UK MP Removed From Conservative Party Says He Will Continue to Question COVID-19 Vaccines

Andrew Bridgen also threatened legal action against those who made antisemitism accusations

Andrew Bridgen, a file photo issued on Jan. 11, 2023. (PA)

An MP who was removed from the UK Conservative Party for questioning COVID-19 vaccines on social media said he was “saddened” but not “downhearted” about the decision and has announced plans to take legal action against individuals who have accused him of racism.

Andrew Bridgen MP made the announcement in a video statement on Thursday, in which he referred to a now-deleted post on Twitter made by a consultant cardiologist, who reportedly told him that the situation with the COVID-19 vaccines is “the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust.”

In his first statement since losing the Conservative whip, he said that he “was saddened to hear yesterday of my suspension, but I’m not downhearted.”

Lost the Whip

On Wednesday Bridgen was suspended by the Tory chief whip for “spreading misinformation about COVID vaccines.”

To lose a political party’s “whip” means to be expelled from the party altogether, meaning Bridgen is now suspended from sitting as a Conservative MP and must sit without affiliation.

Whip Simon Hart said: “Andrew Bridgen has crossed a line, causing great offence in the process.

“As a nation, we should be very proud of what has been achieved through the vaccine programme. The vaccine is the best defence against COVID that we have.

“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.”

Antisemitism

In the video statement, Bridgen said his post on Twitter was “in no way anti-Semitic” but that if anyone was offended, he wanted to “apologise for any offence caused.”

Bridgen’s post drew outraged responses from Conservative ministers such as Matt Hancock, Nadhim Zahawi, and Sajid Javid, as well as Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said the comments were “utterly unacceptable.”

“Obviously it is utterly unacceptable to make linkages and use language like that and I’m determined that the scourge of anti-Semitism is eradicated,” Sunak told MPs.

“I’m disappointed that the chief whip Simon Hart, with the support of the Prime Minister, has chosen to spend me as a member of the conservative parliamentary party,” said Bridgen.

“My tweet of 11th of January was in no way anti-semitic. 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. I wholeheartedly refute any suggestions that I am racist,” he said.

He added that he was “speaking to a legal team, who will commence action against those who have led the calls suggesting that I am.”

On Wednesday Lord Mann, the government’s independent adviser on anti-Semitism, said Bridgen should be barred from standing for the Tories at the next election.

“There is no possibility that Bridgen can be allowed to stand at the next election,” he said.

Bridgen’s post linked to an article authored by Professor Josh Guetzkow, a senior lecturer in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology and the Institute of Criminology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, which was published by ZeroHedge.

Guetzkow wrote on Twitter that the claims of anti-Semitism against Bridgen were “cheap shots that undermine the fight against genuine anti-Semitism, regardless of whether or not he’s correct about the level of harm caused by the [COVID-19] jabs.”

Jonathan Van-Tam, the Deputy Chief Medical Officer for England, administers a dose of the Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine to UK Health Secretary Matt Hancock at a vaccination centre in London, on April 29, 2021. (UK government)

“The fact that I have been suspended over this matter, says much about the current state of our democracy, the right to free speech, and the apparent suspension of the scientific method of analysis of medicines being administered to billions of people,” said Bridgen.

He added that “there are very reasonable questions to be asked about the safety and effectiveness of the experimental mRNA vaccines, and the risks and benefits of these treatments.” He referred to the messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines produced by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna.

He added that there are “reasonable questions” to ask of a government “that is considering extending the use of these experimental vaccines to children as young as six months of age” and noted that “we have a government who indemnifies vaccine manufacturers from claims against the harms caused by their products.”

“I was saddened to hear yesterday of my suspension, but I’m not downhearted. I’ve received huge support from ordinary people, medical workers who are too intimidated to speak out,” said Bridgen.

“And of course from those who’ve experienced vaccine harms themselves, or to a loved one. Hopefully, the media interest around my suspension will finally get the issue of vaccine harms into the media who have been so reluctant to cover this issue for so long,” he added.

‘Wilful Blindness’

Bridgen has been increasingly vocal in questioning the COVID-19 vaccine.

He made a claim in a parliamentary debate in December, in which he called for an “immediate” suspension of the use of mRNA vaccines.

He claimed that a person within a “prominent leadership role” in the British Heart Foundation had sent non-disclosure agreements to researchers to prevent data on potential harms from being made public.

In response, the British Heart Foundation released a statement on social media that said “they did not recognise these claims and strongly refute all allegations made about colleagues in senior leadership roles within the British Heart Foundation.”

In the parliamentary debate on vaccine harms, Bridgen said that there is a “key psychological barrier that has prevented these facts from being acknowledged by policymakers and taken up by the UK mainstream media.”

“That psychological phenomenon is wilful blindness. It is when human beings—including, in this case, institutions—turn a blind eye to the truth in order to feel safe, reduce anxiety, avoid conflict, and protect their prestige and reputations,” he added.