Saying they want to respect the will of the referendum. But every time we come to a vote on the matter there is always a reason why they cannot quite bring themselves to go to the lobby and vote for the Withdrawal Agreement. We have had three occasions in which we could have voted for the with all agree Withdrawal Agreement. Every single time, the same mps trot out to say they support the result and when it comes to the vote they vote to block brexit. So whats different this time . Votes thatingful took place are a very different had a goal different kettle of fish. The cross party talks contain a number of extremely important compromises and concessions for the extension. And it is therefore attractive as this parliament has not had the opportunity to debate the Withdrawal Agreement. Its a different kettle of fish to what went before. Memories,with short the Withdrawal Agreement built was very different to the former Prime Ministers initial socalled blind brexit which was rejected thr
Mercedes on svobodia, the moscow popes took their vows in the lavra. When will ukraine finally deal with the uoc mp, will there be escalation or new blackmail, or will putin dare to go to war with nato , aggravating the situation on the belarusian border , the occupiers attacked odesa three times this night , two waves of attack drones, a total of 15 pieces, eight seabased missiles like caliber, lets look at the terrible consequences of the attack of the russians, the next terrorist attack on odessa , you see that the trucks of the city flew from here , and the first person woke up itching like that the blow will be good, and what can i say will destroy and everything about the shelling of odessa and zaporizhzhia, the crimean bridge that is tired of poland, which is drawing troops to the border with belarus, and the profile of the rpc in ukraine , we will talk for the next hour, we will be his guests, two peoples deputies Valentyn Nalivaichenko and Mykola Knyazhytskyi and diplomat olek
To express one of the things that they should follow the food system and improve peoples food, i. E. Those food items. And the food that the people of the society use on a daily basis, they are looking to see if this food system is standard or not, and how effective it is in diseases. They should do what is most effective in making people sick , in terms of air pollution and other things, then they will go seeking to provide a solution to the government to reduce these factors, to reduce pathogenic factors , because their benefit is that people get sick less, but unfortunately, the Current Health system in our country is based on this for the sector. From our medical society, if people get sick more often, visit doctors and hospitals more, spend more on their treatment , so that their income increases, even if we dont look pessimistic, at least they carelessly prescribe medicine, i dont know , they dont look for tests, sir. Let them say that this patient who came back now will relapse.
Also to lose youth, russian biologists are working on this, its about living fish now, in these aquariums live natabranfyu, fish come from africa, where they live in drying up reservoirs have a lifespan of only a few months. They are born during the rainy season, and before the drought they need time to mature and lay eggs. It seems that if fate were more favorable, the tropical fish would live longer, but even here, in ideal conditions of the aquarium, its age is not complete, this gave scientists an idea. Osteoporosis, in which the fish begin to hunch over. Good gyroprotectors should combat this. Here, in particular, immunosuppressants are considered as such compounds, that is, substances that suppress the immune response. One of the key the most common hypothesis of aging in our time is the hypothesis associated with the fact that in old age the body begins to nonspecifically activate the immune system against its own components, that is, when. The immune system is activated to a le
To vote against, i do not rule out that if and when, or rather not if, when it comes to the consideration of this draft law, well, we will see, they will still rush to block it tribune, they will have nothing to lose and they will try to take advantage of this moment, but in fact the speaker, who stated that the monomajority, she does not want to divide, i am not saying she cannot, she can, they have enough votes, she does not want to consider this bill, and therefore he is, on the one hand, a speaker who is not related to a certain political force. But de facto has, we all understand this very well, he will look for as much as necessary, or as much as he can, some procedural points in order to prevent this bill from being considered in the session hall. I do not see now, unfortunately, the political will, both in the parliament and in the office of the president , in order to bring this law to its logical conclusion, although it seems to me that after the story with the american lobby