Monday, July 22, 2024
HomeClimate WatchAndrew Bridgen interview: ‘The vaccine cover-up is rapidly unravelling’

Andrew Bridgen interview: ‘The vaccine cover-up is rapidly unravelling’


THE elephant in the room of excess deaths is trumpeting louder – and is once again stepping on the toes of Big Pharma in Parliament.

Andrew Bridgen MP’s powerful speech last Tuesday at a Backbench Business Committee meeting sent a clear message to the politicians who have tried to ignore this elephant – you can’t turn a blind eye much longer. 

Despite a barrage of personal attacks and being thrown out of the Tory party, Bridgen has continued to battle for 14 months against top-level resistance to public debate over excess deaths and the links to covid ‘vaccine’ harm. In this interview with me the North West Leicestershire MP talks about growing cross-party support from his Parliamentary peers, and his hopes for a full House of Commons debate on excess deaths by Easter.

Q: There are plenty of journalists who are keen to get the PPE contracts scandal properly investigated and yet some have never heard of the Yellow Card scheme used to flag up covid injection harm. So how do we bridge this gap for those who want to get to the truth but because of censorship are unaware of the main issues? Can you see any way forward?

A: I can see a way forward and I am pretty optimistic. I have been resisted in Parliament over the issue of excess deaths – I put in an application 26 times over a period of 26 weeks before I was eventually given an Adjournment Debate on October 20 which, as the records show, was very sparsely attended by colleagues. But the public gallery was full and there were 150 people who couldn’t get in who were waiting outside.

I then invited medical experts to give a talk in a committee room and invited MPs to come and listen to the evidence they would give about the vaccine harm and vaccine deaths. And 20 MPs turned up with 17 signing a petition to the Backbench Committee for a debate which resulted in the 90-minute Westminster Hall debate we had on Tuesday January 16 which 23 backbenchers attended.

It was a better turnout than I expected and now we have 22 signatories for a debate in the main chamber. The debate on Tuesday was so over-subscribed that after my speech of 32 minutes the backbenchers were restricted to three-minute contributions.

So clearly there is huge demand and this is all being driven by our constituents, it’s pressure on MPs that is forcing them to come and authorise these debates.

The suppression of coverage on vaccine harms and vaccine deaths is slowly unravelling, and it’s a double-edged sword as the majority of the public are now realising that the mainstream media are reporting the news by omission, that’s their biggest power.

I think it was Malcolm X who said the media’s biggest power is that they can make the guilty appear innocent and the innocent appear guilty. But I think the biggest power they have is the power of omission as they decide what is the news.

Excess deaths are affecting every constituency and every community across the land, on a daily and weekly basis, with horrific excess deaths every month – mostly in 50-to-64-year-olds with cardiovascular problems which we haven’t seen before. And there was a 13 per cent increase in excess deaths last year for that age group and we are seeing it across the world.

But I’m fairly confident now that certainly in our Parliament we are going to get a full three-hour debate in the main chamber which is where an issue of this magnitude deserves to be debated.

And I think there is going to be huge pressure on colleagues from the House of Commons from their electorate saying: ‘I want you to be there and to listen to what’s said.’

Q: When is that debate likely to be?

A: The forms have just gone into the Business Committee as we speak (Friday, January 19) so I will be attending a meeting with that committee next week, joined by other MPs who are very supportive, and we will petition for the importance of this debate to be held in light of the public interest and the interest from colleagues. I have had so many signatories on the form that I had to go on to a second form to get them all in as I had more signatories than the form normally allows you to put on.

So that is the size of the shift in awareness within our Parliament. And I think that is somewhere behind the shift in awareness in the wider population.

Q: Has the mainstream media responded to you in relation to Tuesday’s speech? I presume you sent out press packs like last time?

A: Full press packs supporting all my claims were sent out. I have had one text message from a news agency that I will be chasing up. The issue that the Government can’t dodge is that they hold the data that would sort this issue out once and for all. This is data held by the UK Health Security Agency and distributed by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) – and that is the dates, doses and deaths of the vaccine register.

If that data was anonymised, as in people’s names taken off there, so it was one, two, three, four to sixty-odd million, and if that information was given to statisticians they would be able to establish within a couple of days through analysis whether the vaccines are in fact safe and effective or whether they’re not.

The UK Health Security Agency has been petitioned by Dr Clare Craig at HART (Health Advisory & Recovery Team) for a year and they are refusing to release the data. And yet, shockingly, the MHRA disclosed they have given all of this public data to Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Moderna but won’t release it to the public.

Q: Another part of this is the correlation versus causation debate. Can you explain a bit more about that?

A: Yes, what they say is correlation is not necessarily causation, and that there is a link between people eating ice cream in America and people eaten by sharks. There is a correlation there but it is not the causation – eating ice cream doesn’t get people eaten by sharks.

But correlation is an alarm signal and currently, where the Government is concerned, there are alarms going off all over the building but nobody wants to open the door and see if there is a fire.

