TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The speaker explains that a series of laws allowed the military to take over vaccine distribution without any clinical trials or safety testing. The safety testing conducted by the pharmaceutical industry was just for show and had no regulatory implications. The FDA, which is responsible for regulating medical products, does not have the authority to regulate these countermeasures. The legal framework being used pretends that these are health products when they are actually in a different legal space.

Speaker 0 argues that anyone can file a complaint with a law enforcement authority for murder conspiracy and demand arrests and prosecutions. He points to a 2013 press release claiming that DARPA awarded Moderna Therapeutics up to $25,000,000 to develop messenger RNA therapeutics, noting that DARPA is the Pentagon and claiming the Pentagon bought, paid for, and envisioned these mRNA shots. He contends Fort Detrick was involved in developing COVID-19 at the UNC BSL-3 and asserts the Pentagon is on both sides of the argument, developing the weapon and the alleged vaccines. Speaker 1 asks whether there is any liability shield for deploying a biowarfare weapon and whether the narrative about congressional liability for Pfizer is a SIOP. Speaker 0 agrees that civil liability is separate from criminal liability, stating in his book Resisting Medical Tyranny that executives at companies developing these mRNA shots are guilty of murder and conspiracy to commit murder. He cites a Portugal report claiming that upwards of 300,000 Americans had been murdered by the mRNA Franken shots and invokes the JAB resolution, describing it as a Nuremberg crime against humanity and a violation of the Nuremberg Code. He defines a Nuremberg crime against humanity as murder, extermination, and other inhumane acts committed against civilians. Speaker 1 asks about liability for government officials who approved the vaccines. Speaker 0 says FDA officials who approved the shots could be indicted for murder and conspiracy to commit murder, noting the FDA’s involvement in developing COVID-19 as an offensive biological warfare weapon at UNC BSL-3, including a cited contract listing National Center for Toxicological Research and FDA as contributors. He claims the FDA, which approves the vaccines, was involved in this development. Speaker 1 questions the CDC and media accountability, noting the CDC’s recommendation of the vaccines and media promotion of boosters. Speaker 0 says the CDC, including Director Milensky (appointed by Biden, from Harvard Medical School), is complicit, and claims the CDC has a history dating back to the Reagan administration of handling offensive biological warfare projects, including shipping weaponized agents to Saddam Hussein with implications for U.S. troops after Gulf War I. Speaker 1 asks whether there are lawmakers with intel on gain-of-function biowarfare. Speaker 0 mentions Senator Rand Paul as having a strong understanding, but asserts that some lawmakers were threatened and obstructed after consulting him, recounting an experience with Walter Jones of the House Armed Services Committee who briefly engaged but then did not follow up, implying threats prevented action. Speaker 1 asks how citizens should respond, and Speaker 0 advocates reporting to sheriffs, district attorneys, and state attorneys, noting progress with a Collier County health freedom declaration. They discuss enforcement mechanisms, seizure, and incineration of stockpiles, and trial and sentencing for those responsible. Speaker 0 condemns China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology as a bioweapons lab, alleging it was a Chinese counterpart to Fort Detrick, with the Chinese president seeking his own BSL-4 program and an offensive biowarfare arsenal. Speaker 1 notes U.S. funding and international bioweapons labs, including Ukraine and Taiwan, and ends by referencing Lindsey Graham and a speaker labeled as a professor Boyle.

Speaker 0 described a guest whose 18-year-old daughter was injected with Pfizer and developed cancer. He stated that he has sat across numerous people who lost their children to these injections, with some deaths immediate and others gruesome, and that these people must testify to lawmakers and others recounting their stories repeatedly. He framed this as a massive crime that needs to stop. He asserted that the FDA was fully aware that these injections would cause cancer, citing published guidance documents. He claimed that the FDA regulates the industry and, in 2015 and 2013 (and even more recently), wrote extensive guidance documents explaining to manufacturers developing mRNA products that they must study risks, including cancer, death, fertility issues, blindness, strokes, and cardiovascular issues. He said these risks were documented as regulatory knowledge and that manufacturers were told they had to study these risks and exclude them. He also claimed that studying these risks in healthy volunteers was not allowed because it was considered unethical. He contrasted this with 2020, stating that “all of a sudden, all of this is solved,” calling it a joke, and that this period raised his suspicions, prompting him to investigate independently. He concluded by describing the situation as a premeditated crime in which regulators knew, and that the military conducted a “fake exercise” to capture all these pharmaceutical companies and compel them to create these weapons.

