Wednesday, 28 April 2010

Dont Vote For Ukip Says Ukip Leader

Unreal - Pearson is a nutter !

The leader of UKIP has written to a newspaper group in Somerset urging voters to support the Conservatives rather than his party's candidates.

Lord Pearson said constituents should back the Tory candidates in Wells, Somerton and Frome, and Taunton Deane.

The party has asked its candidate in Wells, Jake Baynes, to stand down, but he has so far refused.

UKIP have a policy of supporting eurosceptics from other parties, which they choose not to stand against.

The party's candidate in Taunton Deane, Tony McIntyre, said last night that he had not been told to step aside, and knew nothing about the open letter to Mid Somerset News and Media until he was contacted by the BBC.


Mr Baynes is standing in Wells against Tory eurosceptic David Heathcoat-Amory.

Speaking earlier this month, Mr Baynes said he disagreed with the policy that UKIP should not contest Westminster seats against other genuinely eurosceptic candidates.

"To stand down would be a betrayal... it probably has ruffled a few feathers, but it'll be water off a duck's back at the end of the day," he said.

Lord Pearson has admitted there has been some "disagreement" with Mr Baynes, but that he would not force him to stand down.

Mr Heathcoat-Amory has said he did not believe the number of people voting for him would be affected by whether or not Mr Baynes stood for election.

The other candidates standing in Wells are Richard Boyce, British National Party; Chris Briton, Green; Andy Merryfield, Labour; and Tessa Munt, Liberal Democrat.

Taunton Deane's other candidates are Jeremy Browne, Liberal Democrat; Mark Formosa, Conservative; and Martin Jevon, Labour.

The full list of candidates in Somerton and Frome, is Barry Harding, UK Independence Party; David Heath, Liberal Democrats; David Oakensen, Labour; Annunziata Rees-Mogg, Conservative; Niall Warry, Independent Leave-the-EU Alliance.

Add to Technorati Favorites


Adrian Peirson said...

Off Topic and I've posted on this before but it's such an important topic I wanted to repost.
I believe there is significant evidence here that shows an intent to commit mass murder.

Not just intent but that this has and is being actively carried out right now.

I refer to the use of Sunscreen.

The best explanation is in the Video below by the scientists below, but If I can pre arm you with info before you watch it.

Beyond any doubt, we need Vit D, increasing numbers of researchers are now saying we need far more than the 200 IU's quoted by the Govt.

There are occurances in the Sunscreen debate that just cannot be accidents.
Firstly, there are two types of UV.

UVA a very broad range responsible for skin cancers.

UVB, a narrower range of UV responsible for Vit D production in the skin.

Here is what I find exceptionally difficult to believe is an accident.
Snscreen blocks UVB, necessary for Vit D Production but allows in UVA unhindered.

Also note the chemical used PABA sits EXACTLY in the UVB range.

This molecule was specifically chosen to absorb ONLY UVB.
It's absorbtion spectrum sits DEAD Centre in the UVB range.

Not only this, but the molecule then RE RADIATES that energy, through Flourescence in the Cancer inducing UVA Range.

Here is a molecule Govt's throught the Western world are urging us to put on our children, which is absorbed into their skin which not only absorbs UVB, thus blocking essential Vit D production but then re radiates this energy, deep inside the delicate layers of their skin as Cancer causing UVA.

NOTE This compound has virtually NO Effect in absorbing / blocking UVA Radiation.
It actually INCREASES the amount of UVA received by fair skinned whites through the process of flourescence.

I believe this amounts to very significant evidence of a deliberate plot to commit mass murder.

The very least is that there has been an unfortunate mishap and these companies have targeted the wrong UV light.

But when you look at how neatly the compound sits DEAD Centre in the UVB Range I find this very hard to believe.
That molecule was very specifically chosen to kill whites, by blocking essential Vit D Production and through the DELIBERATE inducement of Skin Cancer in Whites.

Here is the Video, also check out the other videos highlighted along side it which confirm what the scientists are saying, that Skin cancer has increased since the sunscreen campaign was launched.
I believe also, that the evidence and coincidences are so unusual that these scientists, although they do not state so, must be deeply suspicious of this.
Can I suggest you ask someone ,edically qualified to comment on this.

Should the BNP issue a statement on sunscreen once the facts have been confirmed.

Sunscreen, Melanoma and Vit D

Another significant factor is that we produce in our skin around 5000 - 1000 IU's of Vit D3 in just 1/2 hours mid day sun exposure yet Govts and the Medical Community tell us we only need 200 IU's of Vit D.
In the words of one researcher in this field,

'who are you going to trust, God or the Government'

Check out other vids too but they will confirm, sunscreens are CAUSING cancer in Whites, in my view, by design.

Any chance you could get a medical opinion(s) on this situation.

Class action Lawsuit ?

Adrian Peirson said...

I've been interested in this stuff for over ten yrs, I was ill, lost my job house etc, anyway, after 3 yrs found out what it was through my own research, supported by scientific proof, the NHs however denied they had made an error, i eventually sued, even the expert witness lied, so i sued him, Bottom line was they were saying my blood levels were 'normal' ( the word normal is a statistical term ) although my blood levels were at the level of an average 110 yr old man, yes they include blood samples from people of that age if they can find them.

Bottom line was I eventually sued the expert witness for lying to protect his collegue, two weeks later they changed the national guidelines, widening them further so that my blood levels were now within the normal range.
That about sums up, the medical profession today.
PS the normal range, as they call it is different depending on which region you live in, so you could be normal in Glasgow, and not qualify for treatment, but if you moved to Hull, you might be outside their normal range for the hormone and warrant treatment.
I've been chasing these quacks for ten years.

Codex Alimentarius

Agenda 21