Tory MP Andrew Bridgen suspended for comparing Covid vaccine to Holocaust

a reply to: quintessentone

In an ideal world I agree.

Have you seen the various MPs and Government officials address their peers in the proper setting?

Either hardly anyone shows up or they are mocked, ignored, or shouted down.

I find this totally unacceptable, no matter what a representative of actual voting people brings up as a topic.

originally posted by: NorthOfStuff
a reply to: quintessentone

In an ideal world I agree.

Have you seen the various MPs and Government officials address their peers in the proper setting?

Either hardly anyone shows up or they are mocked, ignored, or shouted down.

I find this totally unacceptable, no matter what a representative of actual voting people brings up as a topic.

I have seen different Parliamentary proceedings in different countries, so 'yes'. But when government implements a policy, a member should not go to social media basically treating that policy and the Code of Conduct and parliamentary procedures with contempt or disregard. Isn't he doing the same mocking and ignoring of the policy and Code of Conduct?

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone
Andrew Bridgen back-peddling and apologizing now.

www.bbc.com...

This is for another issue not related to the issue discussed here.

But he did well if he broke some of the rules.

You need to understand the information you try to.link.

You need to admit when you are wrong.

I am not wrong by the way. You are linking something else which isn't related to why he has been suspended from his party. Why he has been suspended from his party is discussed in this thread.

Bridgen apologized for breaking all rules of code of conduct so, I assumed with that remark he included his vax and holocaust comments, but he didn't and to me that is also a breach of code of conduct. You are correct and he will be judged accordingly and very soon.

Yes. There have been two suspensions. One temporary suspension for five days from the UK Parliament and another one which seems to be permanent from the Conservative Party. Two different things.

He is still an MP

He didn't compare the vaccine to the holocaust as he shared someone's comments on twitter I think. The whole thing is a set up of course as the establishment doesn't want to hear someone who is critical of the absurd Covid campaign and the vaccines.

They only want to hear the... vaccine apologists and the defenders of the pharmaceuticals!!! 🍌

His actions within social media went against government policy and that act will be his downfall. See page 23...

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk...

Along with his other transgressions of breach of the Code of Conduct, he just couldn't bother to review and/or follow the rules in the Code of Conduct.

Bridgen is claiming he is just asking questions about the safety of the vax, but he didn't ask any questions with that tweet, he retweeted someone else's comparison and then added a list of adverse vax reactions...without context.

Alongside his Tweet Bridgen posted data on Twitter which claimed to list potential adverse effects of the Covid vaccines.

Lord Mann, an independent peer and former Labour MP who advises the government on anti-Semitism, said Bridgen should be barred from standing for the Tories at the next election.

And Bridgen did apologize for retweeting that tweet -

“My tweet of the 11th of January was in no way antisemitic. Indeed, it alluded to the Holocaust being the most heinous crime against humanity in living memory.

“Of course, if anyone is genuinely offended by my use of such imagery, then I apologise for any offence caused.

Tory chief whip Simon Hart said on Wednesday: “Andrew Bridgen has crossed a line, causing great offence in the process.

“Misinformation about the vaccine causes harm and costs lives. I am therefore removing the Whip from Andrew Bridgen with immediate effect, pending a formal investigation.”

Alongside his Tweet Bridgen posted data on Twitter which claimed to list potential adverse effects of the Covid vaccines.

Lord Mann, an independent peer and former Labour MP who advises the government on anti-Semitism, said Bridgen should be barred from standing for the Tories at the next election.

At Prime Minister’s Questions, Rishi Sunak described Bridgen’s remarks as “utterly unacceptable”.

So posting what the government considers misinformaton about the vax goes against government policy, thus breaches the Code of Conduct.

Bridgen can ask as many questions about the safety of the vax that he wants, why not ask those concerned within Parliament, instead of asking social media?

The Government can consider whatever they want to qualify as misinformation about the vaccines. Buy that doesn't make it misinformation in the first place and nor Government officials are qualified scientists to tell us what misinformation is and what it isn't. Even if they were, their views don't represent science itself. There are no representatives of science in this world.

You are wrong about Bridgen. He has asked these questions in Parliament and his speech which I think 17 or 18 minutes long is one of the most viewed online.

It seems you haven't followed him at all.

