Above, normal blood cells and below, blood cells plus Graphene Oxide
Prepare yourself for a journey into the heart of darkness, where science fiction becomes reality, and the true horrors of nanotechnology are revealed.
In this bone-chilling exposé, we expose the malevolent truth behind graphene nano bots lurking within COVID-19 vaccines.
Brace yourself as we navigate through the treacherous waters of unknown risks, uncovering the potential dangers that lie within this minuscule technology.
Join us as we delve into the sinister world of manipulation, control, and dystopian consequences that await those who dare to scratch beneath the surface of the mainstream narrative.
Fortunately, remediation is promoted as possible. And they recommend elements that have been in my jab detox protocol since the start: https://www.tomgrimshaw.com/tomsblog/?p=35644
My wife sometimes tells me I sound a bit extreme. I guess compared to talking football, the weather or the next holiday, I am. But when you look at the actual data I do, you’d be forgiven for thinking that most people are whistling past the graveyard and will die from ignorance for lack of confronting the truth of our plagued society. For instance, I often lambast drug companies and call them crooks and felons and maybe some people look askance at my stance. Well, for context, look at this list of 83 Merck violations with penalties just since 2000 of $10,582,360,581. Yes. That over Ten BILLION Dollars in penalties for doing the wrong thing 83 proven times. Let alone how many other times they weren’t caught or there was not enough evidence to convict them. Honestly, how would you trust ANYTHING they said or trust any product they produced with that criminal a record?
“Today in one of our classes I introduced the children to two apples (the children didn’t know this, but before the class I had repeatedly dropped one of the apples on the floor, you couldn’t tell, both apples looked perfect). We talked about the apples and the children described how both apples looked the same; both were red, were of similar size and looked juicy enough to eat.
I picked up the apple I’d dropped on the floor and started to tell the children how I disliked this apple, that I thought it was disgusting, it was a horrible colour and the stem was just too short. I told them that because I didn’t like it, I didn’t want them to like it either, so they should call it names too.
Some children looked at me like I was insane, but we passed the apple around the circle calling it names, ‘you’re a smelly apple’, ‘I don’t even know why you exist’, ‘you’ve probably got worms inside you’ etc.
We really pulled this poor apple apart. I actually started to feel sorry for the little guy.
We then passed another apple around and started to say kind words to it, ‘You’re a lovely apple’, ‘Your skin is beautiful’, ‘What a beautiful colour you are’ etc.
I then held up both apples, and again, we talked about the similarities and differences, there was no change, both apples still looked the same. I then cut the apples open. The apple we’d been kind to was clear, fresh and juicy inside. The apple we’d said unkind words to was bruised and all mushy inside.
I think there was a light bulb moment for the children immediately. They really got it, what we saw inside that apple, the bruises, the mush and the broken bits is what is happening inside every one of us when someone mistreats us with their words or actions.
When people are bullied, especially children, they feel horrible inside and sometimes don’t show or tell others how they are feeling. If we hadn’t have cut that apple open, we would never have known how much pain we had caused it.
I shared my own experience of suffering someone’s unkind words last week. On the outside I looked OK, I was still smiling. But, on the inside someone had caused me a lot of pain with their words and I was hurting.
Unlike an apple, we have the ability to stop this from happening. We can teach children that it’s not ok to say unkind things to each other and discuss how it makes others feel. We can teach our children to stand up for each other and to stop any form of bullying, just as one little girl did today when she refused to say unkind words to the apple.
More and more hurt and damage happens inside if nobody does anything to stop the bullying. Let’s create a generation of kind, caring children.
The tongue has no bones, but is strong enough to break a heart. So be careful with your words.”
A take away coffee’s just a coffee right? Spending $3.50 to $4.00 a day on your favourite caffeine blend isn’t really a luxury is it? Well, take a look at this…
A recent article I was reading by Mortgage Choice provided tips on how to pay off your mortgage sooner. It included a range of important information from budget setting to reviewing your home loan. One example explained that by reducing your weekday coffee spend from $4 a day to $4 every second day adds up to a saving of $40 a month… and if you put that saving onto your mortgage you could take 2 years off your loan and $31,000 off your interest bill*.
The article took me back as it was actions like these that allowed me to save up a deposit to purchase my first property much faster than I otherwise would have. When I set the goal I saved for more than 6 years and worked two jobs most of that period before I bought my first property at 24, which by the way I still own.