Q: In the speech on Tuesday I think you alluded to a conspiracy against science?

A: Yes, when someone in Government or a commentator says the science is settled then that’s a red flag straight away as science is never settled. The whole idea of science is it has to be challenged and defended. The fact is various hypotheses have been put forward as settled science, whether that’s vaccines are safe and effective or human beings causing carbon dioxide are changing the climate detrimentally to us.

And when they say you can’t argue against the narrative as it is settled, it puts my hackles up as a science graduate [Bridgen has a degree in biological sciences from Nottingham University]  because even doctors graduating from medical school today are being told half of what they are being taught will be proved to be wrong in ten years. So we always have to challenge and that is the way science progresses.

Eminent scientists like Dr Robert Malone, the man who discovered how messenger RNA works, came out with concerns about the technology he discovered, and these people have been cancelled. They’ve had their incomes cut, they’ve had their jobs taken away from them, positions taken away from universities. All the scientists who have spoken out, they are not doing it for monetary reward because it’s an absolute negative, you get destroyed.

Their reputations are trashed and yet they continue to speak their truth and I can see some analogies with my own situation when I spoke out against the vaccines and then within a few weeks I was thrown out of the Conservative Party and was accused of all sorts of things which aren’t true.

But I have drawn a lot of strength and courage from others who have spoken out. We have suffered the brickbats but I would rather stand alone with the truth than stand with something that is undoubtedly a lie.

Q: You are certainly not standing alone now. I think momentum is growing. One problem that I alluded to at the start is the censorship. Am I right in thinking your latest Parliamentary speech was censored by YouTube?

A: I believe YouTube classed the speech as medical misinformation. I sent out a full scientific press pack to all the media, no one covered it. If they could find anything scientifically wrong with anything I have stated they would have attacked me. They can’t do that so they just have to ignore it. All it is doing is destroying the credibility of the legacy media. The viewers are going down and down because they are realising it is just their version of the truth and it’s not necessarily reality.

Q: In your speech, you highlight the similarities between the Horizon scandal at the Post Office and the covid injections investigation. With Horizon, that has taken ten to 15 years to properly be discussed in Parliament. Do you have confidence the Covid Inquiry and the work you are doing will lead to some sort of reckoning well before ten years?

A: Well, the Government told me unofficially before they ejected me from the party they wanted to cover up the vaccine harms for 20 years. And given their track record for covering up the Post Office scandal for 15 years, Gulf War Syndrome for 30 years, why wouldn’t they think they are going to do that?

But I think this is so big they can’t. With Horizon, hundreds of sub-postmasters were wrongly convicted and had to pay back money they didn’t owe and that’s terrible, but in perspective it’s dwarfed by the vaccine harms and excess deaths. I think this is too big for them to brush under the carpet and there are too many people now who know, and a lot of them know through having vaccine harm themselves or have vaccine-deceased relatives. People aren’t going to forget that.

The analogies with Horizon are all there. Since 2014 I had all the evidence, I could prove that all those convictions were unsafe, and I went round to every media outlet in 2014/2015, and since, and told them if they run with this story they will get an award because this is the biggest miscarriage of justice in history. I stated it in the chamber of the House of Commons under privilege but no media outlet would pick it up.

And we’re in that situation again with the vaccine harm and the excess deaths.

Q: Hopefully it won’t take another documentary drama to get people to wake up?

A: It might do, and I think they are being made, to be honest, but not necessarily by the legacy media. If you want to have a look about vaccine harm and excess deaths, all the information is out there but it’s just not in the mainstream legacy media.

Q: Is this now a cross-party issue? Is the left of politics now getting involved?

A: Yes, we have got a good spread. We have got signatures from all the parties apart from the SNP. I’ve got Alba, I’ve got Liberal Democrats, Labour, Conservatives, Independents. I haven’t got the Green Party but we have a good spread of MPs and our petition will be irresistible. Ultimately, we are the servants of the public, and it is the public that will demand this debate on excess deaths and it is the public that will demand their elected representatives attend.

The Government will try or the establishment will try and get us delayed in getting this full debate for as long as possible but the longer they delay, the more information will come out about the vaccines and the more pressure will come on MPs that they will have to attend. I would think in six weeks we will be having this debate and that is going to be very, very hard for the mainstream media to ignore.

Q: There seems to be almost exponential growth in the number of MPs turning up at your meetings.

A: It’s certainly come a long way since I first spoke about this in the chamber 14 months ago, we have come a very long way. We are genuinely making progress and I think we will break through in the UK Parliament to the mainstream on vaccine harms and excess deaths – and I will be the spear point.

The full transcript of the debate from Tuesday, January 16 discussing excess death trends is here.

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.
If you have not already signed up to a daily email alert of new articles please do so. It is here and free! Thank you.

Henry Widdas
Henry Widdas
Henry Widdas is a freelance journalist.

Sign up for TCW Daily

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.