Gyalchester

The photo above shows Drake performing "Gyalchester" at the Billboard Music Awards 2017 on the 21st of May, the day before the Manchester Arena attack. 

"Gyalchester" is a song by Canadian musician Drake from his playlist, More Life (2017). The term is a portmanteau of the patois-spoken word for girl or "gyal," merged with second half of the word Manchester (Manchester Parish in Jamaica), indicating that beautiful women originate from that area.

As the Billboard website said:

Drake stole the show at the 2017 Billboard Music Awards in more ways than one, taking home 13 honors, surpassing Adele's mark as the artist with the most BBMA wins in one night, delivering a fiery performance in the middle of the famous Bellagio fountain ...

Drake's performance on the night and his performances in general are steeped in Illuminati symbolism. This YouTube video gives a good account of it:

The fact that Drake performed "Gyalchester" on the night before the attack doesn't prove anything of course. It may well be mere coincidence or then again it may signify something quite sinister. The number 22 features prominently in the attack: it occurred around 22:35pm on the 22nd May and there were 22 deaths. The bomber was 22 years old. The number 11 and multiples of 11 (like 22) are recognised Illuminati numbers, whether one believes in the existence of the organisation or not.

This terror event, staged or not, will certainly help Theresa May push her Internet reform agenda forward. Here is part of what she's hoping to implement once her government is returned to power (source):

Theresa May is planning to introduce huge regulations on the way the internet works, allowing the government to decide what is said online. 

Particular focus has been drawn to the end of the manifesto, which makes clear that the Tories want to introduce huge changes to the way the internet works.
"Some people say that it is not for government to regulate when it comes to technology and the internet," it states. "We disagree." 

Senior Tories confirmed to BuzzFeed News that the phrasing indicates that the government intends to introduce huge restrictions on what people can post, share and publish online. 

The plans will allow Britain to become "the global leader in the regulation of the use of personal data and the internet", the manifesto claims. 

It comes just soon after the Investigatory Powers Act came into law. That legislation allowed the government to force internet companies to keep records on their customers' browsing histories, as well as giving ministers the power to break apps like WhatsApp so that messages can be read. 

The manifesto makes reference to those increased powers, saying that the government will work even harder to ensure there is no "safe space for terrorists to be able to communicate online". That is apparently a reference in part to its work to encourage technology companies to build backdoors into their encrypted messaging services – which gives the government the ability to read terrorists' messages, but also weakens the security of everyone else's messages, technology companies have warned. 

The government now appears to be launching a similarly radical change in the way that social networks and internet companies work. While much of the internet is currently controlled by private businesses like Google and Facebook, Theresa May intends to allow government to decide what is and isn't published, the manifesto suggests. 

The new rules would include laws that make it harder than ever to access pornographic and other websites. The government will be able to place restrictions on seeing adult content and any exceptions would have to be justified to ministers, the manifesto suggests 

The manifesto even suggests that the government might stop search engines like Google from directing people to pornographic websites. "We will put a responsibility on industry not to direct users – even unintentionally – to hate speech, pornography, or other sources of harm," the Conservatives write.

Whether she succeeds or not is uncertain but her intention is nothing less than complete control of the Internet. The Internet really only kicked off in 1995 and so 22 years later, it may be about to undergo a radical change. June 8th is the date set for the UK elections.

Manchester Arena Blast

The last time I was in Manchester it was 1996, or maybe 1997, and I remember looking at the damage caused to some of the buildings by IRA bombings. The latest attack at 22:35 BST on May 22nd 2017 occurred at the Manchester Arena and at this stage appears to have killed 19 people. As usual, one can expect the mainstream media to report only what it is told to report. So what's really going on?

The blast occurred at the end of an Ariana Grande concert. This artist is from the United States and has been identified, by those who claim to know about such matters, as yet another artist whom the forces of evil have decided to raise to international stardom. Such artists are sometimes called Illuminati puppets. Their music videos are typically heavy with Illuminati symbols and dark, satanic images. Ariana's recent videos are no exception. Here is a photograph of her with the five-pointed star and one eye visible.