If you’re paying off a home or investment property loan or saving for a deposit to buy your first, second or even third property, it’s often not the big but several little changes and saving habits that will make a big difference over time.
So the next time you grab a coffee and have a break, take a moment to think about your financial goals… and the little things that will help you achieve them.
*Figures based on a home loan of $300,000 at 7% over 30 years. For more information go to MortgageChoice.
We do not need an amendment to the Australian Constitution.
Aboriginals are already included!
~~~~~~~~~~~
Almost no elders from around this country were consulted about the Uluru statement. It also contains multiple plagiarisms from other globalist documents. Australia, we need to wake up. Please, listen to the elders’ voices before believing the feel-good campaign propaganda.
But now it’s out and every Australian needs to hear it before voting on the divisive Voice.
You know how the PM keeps saying the Voice is a “modest change” to the Constitution?
Well, the real agenda behind his Voice referendum has finally been revealed.
Secret government documents the National Indigenous Australians Agency was forced to release under freedom of information laws say that “any Voice to Parliament should be designed so that it could support and promote a treaty-making process”.
And what’s in the treaty?
According to these secret documents, it must include a “fixed percentage of Gross National Product. Rates/land tax/royalties”.
The documents explain:
…a Treaty could include a proper say in decision-making, the establishment of a truth commission, reparations, a financial settlement (such as seeking a percentage of GDP), the resolution of land, water and resources issues, recognition of authority and customary law…
This a direct quote from the secret Voice documents:
“Australia got a whole country for nothing, they haven’t even begun to pay for it.”
Doesn’t that just tell you everything you need to know?
But it gets worse.
According to these documents, they want to abolish the Australian flag, because “the Australian flag symbolised the injustices of colonisation”.
This is why I get so angry when Albo says this is a modest proposal.
What’s modest about forcing you to change your flag or pay a percentage of the entire economy as reparations?
Sounds like a bloody BIG change to me!
Just to be super clear, this is how their plan works:
They enshrine the divisive Voice in the Constitution and it’s there forever.
The treaty means Australians pay a percentage of the GDP – that is, a percentage of the entire nation’s economy – to the Voice … every year.
On top of that, Australians are forced to pay “rates/land tax/royalties” to the Voice.
This is why Albo wants you to think you’re voting on a “modest” change.
Because when Australians find out the truth, there’s no way they’d support it, let alone enshrine it in their Constitution forever.
Yours in unity,
Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price
~~~~~~~~~~
The proposed Voice is a direct threat to our democracy and the Constitution.
This referendum divides Australians by race, gives one small group of Australians an extra say over Parliament and the Government, and will cost the earth.
And to top it off, the dangerous and divisive Voice is a “first step” towards Treaty and “agreement making”.
That could mean reparations, a “black parliament”, and oversight of executive government and the public service.
Meanwhile there’s a crime crisis in Alice Springs, along with an energy and cost of living crisis that’s just going to get worse.
It’s not right and it’s not fair.
But you can help fight back now by signing this pledge, telling Anthony Albanese you’ll vote ‘NO!’.
The referendum is coming – and those driving a divided Australia are already off and running.
So it’s urgent to take action now to oppose it.
Get your name on this pledge today to fight for our nation so it’s fair and free for ALL Australians!
More Disturbing Information About The Voice To Parliament
Please share this far and wide!
Robert Gottliebsen OAM has spent more than 50 years writing and commentating about business and investment in Australia. He has won the Walkley Award and the Australian Journalist of the Year award. He has a place in the Australian Media Hall of Fame and in 2018 was awarded a Lifetime Achievement award by the Melbourne Press Club.
Robert GOTTLIEBSEN on The Voice
Why the Voice could hurt parliament, capital system.
This is the most critical issue in Australia’s future because it is the first spark that will cause a long burning bushfire throughout our economy and your assets.
IF YOU OWN PROPERTY VOTE NO FOR THE TREACHEROUS VOICE REFERENDUM OR YOU WILL LOSE YOUR TITLE AND SECURITY OF OWNERSHIP IN THE FUTURE
Spread this around – I am going to be a NO vote.
Anthony Albanese is pushing for a referendum to change the constitution to recognise the role of First Nations people in Australia’s history.
Slowly the Voice debate is swinging to issues like property ownership, rent and the allocation of government revenue.
I could say welcome to my country, but it is a very unwelcome country.
