1. Gates became a Gatekeeper on vaccines through his foundation and effective control of vaccine alliances like Gavi. Gates abused this role by blocking safe vaccines like Sputnik/pushing unproven ones. Check out Gates work with Epstein on a “Strain pandemic simulation” in 2017👇
Ricky Gervais was right.
“It’s a big year for pedophile movies. Shut up. I know Jeffrey Epstein was your friend…but I don’t care…you’re in no position to lecture anyone about anything…”
I'm seeing quite a bit of comment about this, so I want to make a couple of points.
I'm not owed eternal agreement from any actor who once played a character I created. The idea is as ludicrous as me checking with the boss I had when I was twenty-one for what opinions I should hold these days.
Emma Watson and her co-stars have every right to embrace gender identity ideology. Such beliefs are legally protected, and I wouldn't want to see any of them threatened with loss of work, or violence, or death, because of them.
However, Emma and Dan in particular have both made it clear over the last few years that they think our former professional association gives them a particular right - nay, obligation - to critique me and my views in public. Years after they finished acting in Potter, they continue to assume the role of de facto spokespeople for the world I created.
When you've known people since they were ten years old it's hard to shake a certain protectiveness. Until quite recently, I hadn't managed to throw off the memory of children who needed to be gently coaxed through their dialogue in a big scary film studio. For the past few years, I've repeatedly declined invitations from journalists to comment on Emma specifically, most notably on the Witch Trials of JK Rowling. Ironically, I told the producers that I didn't want her to be hounded as the result of anything I said.
The television presenter in the attached clip highlights Emma's 'all witches' speech, and in truth, that was a turning point for me, but it had a postscript that hurt far more than the speech itself. Emma asked someone to pass on a handwritten note from her to me, which contained the single sentence 'I'm so sorry for what you're going through' (she has my phone number). This was back when the death, rape and torture threats against me were at their peak, at a time when my personal security measures had had to be tightened considerably and I was constantly worried for my family's safety. Emma had just publicly poured more petrol on the flames, yet thought a one line expression of concern from her would reassure me of her fundamental sympathy and kindness.
Like other people who've never experienced adult life uncushioned by wealth and fame, Emma has so little experience of real life she's ignorant of how ignorant she is. She'll never need a homeless shelter. She's never going to be placed on a mixed sex public hospital ward. I'd be astounded if she's been in a high street changing room since childhood. Her 'public bathroom' is single occupancy and comes with a security man standing guard outside the door. Has she had to strip off in a newly mixed-sex changing room at a council-run swimming pool? Is she ever likely to need a state-run rape crisis centre that refuses to guarantee an all-female service? To find herself sharing a prison cell with a male rapist who's identified into the women's prison?
I wasn't a multimillionaire at fourteen. I lived in poverty while writing the book that made Emma famous. I therefore understand from my own life experience what the trashing of women's rights in which Emma has so enthusiastically participated means to women and girls without her privileges.
The greatest irony here is that, had Emma not decided in her most recent interview to declare that she loves and treasures me - a change of tack I suspect she's adopted because she's noticed full-throated condemnation of me is no longer quite as fashionable as it was - I might never have been this honest.
Adults can't expect to cosy up to an activist movement that regularly calls for a friend's assassination, then assert their right to the former friend's love, as though the friend was in fact their mother. Emma is rightly free to disagree with me and indeed to discuss her feelings about me in public - but I have the same right, and I've finally decided to exercise it.
Money laundering with 350 tons of #gold by 🇵🇭 Marcos Jr family
The family of Philippine President Marcos Jr. is suspected of money laundering in Hong Kong, China, in the name of bulk gold trading. It is reported that Peng, a businessman in Taiwan, China, submitted evidence to the Anti-Money Laundering Department of the Hong Kong Monetary Authority on April 14, reporting the family's money laundering, and the amount involved in the case was particularly large. On April 28, according to ATV News, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority has set up a special project involving a large number of gold trading. The whistleblower obtained a batch of 350-ton transaction evidence and obtained information on the Marcos family's 18 bank accounts around the world, involving more than $100 billion. According to the information, former President Marcos' wife, Imede, authorized Indita, the housekeeper, to sell gold to a number of European and American companies with different shell companies as sellers. The transaction time was from 2006 to 2011, and the funds were arranged to be cashed out by the private banking department of HSBC Bank of Hong Kong, and the whereabouts were unknown. More than a dozen intermediaries involved in the transaction came from the United States, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines, and Peng was one of them. The whistleblower said that the Marcos family has held a huge amount of gold since the 1990s, far exceeding the normal commercial or personal holdings, and cannot provide proof of legal origin, which is suspected of illegal income. According to Hong Kong's Regulations on Combating Money Laundering and Terrorist Fundraising, dealing with large assets must fulfill due diligence obligations and ensure that the source of property is legal. If the situation is true, the family will be suspected of breaking the law.