โ€ She stated the following: โ€œAnd if there is not a decision from this Court today then, presumably, the review hearing will be made aware of these proceedings, but their decision is independent of this. If they decide to not lift the suspension, then my decision either does the same or lifts or terminates the suspension. If they terminate the suspension on Monday, then my decision probably becomes quite academic, but necessary, nonetheless.โ€ Even the GMC Counsel admitted that the Courtโ€™s decision was โ€œof interestโ€ I didnโ€™t agree it was โ€œacademicโ€ The Judge continued: โ€œThere is too much material. It is too important.โ€ And later that her decision was โ€œnonetheless, an important exercise.โ€ I emphasised in my response that I wanted the High Court to rectify that injustice done to me in December 2024 and that โ€œthe overarching question is โ€œwas my original suspension, was it correct or not?โ€ McGowan replied : โ€œI โ€“ I do understand that and in order to reach a decision about that I have to look at what you say are the procedural mistakes. I have to look at what you say are the errors of law. I have to look at what you say is unfair about the way the hearing was conducted...โ€ and again,โ€œUntil I have made my mind up about the procedural unfairness and all the other points you have raised, I have got to consider everything.โ€ I again pointed out โ€œ..I would argue itโ€™s an abuse of the system and Iโ€™m actually paying the price for their deficiencies, or rather procedural irregularities. Iโ€™m having to live with the consequences of being deprived of an incomeโ€ฆโ€ In other words, there have been consequences for me โ€“ financially and professionally. And I ended with โ€œI have no faith in the IOT. I have no faith in the MPTS, and I have no faith in the GMC, and I am not the only one to feel that way. The fact that we are calling for a different body and weโ€™re calling for the GMC to be dismantled. Iโ€™m simply asking that the injustice that was done in December is rectifiedโ€ฆโ€ The concluding remarks of McGowan? โ€œWell, I am certainly not going to give judgment in this case at 3.55pm. You raised an awful lot of important issues. The importance of a decision to you, personally, is obviously great. The importance of a decision to your potential patients is high and the importance of a decision to the public is equally important. So, all of those matters have to be considered and balanced and I will get to a decision early next week. I think that is probably the best way, which will be handed down in the usual way. All right, well thank you both very much. Thank you all very much for your attendance.โ€ At no point did McGowan state there would be no Judgement. On 14 July 2025, my suspension was revoked. I self-represented and I didnโ€™t concede a single point or any tweet. What happened next was a shocking abuse of the judicial process. My registration was reinstated โ€“ no conditions. But that 7 months suspension remains on my record visible to every employer. The very next day GMC emails the Court to state that the High Court no longer has jurisdiction over the matter as the suspension was revoked! The IOT panel has very limited powers so whilst it revoked my suspension, it will not deem it unlawful or indeed make any comment about the previous panelโ€™s decision โ€“ and certainly not its legality. The MPTS admitted that only the High court could rule it was unlawful. I contacted the Court pointing this out and that I was expecting a judgement as per McGowanโ€™s position in the High Court. The High Court had a full dayโ€™s hearing and the court was independent of the tribunal and had seized jurisdiction. All my grounds including the legality of the suspension were outstanding. The revocation was to some extent irrelevant to the Court issuing the Judgement โ€“ if anything, it rather supported my contention that the suspension imposed on me in December 2024 was unlawful. I ask the GMC to provide what law theyโ€™re relying uponโ€ฆ.they quote this section and claim it is written in the present tense! โ€œSection 41A(10 of the Medical Act 1983, Interim Orders, states Where an order has effect under any provision of this section, the relevant court may โ€“..