TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The speakers discuss a contract between Pfizer and Canada regarding the COVID-19 vaccine. They claim that the contract reveals that the government knew the vaccine's safety and efficacy were unknown and that adverse effects were possible. They criticize Trudeau for distancing himself from the contract and accuse the government of lying and covering up the truth. The speakers also mention that the contract lacks anti-bribery and anti-corruption sections and highlight concerns about the vaccine's potential risks and uncertainties. They express their belief that the government's actions are criminal and express a desire to hold them accountable.

The speakers argue about the approval and payment terms of the Pfizer vaccine in the US. Speaker 0 claims that the vaccine was approved months before, while Speaker 1 disagrees. Speaker 1 admits to not having read the full contract but argues that the payment made was for an advanced purchase agreement. Speaker 0 disputes this, stating that there is no advanced payment clause in the contract. Speaker 2 clarifies that the payment was made to guarantee Canadian access to doses from Medicago.

The speaker expresses frustration with people who blindly follow vaccine recommendations without questioning their safety. They claim that the Canadian government lied about the long-term effects and efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine, citing a contract that acknowledges the unknowns and potential adverse effects. The speaker shares a personal experience of someone who initially dismissed their concerns but later suffered a vaccine injury. They vow to hold the Canadian government accountable and predict a rising wave of angry parents and individuals who will resist the World Health Organization's influence in Canada. The speaker concludes by asking if the audience is also fed up with the situation.

The speaker asked if the Pfizer COVID vaccine was tested for stopping virus transmission before it was released. They wanted a clear yes or no answer and requested the data to be shared with the committee. In response, it was stated that no, they did not have knowledge about stopping transmission before the vaccine entered the market. They had to act quickly.

The speakers discuss a contract between Pfizer and Canada, highlighting that it shows the government knew the vaccine's safety and efficacy were unknown. They criticize Trudeau for distancing himself from the contract and accuse the government of lying and covering up the truth. The speakers also mention that the contract lacks accountability and mention the issue of serialization. They argue that forcing people to take the vaccine without complete clinical trials is criminal. They express their belief that the government is evil and express their mission to expose and hold them accountable. The speakers also discuss the gender issue, batch differences, and the risks and uncertainties mentioned in the contract. They conclude by mentioning the removal of anti-bribery and anti-corruption sections from the contract.

The speaker questions the safety of a vaccine that skipped animal testing, suggesting that the public is now the test subjects. They express concern over the rising death count from the vaccine and criticize businesses mandating it for employment.

The speaker raises concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine, stating that it skipped animal testing and went straight to human testing. They mention that the animal tests were stopped because the animals were dying. The speaker believes that the American people are now being used as guinea pigs for this experimental vaccine. They express worry about businesses mandating the vaccine for employment despite the rising death count, which they feel is being ignored.

The discussion centers on the credibility of vaccine safety claims made by various health organizations and the FDA. One speaker argues that vaccines undergo rigorous testing, while the other contends that no vaccine has ever completed a long-term placebo-controlled trial before being licensed. They express distrust in the FDA, citing past issues with drugs like Vioxx and opioids, suggesting that the FDA misled doctors and the public about their safety. The speaker believes that pharmaceutical companies influence these agencies, leading to misinformation about vaccine safety. The goal is to address and rectify this perceived corruption.

The speaker points out that the COVID-19 vaccine was released to the public without undergoing animal testing, which is unusual, especially for children. The animal testing was initially started but stopped due to the animals dying. This means that the American people are essentially being used as test subjects. Despite the rising death count, businesses are considering making the experimental vaccine mandatory for employees, and this issue is being ignored.

The speaker raises concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine, stating that it skipped animal testing and went straight to human testing. They claim that the animal tests were stopped because the animals were dying. The speaker suggests that the American people are now being used as guinea pigs for this experimental vaccine. They also criticize businesses that want to make the vaccine mandatory for employees, despite the rising death count associated with it.

The speaker questions the independence of regulatory agencies like the TGA, suggesting that they may be influenced by pharmaceutical companies that fund them. They criticize the quick adoption of COVID vaccines and the authorization for their use in young Australians, even before approval in the US and Europe. They argue that a Royal Commission is needed to investigate these issues and hold those responsible accountable. The speaker also mentions the Pfizer trials, claiming that there were more deaths in the vaccinated group than in the placebo group. They highlight the large amount of money spent on vaccines and the lack of transparency regarding contracts and terms. They believe that mandating vaccines violates international human rights.

The speaker expresses frustration with people who repeatedly get vaccinated based on information from the media and medical professionals. They claim to have evidence of vaccine injuries and accuse the Canadian government of lying about the safety and efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine. They mention a contract that reveals the government's acknowledgment of unknown long-term effects and adverse reactions. The speaker vows to hold the government accountable and warns that angry parents and citizens will resist the World Health Organization's influence in Canada. They conclude by asking if the audience is also fed up with the situation.

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.

The speaker criticizes the Prime Minister for not prioritizing vaccines during the crisis. They point out that while the rest of the world was being vaccinated in January and February, Canada's vaccination rates are lower. They blame the Prime Minister for allowing the spread of variants, which has led to restrictions in Canada. The speaker questions why other countries had access to vaccines earlier while Canada did not.