She's even described battling demonic forces. There's definitely something very odd about the music industry in the United States and, according to some, the price of fame is to swear allegiance to the Dajjal defined as:

Al-Masih ad-Dajjal (Arabic: المسيح الدجّال‎‎ Al-Masīḥ ad-Dajjāl, "the false messiah","liar" or "the deceiver") also referred to as "the anti-christ" is an evil figure in Islamic eschatology. He is to appear, pretending to be al-Masih (i.e. the Messiah), before Yawm al-Qiyamah (the Day of Resurrection). Wikipedia

The Dajjal is blind in the right eye (according to the Wikipedia article). Notice how Ariana has covered her right eye with the five-pointed star. In late 2013, Ariana turned her back on Catholicism and embraced the Kabbalah as explained in this video:

Once you've sold your soul to the devil so to speak there's no going back however, and if you do express misgivings you'll be given a warning. Perhaps this Manchester blast is Ariana's warning. Mind you, I've not found any evidence to support such a lapse of faith. She seems to be at the top of her game and enjoying full Illuminati support. To quote from this article in Factinate:

She also has cultivated a massive social media presence on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Snapchat, and landed on Time magazine’s list of “The 100 Most Influential People” in 2016.

 

I don't know if Ariana Grande is an Illuminati puppet. I don't even know if the Illuminati exists and if it exercises control over the United States music industry. I don't know if the blast is a warning to her. I'm looking at possibilities. It will be interesting to watch how things play out and what Ariana's reaction is to the blast. The British government is currently blaming a suicide bomber.

Italian Government Makes Childhood Vaccinations Mandatory

An article appeared in the BBC News yesterday with the headline: Italy makes 12 vaccinations compulsory for children. The vaccinations are:

• polio
• diphtheria
• tetanus
• hepatitis B
• haemophilus influenzae B
• meningitis B
• meningitis C
• measles
• mumps
• rubella
• whooping cough
• chickenpox

The photo of a child attempting a smile but effecting a strange sort of grimace accompanies the article:

Compare this photograph to that accompanying articles that are skeptical of vaccinations:

This news set me to wondering what pressures had been brought to bear on the Italian Government to implement such legislation (if children are not vaccinated by the age of six, the school starting age, their parents will be fined). An article from Politico titled Italy fights vaccines fear gives some clue. To quote from the article (21st April 2016):

“The Italian situation is unique. Italy has been called out by the WHO [World Health Organization] because the vaccine coverage of the country is falling,” said Lorenzo Moja, an Italian public health expert with the global health body, adding that in some regions, about one in five children do not complete the recommended vaccination schedule.

The article says that in 2015 the Italian Government launched a €700 million National Vaccination Plan with special attention being paid to any doctors who might have reservations:

“We also reached an agreement with the order of physicians, who will be paying close attention to those doctors that discourage parents from vaccinating their kids.” Monitoring these anti-vaccine doctors is key to encourage parents to vaccinate their children.

Further investigation led to an article about a pair of Italian scientists who had published some disturbing findings about contaminants in vaccines. The article titled Dirty Vaccines: New Study Reveals Prevalence of Contaminants (January 30th 2017) appears in a blog called "The Driven Researcher" on the website CRMSI (Children's Medical Safety Research Institute) and begins:

Every Human Vaccine Tested Was Contaminated by Unsafe Levels of Metals and Debris Linked to Cancer and Autoimmune Disease, New Study Reports 

Researchers examining 44 samples of 30 different vaccines found dangerous contaminants, including red blood cells in one vaccine and metal toxicants in every single sample tested – except in one animal vaccine. 

Using extremely sensitive new technologies not used in vaccine manufacturing, Italian scientists reported they were “baffled” by their discoveries which included single particles and aggregates of organic debris including red cells of human or possibly animal origin and metals including lead, tungsten, gold, and chromium, that have been linked to autoimmune disease and leukemia. 