Bridgen didn't apologise for twitting what he twitted. He apologised in case he caused any offence. But only those who want to see offence can accuse him of things that are not there.



This is the front the Twitter account of Professor Norman Fenton who is an Emeritus Professor at Queen Mary University of London and a critic of the absurd and ludicrous Covid campaign

He said this

Professor Norman Fenton: “I’m Jewish, my father was a holocaust survivor, I didn’t at all find Andrew Bridgen’s remarks anti-semitic, he has been one of the only MPs to raise concerns about serious adverse reactions from COVID vaccines."

Professor Fenton debunks the ludicrous claims made against Bridgen in just a few sentences.

a reply to: quintessentone

You really need to try hard to see antisemitism in his tweet.

It's just absurd and ludicrous that antisemitism is even mentioned. It's obvious what the problem is and it seems his views and his speech on the parliament did bother the establishment.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Yep, argumentative, repetitious, pedantic, bombastic and tedious.

Congratulations.

You win the internet.

Zzzzzzz.......

Why do you bother being here if you find it so tedious? No petty insults will stop the tide of people who are now coming to their sense and realizing the massive level of corruption we live under.

This whole thing about Bridgen is important because what he spoke about has been virtually censored for two years and now he speaks out on behalf of the public, because he represents the people as a whole, his constituents (if it works the same way as in canada) and he asked the difficult questions etc. They are punishing him for this and that is not ok in a democracy. The same thing happened to an mp in canada who literally got spoken over as he started to question what was happening.

The whole holocaust thing keeps backfiring in people's faces because we are not allowed to compare anything to it, yet there are holocaust survivors who have spoken up and said that the way the nazis started isolating and persecuting the jews was similar to what happened with covid and the unvaxxed. We were supposed to learn from the past and not remake history's mistakes yet we are now not allowed to talk about it. We cannot stop it if we cannot talk about it.

We need people to be brave enough, who have enough clout to ask these questions in the venues, like parliament, where it matters. Our democracies depend on it.

This issue may not be of importance to you but it is to many of the people he represents and it is also important that the elected official are allowed to speak freely. Otherwise, it may someday be an issue you care very much about.

a reply to: igloo

I will post whatever and whenever I like, if it's all the same to you.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone

You really need to try hard to see antisemitism in his tweet.

It's just absurd and ludicrous that antisemitism is even mentioned. It's obvious what the problem is and it seems his views and his speech on the parliament did bother the establishment.

What the problem is in my view is that he is in the best position to meet and discuss his concerns with top ranking officials in their health agencies, yet he does not exercise his access and power in government rather he goes to social media. Taking into account his other acts of disregard for the Code of Conduct I am suspicious of his agenda.

In the interest of balance:

BBC News - Andrew Bridgen threatens to sue Matt Hancock in Covid vaccine row
www.bbc.co.uk...

This should prove interesting.

a reply to: quintessentone

I agree.

It is hard to see anything actually Anti Semitic in what he said.

Ridiculous and absurd, perhaps, but that's politicians for you.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone

You really need to try hard to see antisemitism in his tweet.

It's just absurd and ludicrous that antisemitism is even mentioned. It's obvious what the problem is and it seems his views and his speech on the parliament did bother the establishment.

What the problem is in my view is that he is in the best position to meet and discuss his concerns with top ranking officials in their health agencies, yet he does not exercise his access and power in government rather he goes to social media. Taking into account his other acts of disregard for the Code of Conduct I am suspicious of his agenda.

What agenda??

Only one side has an agenda and that's not the side Andre Bridgen belongs to. I mean Pharmaceuticals have an agenda of promoting their products and agendas to increase their share of power and influence so to control political and medical narratives.

He has actually spoken to the Parliament for the issue of the crippled vaccines and the various issues associated with the vaccination campaign and the origins of Covid. The video Its around 17-18 minutes long. But the Parliament was empty that day.... The video has been viewed quote a lot though.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
In the interest of balance:

BBC News - Andrew Bridgen threatens to sue Matt Hancock in Covid vaccine row
www.bbc.co.uk...

This should prove interesting.

