TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Vaccines don't cause autism. The science is clear. Vaccines don't cause autism. Vaccines do not cause autism. I do not deny that we need to do more about autism, but it has nothing to do with vaccines. We have thoroughly debunked any association between autism and these vaccines. Robert, it is nearly consensus in the scientific community that there's no link there. To deny a mountain of scientific evidence, which has already taught us that the combination of measles, mumps, rubella, or MMR vaccine doesn't cause autism, Vimerosal, an ethylmercury containing preservative that wasn't a number of vaccines doesn't cause autism, and that too many vaccines given too soon, if you will, doesn't also cause autism. We know that the schedule is safe. Are there peer reviewed scientific reports that indicate a link between No. Between vaccines and autism? No. Not only is there not a peer reviewed work, this is probably the most studied public health issue involving children. Vaccines are really the one thing we have looked at as causing autism. The Institutes of Medicine, the Centers for Disease Control have repeatedly investigated this. Vaccines do not cause autism. We don't need more research. At some point, enough is enough. It's fine to continue to collect data, but at some point, you have to take note for an answer. We're not sure what causes autism, but we know that vaccines do not. Mountains of evidence. No, you know, this has been looked at extensively. Nothing's been more studied in the world than this connection between vaccines and autism. We'd heard it. We've heard it for decades. You know, actually almost a century now, if you want to get into it. This has been the battle cry of the pharmaceutical industry and every shill that works for them. But whether you know it or not all the way back in 2020 for those of you that were watching then we actually disproved this myth right then. Debunked it with a lawsuit where we went at the CDC and said really if the head of your page on the CDC website says vaccines plural meaning all vaccines do not cause us to do we have that original website. This is what it said: vaccines do not cause autism. There it is. All vaccines doesn't say one of them or two of them all vaccines by the plural s at the end of vaccines. If vaccines do not cause autism will you please provide us with all of the evidence and studies that show that vaccines don't cause autism. Send us that evidence. Well they didn't and we sued them and we went to court. Back in 2020, we won the case. Here it looks like in the document. They gave us the list. It's actually 20 studies. 20 total studies make up the entire list of what they look to when they say that these childhood vaccines, the five, and the cumulative effects of them given in the first six months of life, do not cause autism. The first one is an MMR study. The second one an MMR and a DTaP study. The next ones are MMR, these four are MMR and Thimerosal studies. Then the next all the way through to 20 are all just Thimerosal studies. Lastly, we have one antigen study. Of the 20 studies, the first MMR studies are not in the first six months of life; Thimerosal studies show none of the vaccines in the first six months of life had Thimerosal. There was only one study relevant to the first six months of life, the IOM review of the DTaP vaccine, and it said there are no studies that prove or disprove the association with autism. Therefore, that was the only one that was relevant to the first six months of life, and it proved that they had no answers. And so for everyone that's ever sent Mountain of Evidence, that's been a lie. We won in court. It's a lie. You can take that to the bank. And actually just months after winning that lawsuit, that was in May, by August they pulled down the statement vaccines do not cause autism. We celebrated it but five months later it went back up and we've been stuck there with this propaganda statement that have no basis in science up until last night when this happened to the website. Let's see the new page. Here it is. It now says autism and vaccines and right under that it has the key points. So we read those key points. The claim vaccines do not cause autism is not an evidence-based claim because studies have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines cause autism, meaning those vaccines in the first six months of life. Meaning the IOM lawsuit that proved that. Studies supporting a link have been ignored by health authorities. HHS has launched a comprehensive assessment of the causes of autism, including investigations on plausible biologic mechanisms and potential causal links. It does have an explanatory statement I want to read right now. It says this about why you will still see it with an asterisk the header vaccines do not cause autism has not been completely removed due to an agreement with the chair of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee that it would remain on the CDC website. Apparently, this was that backroom deal that was made with Senator Cassidy, of course, when Robert Kennedy Jr. was up there. But now you can see on the page it is clear we are making the statement or it's being made by the CDC that this is not a scientific statement and so ultimately this is a massive change. I tweeted out about it today and to every parent of an autistic child that's been out there. For every one of you that did interviews, whether in the film Vaxxed or when we toured the nation and for everyone that's ever been gaslit, the days of gaslighting are over. We are now moving into science-based, evidence-based statements on the CDC website. It's a beautiful day.