They didn't see safety signals because they didn't want to see them and wouldn't report them. They lied about the vaccine staying in the arm, when they knew it wouldn't. They said the mRNA would dissolve in hours or days, but they knew it was modified RNA that stayed in the body with the spike protein. They continue to push this, despite evidence to the contrary. The science has been corrupted and the agencies have been corrupted, so they have no credibility.

The top agencies leading Operation Warp Speed were the NSA and the Pentagon, not public health agencies like HHS, CDC, or NIH. The vaccines were developed by NIH and manufactured by military tractors, with Pfizer and Moderna being paid to put their names on them. The speaker believes that Operation Warp Speed is not new, as it has been happening since 1980 at Fort Detrick, a bioweapons lab. They claim that the government has been involved in unethical practices, such as injecting the military with HIV in the 1990s.

The Department of Defense used shady contracting practices and laws to shield pharmaceutical companies from conducting proper clinical trials. They manipulated public perception with the help of mainstream media. The clinical trials were just a theatrical performance and not required by law. Human subjects were deceived, including a 13-year-old girl who experienced adverse events. The Vaccine Safety Council had an ad featuring her, but it was pulled from airing during the Super Bowl. Most clinical trial sites, investigators, and FDA employees were also deceived, as only a few top officials were aware of the scam.

Insufficient measures were taken to ensure the safety of the vaccine, as important information regarding heart problems was withheld for a couple of years. The speaker mentions that they have previously discussed myocarditis for over two and a half years. A paper by Michels and colleagues revealed 38 deaths, which Pfizer did not disclose during the FDA meeting in December 2020. The deaths were not questioned by the committee or FDA, and had they been fully reported, there would have been a three to four times higher risk of cardiovascular death. With this data, it is unlikely that any FDA panel would have approved the vaccine.

Vaccine recommendations typically come from the Advisory Committee of Immunization Practices (an outside consulting committee at CDC) and VRBPAC (within FDA), which recommends vaccine licensure. These committees only adopted evidence-based medicine about twelve years ago. The speaker states that during their administration, they want safety studies prior to vaccine licensure and recommendation. They claim vaccines are exempt from pre-licensing safety testing, and the COVID vaccine was the only one tested in a full placebo trial. They assert that the other 76 shots children receive between birth and 18 have not been safety tested against a placebo, meaning the risk profile is not understood. The speaker intends to remedy this.

A bombshell report reveals that the Department of Defense controlled the COVID-19 program from the beginning, using shady approval authorizations to shield big pharma from liability. The Pentagon used laws like the PrEP Act, Emergency Use Authorization, and Other Transaction Authority to protect pharmaceutical companies and avoid proper clinical trials. Clinical trial subjects and investigators were deceived, and informed consent was not required. The National Security Council treated COVID-19 as an act of war, while telling the public it was a health event. The Pentagon's influence extended to agencies like the FDA and NIH. A secret Cabal called the Pandemic Enterprise was formed in 2013 to discuss countermeasures with strict confidentiality. The so-called vaccines were actually prototypes ordered by the Department of Defense, and people were not informed of this. Safety testing and animal trials were skipped, violating regulations.

Speaker 0 asks if Speaker 1 is vaccinated, to which Speaker 1 responds that they are not. Speaker 1 explains that they advised their family and loved ones against getting vaccinated because they believed the vaccine was experimental, not tested on humans, and had concerns about the company behind it. They also mention that most vaccines typically take several years to gather safety data before approval. Speaker 1 expresses their intuition that Operation Warp Speed, the vaccine development initiative, seemed rushed and lacking in safety protocols. However, Speaker 1 did not anticipate the widespread propaganda campaign promoting vaccination, and they were horrified to see everyone around them rushing to get vaccinated without proper testing.