โ€ Yes โ€“ that is the best they could come up with it. Needless to say, the convention in UK legislative drafting is the simple present tense โ€ฆbecause the law is โ€œalways speakingโ€. I call and even visit the Royal Courts of Justice. The Court staff chase the Clerk โ€ฆIโ€™m asked to be patient and await the Judgement. Even up to 6th August 2025 I was told that the Judgement was coming. On 11th August 2025, I am informed by email that there will be no Judgement!! I spoke to a number of barristers and solicitors โ€“ itโ€™s almost unheard of. They're all useless though. I get no replies to my emails to the High Court. So in November 2025, I requested the Hearing transcript. On 12th December 2025 โ€“ over 5 months after the substantive hearing โ€“ I received an Order (not a Judgement). It was a bare order โ€“ simply stating โ€œUpon the Court hearing the substantive hearing on this matter on 10 July 2025 And upon following consideration of the documents lodged by Respondent on 15 July 2025 confirming revocation of the Interim Order pursuant to Section 41A of the Medical Act 1983, the application is dismissed.โ€ No reasons whatsoever as to why the Judge had contradicted her own position in Court. I replied to the Court and file an application for permission to appeal โ€“ not just to McGowan (the system is so barmy that you have to ask the same judge for permission to appeal) but also to the Court of Appeal โ€“ the latter for both permission to appeal and the appeal itself concerning McGowanโ€™s bare unreasoned order. McGowan now responds (miraculously) via the Court staff wanting a 30-minute hearing for permission to appeal โ€“ that is set for Tuesday 13 January 2026. So, yet again I am at the High Court now requesting permission to appeal. To be honest, I wasnโ€™t expecting much. McGowan had shown she lacks the spine to address the issues โ€“ and has zero integrity. You donโ€™t get a DBE in the UK for nothing. In fact, she started this hearing by asking the GMC to interpret the Section 41A of the Medical Act!!! Then she turned to me โ€“ the Claimant โ€“ and asked if โ€œI understood what was being saidโ€. I replied that I understood full well. English after all is my first language and Iโ€™m a Cambridge graduate. I can understand basic English. She clearly has difficulties though โ€“ I later learnt that she dropped English at Manchester University for Law. At the expense of sounding very snobbish, I just knew she wasnโ€™t Oxbridge materialโ€ฆ. I present my arguments โ€“ including case law. The GMC has no relevant case law โ€“ their arguments are โ€œit is written in the present tenseโ€ (I did correct them that in actual fact, it was written in the simple present tense to be more precise) and that the decision of the High Court โ€œis finalโ€. Of course, I point out that finality is based on two aspects โ€“ firstly, getting a reasoned Judgement! I never got a judgement. I effectively got a blank piece of paper. On no grounds, could that be considered โ€œa decisionโ€. And secondly, if there were any errors of law, procedural irregularities โ€ฆthey were always appealable. Appeal however was not automatic โ€“ all that meant was that one had to request permission to appeal. Can you imagine a system where a Judge makes an error but you canโ€™t appeal it?! I point out that every issue remains live. I even simplify it for them โ€“ I point out that in the case of rape, and using GMC logic, weโ€™d never prosecute the rapist โ€“ after all, the rape was no longer in progess. That is not justice. The High Court seized jurisdiction by having a substantive hearing and had to produce a judgement. Of course, I understood that had I appealed after the revocation, the application would have been dismissed. McGowan sat there clearly not listening. This was merely an exercise to show thereโ€™d been a hearing. She tried to claim she has โ€œno powerโ€!! She then had the audacity to say โ€œYouโ€™ve had a success. Why arenโ€™t you satisfied with that?โ€ I point out that I was suspended unlawfully โ€“ I had 20 years of an impeccable record and it states โ€œmisconductโ€ on my record. I have a right to get that unlawful suspension struck from my record and remedy with regards to the consequences I had suffered. The GMC โ€“ a public body โ€“ should be held accountable not just for my sake but for other doctors and I remind her of her own words โ€œfor the wider public interestโ€. In fact, I quote liberally from the transcript and point out her contradictions. At no point did she ever state โ€“ because itโ€™s not possible โ€“ that the High Court lost jurisdiction. Thatโ€™s the legal principle: โ€œOnce seized, always seized.โ€

DR REHIANA ALI BA MB BCHIR (Cantab) MA MRCP PhD

18,659 ๆฌก่ง‚็œ‹ โ€ข 6 ไธชๆœˆๅ‰