A Dutch court has ruled that Bill Gates will face trial for allegedly misleading the public about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. The case was brought by seven plaintiffs claiming vaccine-related injuries. Gates' legal team argued against the court's jurisdiction, but the judge confirmed it, allowing the lawsuit to proceed. Notably, other defendants include the Dutch Prime Minister, NATO Secretary General, members of the Dutch government, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, and the Dutch state. This ruling is seen as a significant step forward, as those named must now defend themselves against these accusations.

I'm an attorney looking for ways to sue those responsible for damages during the pandemic, but the PrEP Act, the CARE Act, and the 1986 VICA Vaccine Act, provide broad immunity from liability. As a corporate liability officer, my colleague and I agree, that we should go after Pfizer for the fraud they have committed. The challenge is figuring out how to break through their defenses. Pfizer will argue they delivered the fraud that the government ordered. Even if a case gets dismissed based on this argument, the admission itself is valuable. We need to get them to admit in court whether committing mass murder and genocide is explicit US government policy, or if individuals like Kotlik, Marks, and Fauci were rogue actors acting outside their authority.

Merck, the maker of the Gardasil vaccine, is the focus of this speech. The speaker claims that what they are about to say would be considered slanderous if untrue. They challenge Merck to sue them, but believe Merck won't because truth is a defense against slander in the United States. The speaker also suggests that if sued, they would request discovery, leading to the emergence of more documents exposing fraud committed by Merck on a global scale.

Today, we are here to inform the public and representatives about the serious errors and safety issues related to mRNA injections. The previous speakers discussed the deadly political mistakes made by the EMA and the European Commission, who deliberately deceived the public and used pseudoscience to push people into potentially deadly experiments. The EMA admitted to providing misleading information to the public, and the lack of evidence for transmission control makes the vaccination campaign a fraudulent and illegal marketing campaign. The argument that this is for the benefit of vulnerable and elderly individuals is false, as the entire population has been forced to participate in this potentially deadly experiment. We demand the removal of all mRNA injections from the market and accountability for those responsible.

The speaker claims Pfizer committed the greatest crime against humanity in recorded history due to the scale and foreknowledge of harm. She states Pfizer knew within a month of the vaccine rollout in November 2020 that it didn't work to stop COVID, referring to internal language describing "vaccine failure" and "failure of efficacy." She claims the 3rd most common side effect in the documents is COVID. According to the speaker, mandates, job losses, family separations, deaths, injuries, and sterilizations were based on a lie. The speaker asserts that society was destroyed, children's education was ruined, depression and suicide levels increased, and businesses were destroyed, all based on a lie, resulting in a massive transfer of wealth.

Pascal Nagiadi, the son of a World Economic Forum cofounder, is demanding justice for the global release of COVID-19 vaccines. He is joined by Dr. Astrid Stuckelberger in calling for the criminal prosecution of all involved. Nagiadi also wants the arrest of those responsible for crimes against humanity related to the pandemic, including the WEF, WHO, GAVI, Big Pharma, Big Tech, and Bill Gates. He believes he and his mother are victims of the vaccines and that the situation is a democide. If his demands are met, it could have significant global health and economic implications. The outcome of this call to action remains uncertain, but it highlights the power of individuals challenging established systems.

Tonight, we will be filing a complaint against Mrs. Von der Leyen, the European Union, and Pfizer. The complaint is significant because it exposes their complicity in the deception surrounding the Covid vaccine. We have evidence, including a contract signed on November 20th between the EU and Pfizer, where the EU blindly invested €200 million without any knowledge of the product's outcome or nature. This money came from our taxes and was meant to fund Pfizer's research.

This impromptu session of the International Crimes Investigative Committee features Pascal Najadi, who has filed a criminal complaint against several individuals, including the president of Switzerland. Najadi explains that he has filed charges in Switzerland and the United States, alleging violations of laws and rights related to the Pfizer vaccine. He emphasizes the importance of informed consent and criticizes the World Health Organization. The case could have implications for others who have suffered similar damages. The conversation also touches on allegations of a population reduction program and the lack of testing for vaccine efficacy and safety.