I predicted this well happen when this guy Hancock start making accusations in public and especially in the UK Parliament. But I can't remember him saying directly that Bridgen is an antisemite and an anti-vaxxer but rather referring indirectly to him by saying that anti-semitism is unacceptable, etc.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: quintessentone

I agree.

It is hard to see anything actually Anti Semitic in what he said.

Ridiculous and absurd, perhaps, but that's politicians for you.

This is the form the Twitter account of Professor Norman Fenton who is an Emeritus Professor at Queen Mary University of London and a critic of the absurd and ludicrous Covid campaign

He said this

Professor Norman Fenton: “I’m Jewish, my father was a holocaust survivor, I didn’t at all find Andrew Bridgen’s remarks anti-semitic, he has been one of the only MPs to raise concerns about serious adverse reactions from COVID vaccines."

Professor Fenton debunks the ludicrous claims made against Bridgen in just a few sentences

a reply to: Asmodeus3

"I predicted this well happen when this guy Hancock start making accusations in public and especially in the UK Parliament. "

Especially?

Parliamentary privilege allows such things.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone

You really need to try hard to see antisemitism in his tweet.

It's just absurd and ludicrous that antisemitism is even mentioned. It's obvious what the problem is and it seems his views and his speech on the parliament did bother the establishment.

What the problem is in my view is that he is in the best position to meet and discuss his concerns with top ranking officials in their health agencies, yet he does not exercise his access and power in government rather he goes to social media. Taking into account his other acts of disregard for the Code of Conduct I am suspicious of his agenda.

What agenda??

Only one side has an agenda and that's not the side Andre Bridgen belongs to. I mean Pharmaceuticals have an agenda of promoting their products and agendas to increase their share of power and influence so to control political and medical narratives.

He has actually spoken to the Parliament for the issue of the crippled vaccines and the various issues associated with the vaccination campaign and the origins of Covid. The video Its around 17-18 minutes long. But the Parliament was empty that day.... The video has been viewed quote a lot though.

Misguided agenda...fixed that for all of us.

The gist of this fact-checking article on Brigden's understanding of absolute risk and relative risk seems to me that he does not understand it all. Also most of his understanding was from dated sources having nothing to do with Covid vaccines.

The Academy of Medical Royal Colleges has also previously put out guidance stating that both absolute risk and relative risk should be published in press releases.

In a 2017 guidance document, the organisation said absolute risk reduction is “best understood by patients and the public”, while “relative risk reduction tends to exaggerate benefits and harms” and should not be used in isolation. However, the guidance also adds that the latter “is more generalisable as it does not depend on a specific time frame and baseline risk”.

We deserve better than bad information.
After we published this fact check, we contacted Andrew Bridgen to request a correction regarding his claim that serious adverse effects reported by the public after vaccination are thought to represent only 10% of the true rate of serious adverse events.

Mr Bridgen did not respond to our correction request.

fullfact.org...

Mr Bridgen did not respond to our correction request - that's because he only wants to be a mouth piece on social media.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

"I predicted this well happen when this guy Hancock start making accusations in public and especially in the UK Parliament. "

Especially?

Parliamentary privilege allows such things.

It doesn't look like it can stop Andrew Bridgen from suing another member of Parliament for libel and defamation.

I don't know how far this Parliamentary privilege goes. Can you defame others? Harass them? Steal or murder?

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone

You really need to try hard to see antisemitism in his tweet.

It's just absurd and ludicrous that antisemitism is even mentioned. It's obvious what the problem is and it seems his views and his speech on the parliament did bother the establishment.

What the problem is in my view is that he is in the best position to meet and discuss his concerns with top ranking officials in their health agencies, yet he does not exercise his access and power in government rather he goes to social media. Taking into account his other acts of disregard for the Code of Conduct I am suspicious of his agenda.

What agenda??

Only one side has an agenda and that's not the side Andre Bridgen belongs to. I mean Pharmaceuticals have an agenda of promoting their products and agendas to increase their share of power and influence so to control political and medical narratives.

He has actually spoken to the Parliament for the issue of the crippled vaccines and the various issues associated with the vaccination campaign and the origins of Covid. The video Its around 17-18 minutes long. But the Parliament was empty that day.... The video has been viewed quote a lot though.

Misguided agenda...fixed that for all of us.