On election night last May, among the most inspiring words of our newly elected Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was his embrace of a referendum to change the constitution to recognise the role of First Nations people in Australia’s history.
Albanese aimed to bring together our past and our present and end current and future basic differences.
At the time, like most Australians without Aboriginal heritage, I knew very little about how the so-called voice would work, but the Prime Minister’s sentiments made me an early supporter.
Then the detail started to emerge, and it became apparent that we were being asked to vote on a proposal without full knowledge of what the legislation to be passed by parliament would contain. I found this both strange and disturbing.
Then came constitutional experts, who warned us that while the proposed wording change to the constitution might look innocuous to a lay person, keywords had legal meanings which the High Court could easily interpret to give the First Nations body very wide approval powers over the actions of the parliament of Australia. Almost certainly that would include the federal budget.
The Australian’s legal affairs writer Chris Merritt, who is also vice-president of the Rule of Law Institute of Australia, explains that the constitutional provision has been drafted in a way that would permit the First Nations body to dissipate its efforts across the entire range of federal public policy – a very powerful body indeed.
More recently the debate has taken an even more dangerous course and a group of First Nation people led by a member of the Upper House of the federal parliament now opposes the Voice referendum because it inhibits First Nations’ rights to be declared the real owners of all land in Australia.
Some people in this group take the natural next step and say that as people with Aboriginal heritage own the land, those who occupying it should pay rent.
The Greens, whose support the government needs to pass most of its controversial legislation, say the voice is merely a first step and a “treaty” must follow. The word “treaty” in this context usually means property ownership and rent.
We are now looking at a potential attack not just on the power of our parliament but our capital system, which operates on the basis people who buy, and mortgage property have title to the land.
It’s possible – maybe even likely – that reference to land ownership will be contained in this so far secret legislation.
Perhaps that’s why it’s being kept secret.
In normal circumstances when groups of people or individuals want to reconcile their views and move forward, then any issues involving property, money or rent must be put on the table as part of the reconciliation. If not addressed, then such issues will arise again and again.
Now that section of the First Nation community has raised the issue of property and rent to be paid by Australian householders and commercial property “owners” for occupying land they “don’t own” the issue is in the table.
The government is pouring very large sums into places like Alice Springs, and the overall Australian community has little concept of just how this money is being distributed.
The same applies to the large royalties being paid by mining companies.
Reconciliation is not all one way. It should be a two-way exercise, with both sides coming together and prepared to give ground.
In this context, Australian land covering large parts of WA, SA, NSW Queensland and Northern Territory has the potential to be used as major solar power generation sites and for the growth of carbon absorbing plants like salt bush.
This will be highly remunerative. The land is part of Aboriginal land rights. We need to talk about these things now, rather than leave it to heated debates later.
I don’t pretend to have any knowledge of the forces that are causing First Nations people to attack each other and wreck property.
Obviously alcohol plays a big role, but I suspect deep in the background is the way the abundant cash is being distributed and the difficulty of First Nations people in those areas have in owning a house.
We are now discovering in our capital cities and regional areas that when you spray money into a community, as we did in Job-keeper, it can have bad impacts on the younger generation irrespective of their colour or racial origins.
We are rushing into a referendum that is great superficial community appeal where we have not sorted out the details and kept some of the details that have been sorted out secret. Lasting reconciliation agreements negotiate these things first. By rushing we may head into an area of dispute it will last many decades.
Finally, our Prime Minister is telling us that the new parliamentary body will not impact the broader workings of the nation’s parliament.
I suspect most of the nation is like me and wants to believe him, but the Prime Minister is not a constitutional expert and those with far more knowledge of this subject are warning us that he is wrong.
“The United Nations has given the (Australian) Federal Government a mandate of ownership for housing, property, farms and businesses to government control once the Republic has been proclaimed”. And what is preventing Australia becoming a republic? The fact that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders are not currently included in the Constitution and are still deemed to be the original owners of the land. Do you now have some idea why Albanese and Labor want to have Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders written into the Constitution? There is nothing the slightest bit altruistic about it. It is deceptive and nefarious stuff. It is about the stated aim of Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum that “By 2030 you will own nothing and be happy about it”.
Cornish pasties started life as a hearty, eat-in-the-hand lunch for British coalminers, with a warm peppery filling of beef, potato, swede and onion inside rich, buttery pastry.