A court hearing took place following the arrest of Arno van Kessel, a key figure in a case accusing Alfred Bourla from Pfizer, news channel editors, and Dutch politicians. The hearing addressed a request to hear expert witnesses, including Catherine Olsen Fitts, in a separate case brought by three victims. The defense argued against the need for witnesses, citing readily available online information, but the victims' lawyer insisted on in-person testimony before the court. The discussion included Bill Gates' lack of defense, with his lawyer deferring to the court. Concerns were raised about van Kessel's arrest, allegedly by a police unit with ties to NATO, which is also accused of involvement in a misinformation campaign related to the pandemic. Van Kessel has been suspended as a lawyer, and is being held in a prison with interrogation rooms and a psychiatric ward, raising concerns about intimidation and due process. Supporters believe the case is of international importance and could spark further legal actions globally.

Today, we are here to inform the public and representatives about the serious errors and safety issues related to mRNA injections. The previous speakers discussed the deadly political mistakes made by the EMA and the European Commission, who deliberately deceived the public and used pseudoscience to push people into potentially deadly experiments. The EMA admitted that the information provided to the public was not for informed consent. The lack of evidence for transmission control from the start makes the vaccination campaign a fraudulent and illegal marketing campaign. The argument that it is a disservice to vulnerable and elderly individuals is false, as the entire population has been forced to participate in this potentially deadly experiment. We demand the removal of all mRNA injections from the market and accountability for those responsible.

A court hearing took place following the arrest of Arno van Kessel, a key figure in a case accusing Alfred Bourla from Pfizer, news channel editors, and Dutch politicians. The hearing addressed a request to hear expert witnesses, including Catherine Olsen Fitts, in a separate case brought by three victims. The defense argued against hearing these witnesses, citing readily available online information. The lawyer for the victims argued that court testimony is necessary. The discussion included Bill Gates' lack of defense, with his lawyer deferring to the court. Concerns were raised about van Kessel's arrest by a special police unit with alleged NATO links, his suspension as a lawyer, and his detainment in a prison described as a dangerous facility where prisoners can be interrogated without public access. The case involves charges of genocide and the use of biological weapons, potentially leading to a Nuremberg-style trial. Supporters believe this case is an international precedent and could spark justice globally, while his arrest is seen as intimidation.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss a set of legal actions taken by Health Freedom Defense Fund against the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) over COVID-19 vaccination mandates. - Health Freedom Defense Fund sued LAUSD in 2021 over an EUA vaccine mandate. They claim the district initially had a mandate, then appeared to repeal it, leading the court to dismiss that case as no longer ripe. Seventeen days after the dismissal, LAUSD implemented a new mandate stating employees could not test and subsequently fired a number of employees, with more than a thousand affected in total. Many faced loss of pensions, seniority, and employment. - A second lawsuit was filed in November 2021 arguing that the vaccines do not stop transmission or infection, a position the group says was supported by statements from the CDC in 2021 and by CMS in October 2021. Based on this, they argued that the vaccines are a private matter and should be treated as therapeutic rather than a public health issue. They also asserted that natural immunity is real and that Jacobson v. Massachusetts does not apply because the smallpox vaccination was assumed to be safe and effective only under historical conditions, which they argue do not hold for COVID-19. - The group reports strong initial success. Their argument won at first instance, and they achieved a favorable ruling on appeal before a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit. This led to an en banc review (broader panel) of the Ninth Circuit. Although typically taking many months, the en banc decision came after three months, and on July 31, the Ninth Circuit ruled against them. The court stated that what mattered was the existence of a public health emergency, rather than whether the vaccine stopped transmission or infection. The group contends this is a dangerous precedent and maintains that COVID-19 is not the same as smallpox, which had a 30 percent death rate; they reasoned that by August 2021, four percent of Los Angeles County residents had already been exposed and recovered, indicating the situation did not constitute the same emergency as smallpox. - The group notes that an appeal to the Supreme Court may be possible, and they are considering pursuing it. They emphasize that the court’s decision focused on the public health emergency rather than vaccine effectiveness against transmission or infection, which they argue is a troubling position. - The speakers discuss the potential implications and the perceived terrifying precedent, with the possibility of further appeals to higher courts being contemplated.