The gist of this fact-checking article on Brigden's understanding of absolute risk and relative risk seems to me that he does not understand it all. Also most of his understanding was from dated sources having nothing to do with Covid vaccines.

The Academy of Medical Royal Colleges has also previously put out guidance stating that both absolute risk and relative risk should be published in press releases.

In a 2017 guidance document, the organisation said absolute risk reduction is “best understood by patients and the public”, while “relative risk reduction tends to exaggerate benefits and harms” and should not be used in isolation. However, the guidance also adds that the latter “is more generalisable as it does not depend on a specific time frame and baseline risk”.

We deserve better than bad information.
After we published this fact check, we contacted Andrew Bridgen to request a correction regarding his claim that serious adverse effects reported by the public after vaccination are thought to represent only 10% of the true rate of serious adverse events.

Mr Bridgen did not respond to our correction request.

fullfact.org...

Mr Bridgen did not respond to our correction request - that's because he only wants to be a mouth piece on social media.

We have already discussed how reliable and credible full-fact is. Not many can trust this 'fact-checkers'. Full fact cannot be take seriously.

As for the under-reporting this is true. Only a small fraction of adverse reactions is ever reported on VAERS or wherever else.

Absolute and relative risk should be published always and is related to all vaccines not just the Covid vaccines. It is really disingenuous when the absolute and relative risks are not stated precisely.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone

You really need to try hard to see antisemitism in his tweet.

It's just absurd and ludicrous that antisemitism is even mentioned. It's obvious what the problem is and it seems his views and his speech on the parliament did bother the establishment.

What the problem is in my view is that he is in the best position to meet and discuss his concerns with top ranking officials in their health agencies, yet he does not exercise his access and power in government rather he goes to social media. Taking into account his other acts of disregard for the Code of Conduct I am suspicious of his agenda.

What agenda??

Only one side has an agenda and that's not the side Andre Bridgen belongs to. I mean Pharmaceuticals have an agenda of promoting their products and agendas to increase their share of power and influence so to control political and medical narratives.

He has actually spoken to the Parliament for the issue of the crippled vaccines and the various issues associated with the vaccination campaign and the origins of Covid. The video Its around 17-18 minutes long. But the Parliament was empty that day.... The video has been viewed quote a lot though.

Misguided agenda...fixed that for all of us.

The gist of this fact-checking article on Brigden's understanding of absolute risk and relative risk seems to me that he does not understand it all. Also most of his understanding was from dated sources having nothing to do with Covid vaccines.

The Academy of Medical Royal Colleges has also previously put out guidance stating that both absolute risk and relative risk should be published in press releases.

In a 2017 guidance document, the organisation said absolute risk reduction is “best understood by patients and the public”, while “relative risk reduction tends to exaggerate benefits and harms” and should not be used in isolation. However, the guidance also adds that the latter “is more generalisable as it does not depend on a specific time frame and baseline risk”.

We deserve better than bad information.
After we published this fact check, we contacted Andrew Bridgen to request a correction regarding his claim that serious adverse effects reported by the public after vaccination are thought to represent only 10% of the true rate of serious adverse events.

Mr Bridgen did not respond to our correction request.

fullfact.org...

Mr Bridgen did not respond to our correction request - that's because he only wants to be a mouth piece on social media.

Absolute risk and relative risk reduction
Here is the paper where it shows how these are very different. It is very misleading to present the relative risk reduction without making it clear what it is.

www.nejm.org...

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone

You really need to try hard to see antisemitism in his tweet.

It's just absurd and ludicrous that antisemitism is even mentioned. It's obvious what the problem is and it seems his views and his speech on the parliament did bother the establishment.

What the problem is in my view is that he is in the best position to meet and discuss his concerns with top ranking officials in their health agencies, yet he does not exercise his access and power in government rather he goes to social media. Taking into account his other acts of disregard for the Code of Conduct I am suspicious of his agenda.

What agenda??

Only one side has an agenda and that's not the side Andre Bridgen belongs to. I mean Pharmaceuticals have an agenda of promoting their products and agendas to increase their share of power and influence so to control political and medical narratives.

He has actually spoken to the Parliament for the issue of the crippled vaccines and the various issues associated with the vaccination campaign and the origins of Covid. The video Its around 17-18 minutes long. But the Parliament was empty that day.... The video has been viewed quote a lot though.

