Firering Strategic Minerals: From explorer to producer. Watch the video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
*fatality! Stupid phone
If only it were a Freudian slip, there is clear evidence these clot shots have reduced fertility
Could this be why they’re waving in millions of immigrants? 🤔
Know not no
See it cuts both ways.
Why am i ignorant? I made a judgement and decided not to take mRNA experimental gent therapy
That’s my call. Guess what? I’ve had covid a few times and I’m still here and I’m in rude health
And even the manufactures admitted it was never tested to see if it prevented spread. So you were lied to by bbc and sly news propaganda
The more jabs you get, the weaker your immune system. Why is nobody rolling up their sleeves now? Have you realised or have you been fed rubbish that it was previously deadly and now it’s feeble?
Honestly, you fools are so gullible
Ha ha if only you knew!!!
I know exactly what the globalists are up to. And that’s exactly why I didn’t take this gunk. I know one the bit though, albeit a dry run to test our levels of compliance, I bet they were over the moon at the results!
Grown men in their twenties hiding behind a sofa from an invisible mugger as puppet Johnson called it, wearing a pair of the wife’s old knickers over their face, standing two metres apart and following one way systems in supermarkets
They must have been laughing their heads off at you!! I know I was
You're a liar Slug show me an official link that the supplier admitted it wasn't tested.
An official link not GB news or some crazy individual.
Once again you don't understand how a RNA vaccine is tested.
Again this makes you the most unintelligent poster on here.
An exec admitted to European parliament Quady. In the interim the likes of faucci, the bbc and sky news has peddled Armageddon doom along the lines of don’t kill granny, don’t be selfish get the jabs to protect others. But it was never tested to see if it prevented transmission and it clearly didn’t because literally everybody caught it!!
Janine Small, president of international markets at Pfizer, told the European Parliament on Monday that Pfizer did not know whether its COVID-19 vaccine prevented transmission of the virus before it entered the market in December 2020. But Pfizer never claimed to have studied the issue before the vaccine’s market release.
1984, people like you all around the world still believe the world is flat!
Good grief Slug even you cannot be that stupid.
Get the jab to protect others, doesn't refer to transmission.
Do you really know nothing.
It's an RNA jab.
It's about getting the body to realise that you have COVID.
As people started dying after ten days.
The body didn't realise that it had COVID.
The jab allowed this, and because it made Attacked the virus sooner, the reinfection rate was massively reduced,
Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-W76C0kkwc&list=PLHSoxioQtwZcqdt3LK6d66tMreI4gqIC-&t=5s
It’s mRNA. It’s brand new and had only previously been tested on mice and end of life cancer patients. Even its inventor said it should never have been rushed out
Fauci, the U.K. government and MSM specifically said the vaccine reduces transmission so getting it protects others. Pfizer and moderna later admitted under testament in court that they’d never tested for this
Your understanding of messenger rna is also some way off. It is an instruction for the body to manufacturer the spike protein that was supposedly the signature of the covid virus, the theory being that if your body made this spike and spotted it as an imposter it would learn to eradicate it and thus do the same when the real thing landed
But post mortems have found millions of these spikes lodged in the various organs of the body.
Those who took the vector (traditional) vaccine whereby a bit of spike is smuggled in with monkey flu and the body already knows to attack it, seem to have got off more lightly. Although these were pulled quite quickly due to clotting issues and death
Aquinaga. People like me are not fooled by BS. You’ll thank us one day if we save the world from globalist totalitarianism
Evening Kat, someone else who isn’t gaslit easily!
Have you see the president of guayana hand the bbc eco loon’s backside to him on a plate?
Well worth a watch
Slug you are screwy show me a link on millions of autopsies.
Kat the video you posted at 20.34 is a well known hoax.
It's complete rubbish for fools to believe.
Climate alarmism is the hoax! Follow the dollar
Did you know the oft quoted “97% of scientists agree that anthropogenic climate change is a thing”
Actually turns out to be 0.5% when you remove all the fiddles? The first fiddle is that hundreds of those questioned had no opinion either way so threw them out of the sample!!
We shouldn’t be surprised, we saw this kind of charlatan tactic with the scamdemic but I’m afraid Joe Public is idiotic and believes that the bbc is telling them the truth and that their government is working for them
Again Slug you talk rubbish, publish a proper link .
It’s been debunked all over the internet. The story goes that 97% of climate scientists agree with AGM. This claim came from John Cooke et Al (2013) and is quoted by eco loons constantly
11,994 climate papers were surveyed
66.4% (7,930) expressed no opinion
So they threw these out of the window
Of the remainder, 3% (118) rejected global warming
Therefore (according to this bullocks) 97% of papers with an opinion (that bit gets left out) support global warming
But that was a shameful mistruth because of the remaining papers only 2,910 (24%) supported global warming
Ie there has been some warming
But digging deeper only 8% (986) endorses anthropogenic global warming (ie it’s our fault)
And only 0.5% (64 papers) explicitly supported the IPCC version of AGW
So when we say that 97% of scientists agree with the IPCC AGW it turns out the truth is 0.5% do
And that my friend is how propaganda is used to fool idiots
“Slug you are screwy show me a link on millions of autopsies.”
Millions of spike proteins lodged in organs. PER autopsy
Learn to read
How would you improve Mark Lynas's methodology from 2021, Slug?
We're listening 🤣
Come on stack you’re not that thick 🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪
If this is truly a climate alarm; why isn’t the west waging war on China to force them to stop their 33% contribution to CO2 emissions from man to atmosphere?
If the world is done in ten years, why are we sitting back and watching chinas emissions grow at the rate of one U.K. worth every single year?
Why isn’t China bothered? Why is no developing nation bothered?
You have to be absolutely thick to see that it’s not a load of rubbish designed to push a different agenda
Sadly, you are thick
Nice try, but back to the issue you raised about climate consensus.
How would you improve the most recent methodology for measuring scientific consensus around climate change? Your claims are poorly reasoned (that's generous), but you have an opportunity to demonstrate some intelligence here. The floor is yours: we will wait.
I’ve presented many arguments why it’s a load of rubbish but the most important of which is there’s never been proven a link between increase in co2 ppm and “global temperature” (whatever that is)
Most of the world isn’t remotely fussed which makes any effort the U.K. makes utterly irrelevant even if it were true
It is purely a political scam being pushed by people who want power over us. It’s Crystal clear to anybody with anything between their ears. Sadly that excludes morons like you
Sp that's another embarrassing defeat for slug.
The consensus is real, the methodology for measuring is sound and when given the opportunity to critique it, he resorts to nonsense.
6-0?