Checklist for summary approach: - Identify and restate the speaker’s claimed credentials (or lack thereof). - Capture the core activity described (deposing leading vaccine experts) and the basis for claims (actual evidence). - Note the courtroom principle contrasting titles versus evidence. - Outline the asserted strategic actions (legal action against specific agencies) and purported results. - Preserve the exact claim about the outcome of the lawsuits regarding vaccine safety science. - Present statements verbatim where feasible, and otherwise closely paraphrase to retain meaning. - Avoid adding judgments, external context, or evaluative commentary. Summary: The speaker introduces himself as Mister Siri and immediately clarifies that he is not a medical doctor, and not an immunologist or biologist or any kind of vaccinologist. He adds that despite lacking these titles, he “depose[s] them regularly, including the world’s leading ones with regards to vaccines,” and that he must base his claims on “actual evidence.” In describing his courtroom approach, he asserts that when he goes to court regarding vaccines, “I don’t get to rely on titles.” He then recounts a proposed strategic path he characterizes as a “genius way forward”: “We’re gonna sue the government agencies, HHS, FDA, NIH,” and he states that “we started winning.” The narrative then turns to the alleged outcomes of those legal actions, posing the question, “And what did we prove in those lawsuits?” followed by the claimed conclusion: “That the entire science behind vaccine safety was nothing but a complete fraud.” Throughout, the speaker frames the process as a shift from deference to credentials to a reliance on evidence obtained through deposition and litigation, culminating in purported victories against major federal health agencies. He presents the lawsuits as the mechanism by which the foundational science of vaccine safety was challenged, and he asserts that the result of these proceedings is a definitive statement that the science underpinning vaccine safety is fraudulent, as claimed within the transcript’s courtroom-centered account. The emphasis remains on the contrast between claimed authority and evidence-based legal challenges, as well as on the asserted procedural successes and the sweeping conclusion about vaccine-safety science.

The attorney (Speaker 0) opens by expressing frustration that pandemic-era liability protections—the PREP Act, the CARE Act, and the 1986 VICA Vaccine Act—grant broad immunity to the actors involved, effectively shielding them from liability and allowing what he calls “mass murder.” He asks Sacha whether there are obvious legal avenues to sue Pfizer and obtain redress for what he views as illegal acts, given this shield of immunity. Sacha (Speaker 1) replies that neither he nor his colleagues discourage attempts to sue Pfizer due to the fraud allegations they’ve identified. He notes, however, that nobody knows exactly what will break through the immunity barrier, so they should try different approaches. He outlines the current landscape: the defense Pfizer will likely raise is that they did not defraud the government, but merely delivered fraud that the government ordered. He references a concrete example in Brooke Jackson’s case, where Pfizer filed a motion to dismiss in April, arguing the fraud claim centered on delivering government-ordered fraud rather than perpetrating it independently. Sacha emphasizes that while the case may be dismissed, it has not been yet. If a future dismissal occurs, the admission would be valuable, and the goal is to elicit admissions in court. He suggests that they need to prove, by any admissible method, that there was explicit U.S. government policy to commit mass murder and genocide, or that certain individuals—Robert Kodlek, Peter Marks, Fauci, and others—were rogue actors acting outside their authority. In other words, the objective is to obtain explicit statements or admissions that could substantiate claims of government-directed action or unauthorized conduct by specific individuals, to challenge the immunity and pursue redress.

A court hearing took place following the arrest of Arno van Kessel, a key figure in the case, who is now held in a high-security prison with no contact allowed. The case involves accusations against Alfred Bourla of Pfizer, news channel editors, a newspaper, and Dutch politicians. It consists of the original case from last year and a separate one initiated by three clients. The hearing addressed a request to hear expert witnesses, including Catherine Olsen Fitts and Mike Heiden, with arguments focusing on the validity and necessity of their testimony. The defense argued against it, citing readily available online information, while the victims' lawyer, mister Stassen, emphasized the importance of court testimony. Bill Gates' legal representative stated he would comply with the court's decision, offering no defense. Concerns were raised about van Kessel's arrest by a special police unit with alleged NATO links, coinciding with accusations against NATO in the other court case regarding misinformation. Van Kessel has been suspended as a lawyer, raising concerns about preventing him from reaching judges. The prison holding him is described as a potentially dangerous environment where prisoners can be interrogated and tried without public access. The case is seen as internationally significant, potentially setting a precedent and sparking further actions worldwide.

A Dutch government official revealed that the COVID pandemic was orchestrated as a military operation under NATO orders, suggesting that forced vaccinations and lockdowns were part of a hidden agenda rather than public health measures. This admission could significantly impact the ongoing trial of Bill Gates and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla in the Netherlands, where they face accusations of misleading the public about COVID vaccinations. The Dutch health minister confirmed that pandemic preparedness was tied to treaty obligations and intelligence services. This revelation aligns with claims made by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. about the military's role in vaccine production. The discussion raises concerns about the true motives behind the pandemic and the need for accountability from those responsible for the global health crisis.