During the vaccine rollout, I witnessed people arriving in rental cars with simple coolers to administer the experimental shots in nursing homes. The shots were given to older individuals and those with dementia, who couldn't provide proper consent. Additionally, the shots were not stored at the required low temperature. This experiment had several flaws that need to be addressed.

The speaker claims that the public had limited access to data when the vaccines received emergency use authorization. They believe regulators, who they consider corrupt, were determined to push forward with the mass vaccination program. The speaker argues that effective therapeutic medicines like Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin were intentionally suppressed to pave the way for vaccine authorization. They explain that a federal law prohibits emergency use authorization for a vaccine if there is an existing licensed drug that proves effective against the same disease. The speaker suggests that this decision was driven by financial interests, with the NIH owning half the patent for the Moderna vaccine and individuals associated with Anthony Fauci potentially receiving significant royalties.

The speaker describes a committee conflict investigated by the office of inspector general and Congress, who urged change, but nothing happened. They claim medical malpractice by this group is evident in the approval of vaccines. The speaker states that in 1986 there were 11 vaccines, which increased to 69, then 92. They assert that, except for the COVID vaccine, none had a pre-licensing safety trial involving a true placebo. According to the speaker, these vaccines were introduced without safety studies, resulting in a lack of understanding regarding the risk profiles of these products. The speaker attributes this to corruption and agency capture.

At the outset, a process was approved by the FDA for emergency use authorization. However, it was later discovered that the approved process was swapped out for one containing contaminants like DNA and a cancer-causing substance. Pfizer redacted 800 pages of the manufacturing process, hiding the fact that a carcinogen was included. This lack of transparency led to no informed consent and potential harm to individuals. The vaccine rollout included a trial with a 2.4 times higher adverse event rate, including the presence of a carcinogen.

The speaker discusses the vaccine's link to death and disability, citing over 37,000 deaths globally reported on VAERS. They criticize regulators for not addressing this issue earlier and mention a conversation with Francis Collins about vaccine-related deaths. The speaker also mentions a conversation with Dr. Redfield, who admitted downplaying vaccine injuries to avoid creating hesitancy. Dr. Redfield acknowledged that there are more injuries than reported.

Speaker 0: I find information like this, you know, inserts for the vaccine. Paper's there, and there's nothing printed on it. I find that very interesting, disheartening, disgusting, and lots of other words, but then it gets better. It just keep wait. There's more. It just keeps happening. The CDC redacts every single word of a 148 page study on a myocarditis after COVID vaccination. So I asked research to print the study for me. 148 pages. The entire thing is redacted. What good does a study do if there's nothing there? Then I wanna know, wait, what might have been there that they needed to redact it? That's even scarier. Speaker 1: We're witnessing an active cover up of a colossal consumer product safety debacle that is is basically affecting the entire world. Mhmm. So in The United States, our CDC, National Institutes of Health, and the FDA are actively involved in a cover up. And the same is occurring in The UK with the MHRA, Europe with European medicine agencies, and Australia with the Therapeutic Goods Administration. Something is going on that's very big. Each one of these companies that puts out a product has an obligation to produce ninety days of safety monitoring after their product comes out. It's a regulatory dossier. If somebody has a problem with the new product and they call the company like Pfizer, Pfizer has to report, write down what happened, and they have to collate that in a report and produce it and make it publicly available. When it came to ninety days with Pfizer, the first vaccine that came out, remember Pfizer was approved 12/10/2020. Pfizer didn't produce the report. And then people started asking, well, what's happening with your vaccine? And Pfizer would not disclose what happened. And then it went to court. And the lawyer for the FDA stepped in and said they don't wanna release Pfizer's dossier for fifty five years. Mhmm. Oh. Fifty five years. And the the the plaintiff pushed. And finally, slowly, the Pfizer dossier came out. Pfizer recorded one thousand two hundred and twenty three deaths with their product within ninety days of release. People were calling Pfizer in desperation watching their family members die after taking the vaccine. Pfizer recorded over twelve hundred new adverse events, new problems that doctor Boden has talked to you about that we are grappling with the entire time. But the point is our FDA worked to cover this up. The FDA should be regulating this company. FDA should have been having at least monthly meetings and fully disclosing what was going on with these novel vaccines, which are a genetic transfer technology platform.