Misguided agenda...fixed that for all of us.

The gist of this fact-checking article on Brigden's understanding of absolute risk and relative risk seems to me that he does not understand it all. Also most of his understanding was from dated sources having nothing to do with Covid vaccines.

The Academy of Medical Royal Colleges has also previously put out guidance stating that both absolute risk and relative risk should be published in press releases.

In a 2017 guidance document, the organisation said absolute risk reduction is “best understood by patients and the public”, while “relative risk reduction tends to exaggerate benefits and harms” and should not be used in isolation. However, the guidance also adds that the latter “is more generalisable as it does not depend on a specific time frame and baseline risk”.

We deserve better than bad information.
After we published this fact check, we contacted Andrew Bridgen to request a correction regarding his claim that serious adverse effects reported by the public after vaccination are thought to represent only 10% of the true rate of serious adverse events.

Mr Bridgen did not respond to our correction request.

fullfact.org...

Mr Bridgen did not respond to our correction request - that's because he only wants to be a mouth piece on social media.

Absolute risk and relative risk reduction
Here is the paper where it shows how these are very different. It is very misleading to present the relative risk reduction without making it clear what it is.

www.nejm.org...

Send the link to Bridgen, he needs it more than anybody else it seems.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Here:

en.m.wikipedia.org...

No, of course it doesn't include stealing or murder.

That would be just absurd and ludicrous.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone

You really need to try hard to see antisemitism in his tweet.

It's just absurd and ludicrous that antisemitism is even mentioned. It's obvious what the problem is and it seems his views and his speech on the parliament did bother the establishment.

What the problem is in my view is that he is in the best position to meet and discuss his concerns with top ranking officials in their health agencies, yet he does not exercise his access and power in government rather he goes to social media. Taking into account his other acts of disregard for the Code of Conduct I am suspicious of his agenda.

What agenda??

Only one side has an agenda and that's not the side Andre Bridgen belongs to. I mean Pharmaceuticals have an agenda of promoting their products and agendas to increase their share of power and influence so to control political and medical narratives.

He has actually spoken to the Parliament for the issue of the crippled vaccines and the various issues associated with the vaccination campaign and the origins of Covid. The video Its around 17-18 minutes long. But the Parliament was empty that day.... The video has been viewed quote a lot though.

Misguided agenda...fixed that for all of us.

The gist of this fact-checking article on Brigden's understanding of absolute risk and relative risk seems to me that he does not understand it all. Also most of his understanding was from dated sources having nothing to do with Covid vaccines.

The Academy of Medical Royal Colleges has also previously put out guidance stating that both absolute risk and relative risk should be published in press releases.

In a 2017 guidance document, the organisation said absolute risk reduction is “best understood by patients and the public”, while “relative risk reduction tends to exaggerate benefits and harms” and should not be used in isolation. However, the guidance also adds that the latter “is more generalisable as it does not depend on a specific time frame and baseline risk”.

We deserve better than bad information.
After we published this fact check, we contacted Andrew Bridgen to request a correction regarding his claim that serious adverse effects reported by the public after vaccination are thought to represent only 10% of the true rate of serious adverse events.

Mr Bridgen did not respond to our correction request.

fullfact.org...

Mr Bridgen did not respond to our correction request - that's because he only wants to be a mouth piece on social media.

Absolute risk and relative risk reduction
Here is the paper where it shows how these are very different. It is very misleading to present the relative risk reduction without making it clear what it is.

www.nejm.org...

Send the link to Bridgen, he needs it more than anybody else it seems.

He already raised this in parliament and I am sure he is aware of the paper and other papers that discuss vaccine effectiveness.

You have misunderstood something here just as some other things which I have pointed out to you in our discussions. He isn't the one who needs to explain himself over this matter. What he said about relative and absolute risk reduction is true. To make it more clear it is the pharmaceuticals that are accused of misleading the public and the papers which are written without explaining what vaccine effectiveness is. Which is very misleading.

He doesn't need any defense on this matter as he is right. He doesn't need any defense on any other matter he is raised in parliament as he is right and he has backed his speech with plenty of evidence.

The claim made by full fact that he doesn't understand the relative and absolute risk reduction is just baseless. Nobody can take seriously 'fact checkers'