Prominent Swiss citizens Pascal Nejadi, a British Swiss banker, and Dr. Astrid Stuegelberger, a Swiss researcher, discuss their actions against the Swiss president and Pfizer Inc. Nejadi has filed criminal charges against the Swiss president and a lawsuit against Pfizer in New York. The claim is related to the COVID-19 vaccination policy. Dr. Stuegelberger criticizes the World Health Organization (WHO) and its role in the pandemic, calling it a criminal organization. They also discuss concerns about genetic editing, digitalization of care, and the sterilization effects of the mRNA injections. Nejadi expresses anger over the harm caused by the injections and vows to seek justice.

A lawyer suing Bill Gates and Pfizer's CEO for COVID vaccine injuries was arrested in the Netherlands. According to the McCullough Foundation, the arrest of attorney Arno van Kessel occurred one month before the trial against Bill Gates was set to begin. Van Kessel was set to lead a lawsuit against Bill Gates, Albert Borla, and Klaus Schwab over COVID policies and vaccine injuries. He was arrested in a military-style raid and jailed without charges. Grock reported that Van Kessel was arrested on suspicions of anti-institutional activities and potential violence and detained in Vought Prison. His imprisonment was extended ninety days without formal charges. The speaker claims this violates habeas corpus and Magna Carta principles. The speaker suggests the arrest, a month before the lawsuit trial, indicates possible suppression, though officials cite security risks. The July 9 trial proceeded with a co-lawyer, Peter Stassen. The charge was suspicious suspicions of anti-institutional activities and potential violence.

Fauci, Soros, Gates, Zuckerberg, and others must be held accountable for their involvement in what is claimed to be the largest mass poisoning in human history.

I'm in Helsinki to give a witness statement in a case against the Finnish government and a catering company for human rights violations related to the COVID pass. We aim to fight for freedom against medical tyranny. This is a unique case globally where the government is being sued. We are determined to expose corporate crimes and mistakes in history. Though we can't film the court, the transcript will be available. Let's stand up for freedom and justice.

The World Health Organization worsened global health during the pandemic by supporting coercive mandates for harmful pharmaceutical products. They have not apologized for the harm caused. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a major funder, profited from investments in COVID mRNA vaccines. We must resist and refuse to comply with these actions. Our voices must be heard to protect our rights. Thank you to everyone standing up with courage.

Pfizer is being sued for defrauding the government, but they claim they did not commit fraud. They argue they provided what the government requested, even if it was a faulty product distributed worldwide. This information is crucial and not widely known.

Speaker describes ongoing experiences challenging corona mandates in Switzerland: leading court proceedings as a Swiss lawyer against unconstitutional mandates, representing individuals seeking compensation for injuries from mRNA injections, and initiating a major criminal court proceeding against Swissmedic, the Swiss medical safety agency. Despite over three years of hard work, results regarding justice remain unseen. From these efforts, the speaker identifies a lesson: in Europe, in all involved courts and health authorities, they protect their governments with deceptive information policies, wrong decision making, and, most of all, with totally illegal authorizations of mRNA products granted in Switzerland by safety agencies. The speaker notes that no justice has been done and no lesson learned in the official European world. The speaker then asks what can be done about this and first seeks input from the MAHA team and Doctor Robert Malone about any hope from the United States, where positive signals have emerged, notably on January 20 with the present president Trump’s declaration to exit the WHO and other steps. From today’s event, the speaker derives hope, but contends that the hope must come from Europe. A plan is articulated: Europe will take its destiny into its own hands. The speaker intends to ensure that people can see the true effects of the WHO and the true effects of the industry after many proceedings have resulted in authorities claiming that the WHO was setting Gold standards. The speaker aims to contribute, together with the MEHA movement, all of their experience and investigations conducted against the WHO, and to work together to make Europe healthy again. The commitment is clear: they will never give up.

The speaker believes COVID vaccine programs should be stopped. They are astounded by the number of papers critical of the vaccine or showing negative effects. The speaker claims a group of researchers funded by Pfizer and the NIH bullies editors to retract papers with negative findings about the vaccine. They assert the number of retractions is appalling. According to the speaker, in one instance where an editor resisted, Nature Springer bought the journal and retracted the paper. The speaker states that this is what they have been dealing with.