I recently met someone whose 18-year-old daughter developed cancer after receiving the Pfizer vaccine. I've heard from many parents who lost children to these injections, some experiencing immediate and horrific deaths. They repeatedly share their stories with lawmakers, highlighting a significant crime that must end. The FDA was aware of the potential cancer risks associated with these vaccines, as outlined in guidance documents from 2013 and 2015. These documents instructed manufacturers to study risks like cancer, fertility issues, and cardiovascular problems, and deemed it unethical to test on healthy volunteers. Yet, by 2020, these concerns were seemingly overlooked. This raises serious suspicions about the intentions behind the vaccine rollout, suggesting a premeditated crime where regulators and the military may have colluded with pharmaceutical companies.

There have been repeated attempts to mandate coercion without accepting natural immunity, which is claimed to be equally effective at preventing infection and more effective at preventing severe disease and death. There was no real questioning of an emergency use authorized product, and informed consent was not prioritized. When doctors make mistakes, they should acknowledge the mistake and harm, apologize, and institute measures to prevent recurrence. This hasn't happened at a public health scale, and the medical establishment needs to acknowledge the problem. The speaker believes the product in question should never have been approved for a single human. At the very least, there should be acknowledgement of unintended harms, apologies, efforts to help the vaccine-injured, and structures for greater transparency in medicine. Regulators should not receive 86% of their funding from big pharma and then claim to be independent.

The speaker discusses the decision-making process for the COVID vaccine, highlighting the role of Operation Warp Speed and the lack of FDA involvement. They praise the collaboration between NIH and FDA, emphasizing the dedication of the team. The speaker commends the public-private partnership and the effectiveness of Operation Warp Speed. They express a wish for earlier financial support from the government for the industry.

The speaker states they searched for years for a pre-licensing safety trial of the 72 vaccine doses effectively mandated for American children. They claim that every other medication requires a safety trial comparing health outcomes in a placebo group versus a vaccine group before FDA licensing. The speaker assumed this was also done for vaccines. They state they found out that vaccines were exempt from this requirement.

The speaker claims a committee experienced typical conflict, but a specific conflict was particularly obvious. The Office of Inspector General and Congress investigated and urged change, but nothing happened. The speaker asserts this group committed medical malpractice by approving vaccines, increasing the number from 11 in 1986 to 69 and then 92. They state that, except for the COVID vaccine, none had pre-licensing safety trials with a true placebo. According to the speaker, these vaccines were introduced without safety studies, meaning the risk profiles are unknown. The speaker attributes this to corruption and agency capture.

The speaker questions how many people injected with mRNA products knew they weren't receiving a traditional vaccine, suggesting many, including medical professionals, are unaware due to the perception of conspiracy. The speaker claims there was a sufficient safety signal in VAERS to halt the rollout in January, citing almost 90,000 VAERS entries and nearly 700 deaths within the first month. They state that historically, products causing over 50 deaths have been pulled from the market. The speaker questions why the CDC, HHS, and FDA aren't investigating this data.

The emergency use authorization (EUA) was crucial for normalizing the mRNA platform, which was seen as a significant advancement in vaccine technology. The fear surrounding COVID-19 helped facilitate acceptance of this new approach, despite existing treatments that could have mitigated the pandemic's impact. If doctors had been allowed to explore effective treatments, the reliance on mRNA vaccines would have been diminished, creating a control group that could reveal potential harms. While the EUA was important, it wasn't strictly necessary; they could have navigated around it. The rollout of the mRNA platform aimed to reshape public perception, and the legal complexities surrounding the EUA provided a layer of immunity for those involved. The backlash and discussions about vaccine injuries may complicate future implementations of this technology.

The speaker argues that there was no informed consent regarding the COVID vaccine, as the government and pharmaceutical companies knew it wasn't a traditional vaccine. They hid potential adverse reactions and lack of evidence on transmission prevention. Despite good intentions, people were misled into taking it.