In the study, published this week in the International Journal of Vaccines and Vaccination, the researchers led by Antonietta Gatti, of the National Council of Research of Italy and the Scientific Director of Nanodiagnostics, say their results “show the presence of micro- and nano-sized particulate matter composed of inorganic elements in vaccine samples” not declared in the products’ ingredients lists.

There is a link to the study. It leads to a PDF file hosted on a site called MedCrave that promotes the publishing of scientific papers without the peer review process of the well known scientific journals. To be fair, MedCrave does claim that its paper are peer reviewed. However, the site is listed as one of many accused by the scientific community of "predatory publishing" (publishing articles of dubious scientific merit in exchange for money). The site does have its defenders however, and while it does not have the imprimatur of the scientific establishment, it does seem to be offering a genuine service. A number of online journals are hosted and the International Journal of Vaccines & Vaccinations is just one of many. The study appears in Volume 4 Issue 1 2017. 

The study seems professional enough and seems to show that vaccines contain a disturbing number of contaminants. However, a harsh criticism of the study can be found here. The author writes:

I’ve frequently written about what I like to refer to as the “toxins gambit” with respect to vaccines. Basically, in the hard core (and even soft core) antivaccine crowd, vaccines are feared as being loaded with all sorts of “toxins,” such as aluminum, formaldehyde, mercury, and various chemicals that are dangerous enough separately, but, when combined, “poison” young babies, resulting in their becoming autistic, acquiring asthma and autoimmune diseases, or even dying of sudden infant death syndrome. Of course, many of the scary-sounding chemicals to which antivaccinationists point actually are in vaccines, but, as Paracelsus put it, the dose makes the poison, and the amount in vaccines is very much low enough not to pose a health threat. Also, formaldehyde is a product of normal metabolism present in the bloodstream of infants at a level much higher than what any vaccine contains.

It's an interesting argument and I'm not trying to decide here if the author's criticisms are valid or not. What I started out to investigate was the reason why the Italian government decided to make vaccinations mandatory. I've established that the government was already under pressure from WHO and had launched a vaccination drive back in 2015. The Italian researchers' article appeared in January 2017 and, coming as it did from Italians, it would have been noticed. The rebuttal from Orac, the nom de blog of a surgeon named David Gorski, was posted on ScienceBlogs. Maybe the MedCrave article was the catalyst for the legislation but who knows?

There is definitely politics involved. According to this source:

The ruling parties accuse the opposition 5-Star movement for feeding the climate of fear over vaccines. The populist movement criticised the vaccination reform as a gift to pharmaceutical companies.

So this polarisation, between the ruling party and the opposition regarding attitudes to vaccination, may have played a role as well. It's clear that mandatory vaccination is quite a contentious issue in Italy and there is far from unanimous support for it.

Pneumococcal Vaccine

The heading of this article in today's 9NEWS.com.au caught my attention: Death no incentive for lung infection vax. The entire article is reproduced below:

Potential death is not enough to make three quarters of Australian adults vaccinate against pneumococcal pneumonia, a survey reveals. The research shows efforts to raise public awareness of the seriousness of the infection are failing, says Associate Professor Lucy Morgan of the Lung Foundation Australia. 

"Even among high-risk groups, such as those aged over 65, there are no overwhelmingly high motivators for vaccination," she said. Pneumococcal pneumonia is a severe lung infection responsible for a large proportion of pneumonia cases aged 65 and above. An online survey of 1241 adults for the foundation found 75 per cent of adults cannot be motivated to protect against the infection, despite being informed of its seriousness and potentially fatal complications. Of those, 73 per cent are considered high risk of contracting the infection because of their age or a pre-existing condition. 

Infectious diseases paediatrician and immunisation expert Professor Robert Booy says there is a 93 per cent vaccine rate among Australian children. "However, among equally vulnerable senior, we're failing to achieve even 50 per cent pneumococcal vaccine uptake, which could offer up to five more years of high-quality life," he said. "Given grandchildren may pass pneumonia onto their grandparents, and vice-versa, protecting against pneumococcal infection would enrich their lives." 

