The burdon of proof is always on someone else isn't it?

[Link]

"Patrick Gaspard – Former United States Ambassador to South Africa, President of the Open Society Foundations"

It also says:

“Archewell Foundation has invested in The People’s Vaccine Alliance, a coalition of over 90 organizations, health experts, economists, Heads of States, faith leaders and activists that’s mission is to ensure that everyone across the world has access to COVID-19 vaccines, tests and treatments. Archewell’s support will go toward the Alliance’s ongoing campaigns and efforts to secure fair vaccine access for low and middle-income countries and bringing an end to the global COVID-19 pandemic.”

So an organisation set up to promote vaccines is telling you that people died in the 3rd world because of a lack of vaccines with actually zero evidence. If fact the evidence is there that this never happened.

If you read their manifesto they are totally in line with the WHO in demanding that funds are re-directed to "healthcare" (specifically Pharmaceutical Companies producing vaccines)

Everyone gets a cut.

Now I've done all the work perhaps you can engage on all my other previous points?

When you make assertions, yes, the burden of proof does indeed rest with you.

I have no need to debunk it. You do that all on your own. Ensuring fair access to vaccines is an honourable mission. That people have died in the 3rd world because of a lack of them is evidenced only empirically. If no records are kept, then there simply is no other way. Of course, they are in line with the WHO, who have much more experience of, and knowledge about, this situation than either of us. I respect the WHO. You doubtless think they are an evil organisation seeking to limit the numbers in the world. Conspiracy theorists tend to do that.

Added to that are my own experiences and observations. Having seen this first hand, I know it's true.

You haven't made any "previous points"! You just regurgitate garbage. Regurgitated garbage is still garbage.

They could, but they won't.

They prefer Sunak, but will get Truss. Why is this? It's because of the fear they have of both being whipped and then of being deselected. The whole system has become unfit for purpose and needs a root and branch overhaul to ensure it really serves the needs of the people.

.
I believe most are decent, public spirited and honest whose motivations on entering politics are sound.

Then the system swallows them. My own MP, part of the 2019 intake, is working hard but fighting against bureaucracy, the lack of resources and an overflowing in box to get anything done.

It really cannot be easy.

[Tweet Link]

Anything but the “vaccine”

Makes a change for you to be right.

Even a blind dart player will hit the bull from time to time.

It is indeed anything but the vaccine. The heat, shortage of NHS staff doing preventative care, a social care crisis also caused by a staff shortage, largely as a consequence of Brexit and, of course, the huge backlog of work which built up during the peak of the pandemic, resulting in conditions worsening.

These all mean that more people present as emergencies.

Edited by Wisbech Eagle (12 Aug 2022 11.34pm)