The Lung Foundation Australia is releasing its research on Tuesday to mark Know Pneumonia Day.

According to this government website, immunisation against pneumococcal disease is achieved using single-disease vaccines. For babies, the first dose of pneumococcal vaccine is recommended at two months of age, with subsequent doses at four and six months of age. While the babies who receive the vaccine have no choice in the matter, adults do and the article laments that 75 per cent of adults cannot be motivated to protect against the infection. The article implies that they're dicing with death and the oldies in particular are just throwing away five more years of high-quality life and maybe passing the damn disease on to their grandchildren. The Lung Foundation Australia is releasing these shocking statistics to mark Know Pneumonia Day. So what is Lung Foundation Australia all about?

Well it turns out that it has offices very near where I grew up. It's official address is Level 2, 11 Finchley Street, Milton QLD 4064. Its website states that:

We ensure lung health is a priority for all in Australia by:

• Promoting the importance of lung health
• Promoting early diagnosis of lung disease
• Supporting those with lung disease, their families and carers
• Promoting equitable access to evidence-based care
• Funding quality research

We rely on donations, membership, bequests, grants, business and industry support.

So who keeps Lung Foundation Australia afloat? Who are the big sponsors? It doesn't take long to find out:

 

Hmmm, well Boehringer Ingelheim is one of the world's leading research-driven pharmaceutical companies with 130 years of experience and Roche is a leader in research-focused healthcare with combined strengths in pharmaceuticals and diagnostics. Get the picture? BIG PHARMA finances this foundation and it is BIG PHARMA that manufactures the pneumococcal vaccine. Perhaps there's a conflict of interest here but that's not an issue likely to be raised on 9NEWS.com.au. It's sounds quite reasonable at first sight: Lung Foundation Australia, whose sole non-profit interest is to keep you breathing, urges all right-thinking adults to line up for their pneumococcal vaccinations. It's in the best interests of themselves, their grandchildren and, just coincidentally, BIG PHARMA.

The drug companies must dream of a day where vaccinations like this are simply mandatory for everybody. 93% of Australian babies are already covered and you can bet that elderly people in nursing homes have little say in the matter as well. It's those damn 75% of adults who are proving a problem. Well, a sensational article with the heading Death no incentive for lung infection vax can't do any harm. It may panic some of them into having the jab. So how effective is this vaccine? Are there any side-effects? This article, admittedly from 2011, shows that we ought to be cautious:

UK Scraps Pneumonia Vaccines Because They 'Don't Work' 

When deciding whether or not to vaccinate, it's important to consider the risks versus the benefits. Case in point, new advice from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) in the UK has determined that routine vaccination of people over 65 with the pneumococcal vaccine should be discontinued. The Committee stated: 

"JCVI has concluded that the protection the vaccine provides is poor and is not long-lasting in older people. In addition, the programme has had no discernable impact on the incidence of invasive pneumococcal disease in older people. The committee has advised, therefore, that there is little benefit to continuing the programme and that it should be stopped." 

Millions of people over 65 have already received the pneumonia vaccine, which was often offered alongside the flu vaccine in the UK -- and the Department of Health was reportedly still promoting it as recently as January. 

For a vaccine that has provided "poor" protection against illness, the stakes have been high. Mail Online reported official figures from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency that stated the vaccine, sold under brand names Pneumovax and Pneumovax II, has been linked to 30 deaths and more than 3,300 reported side effects. LINK

A supposedly more effective pneumococcal vaccine was introduced by Pfizer in 2014 but there is clearly cause for concern. So for the elderly, as with the young, the list of suggested vaccines keeps rising: pneumococcal, flu, shingles, diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis are suggested by the Australian Government. At the moment, such vaccinations are optional but it won't be long before certain penalties will apply to seniors who don't submit to them, in the same way that child support payments are now being withheld from parents who don't fully vaccinate their children.