The government is criticized for not adequately addressing concerns about mRNA vaccine contamination with oncogenic material. Professor Angus Delwych warns that mRNA vaccines should be banned due to safety risks. The loss of trust in pharmaceutical companies is highlighted, calling for transparency and data disclosure. The importance of ethical medical science in pandemic management is emphasized. The need for societal coordination, human rights respect, and adherence to scientific principles is stressed. The speaker questions the government's handling of vaccine safety and urges for accountability in the face of potential risks.

The speaker claims that on 10/26/2020, Anita Nann of the Liberal Party signed a Pfizer Canada agreement that states in section 5.5 that the long term effects and efficacy of the vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the vaccine that are not currently known. The speaker alleges that the government knew in October 2020 that the vaccines were not safe or effective, but forced them on the population anyway. The speaker also references a June 2024 NCI cop report that allegedly identified 11 traitors in the House of Commons. The speaker asks why this information was not disclosed and questions how informed decisions can be made without knowing if one is voting for someone who committed treason. Speaker 1 encourages listeners to visit ledgerwood.ca to learn more and vote for an MP who will fight for them and tell them the truth.

The speaker expresses frustration with people who repeatedly get vaccinated based on information from the media and medical professionals. They claim to have evidence of vaccine injuries and accuse the Canadian government of lying about the safety and efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine. They mention a contract that reveals the government's acknowledgment of unknown long-term effects and adverse reactions. The speaker vows to hold the government accountable and warns that angry parents and citizens will resist the World Health Organization's influence in Canada. They conclude by asking if the audience is also fed up with the situation.

The speaker cross-examined Dr. Lourenco about the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine. They compared it to previous vaccines like pneumonia and shingles, asking if the same rigorous testing process was followed. Dr. Lourenco confirmed that animal trials and two phases of human trials were conducted for those vaccines before approval. However, she admitted that the final phase of human trials, which has been completed for all other vaccines in Canada, was not done for the COVID-19 vaccines. She tried to justify this by mentioning a new process.

In January 2022, a colleague alerted Speaker 0 that there had been a doubling or tripling of baby deaths in the last year, which sparked curiosity. Speaker 1 states that “Their own government told us a medical treatment was safe, and it killed babies.” Speaker 2 says she has “lost all faith that Health Canada is looking out genuinely for the best interests of Canadians.” Speaker 3 alleges that doctors “made extra money to push vaccines” and were given a billing code to do it, and that she has “pulled all the billing codes.” Speaker 4 asserts that “They've purchased the vaccine that hasn't been approved,” distributed it to the provinces so that once it’s approved, they can “start jabbing ourselves with it” and “start jabbing pregnant mothers with it.” Speaker 3 questions the necessity of vaccinations: “Why did we have to get these vaccinations? Like, why was this something that we had to do? You go to the hospital, you expect to have a baby, and you expect to go home, and then you don't.” Speaker 0 speculates on criminal negligence, saying, “I would suspect that there was criminal negligence on part of the government and the public health officials.” Speaker 3 notes that it is “highly recommended that pregnant women get their vaccine as soon as possible.” Speaker 0 contends that a narrative was pushed to everybody, including pregnant and breastfeeding women, that the mRNA shots were safe and effective. Speaker 2 claims wiretapping, harassment, charging, and barring expert witnesses: “They had wiretapped her phone. They had harassed her. They had charged her. They didn't allow any expert witnesses to testify.” Speaker 1 accuses police of trying to cover up Canadian babies’ deaths “to the point of stopping detective Helen Greaves from testifying about it.” Speaker 4 observes that “The dominant individuals keep the subordinates in their place by constant aggression.” Speaker 5 discusses vaccination choice versus public risk, remarking, “If you don't wanna get vaccinated, that's your choice. But don't think you can get on a plane or a train besides vaccinated people and put them at risk,” and claims CBC initially “started off with CBC running a story to implicate her and to paint her with a brush that looks uncomplimentary to the public.” Speaker 6 claims Canada must shift its understanding of what the is, describing it as “a state broadcaster pushing the agenda of the Liberal government of Canada.” Speaker 4 calls this “the most significant matter affecting our children today from a health perspective,” noting that authorities are “not investigating.” Speaker 2 concludes that everything emanates outward from this case involving law enforcement, the judicial system, the pharmaceutical industry, and health agencies, “how they work together, how they censored information. It all ties together to this one case, and that's what makes it so dangerous.”

The speaker raises concerns about the COVID response and the involvement of the Medical Countermeasures Consortium, a partnership between Australia, Canada, the UK, and the US. They question the military's role in vaccine development and the use of fraudulent information. The speaker criticizes the dismantling of the COAG system and the creation of a secretive national cabinet. They highlight the military's involvement in COVID operations in Australia, the UK, and Canada. The speaker accuses Pfizer of fraud in their clinical trials and suggests a cover-up of COVID's origins. They call for a Royal Commission to investigate these issues.

The speaker raises concerns about the contamination of current vaccines with DNA and the unknown consequences of this contamination. They argue that efforts should be made to eliminate DNA contamination, even if it means higher production costs. The speaker mentions a researcher from MIT who discovered that mRNA vaccines were contaminated with DNA, despite DNA not being listed as a component. They criticize the authorities for testing vaccines without DNA contamination on a small group of people, but then vaccinating billions of people with contaminated vaccines. The speaker highlights the potential risks of DNA contamination, including the possibility of cancer. They conclude by stating that vaccines from the second process should undergo more rigorous studies before being commercialized.

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 points out that the COVID-19 vaccine was released to the public without completing animal testing, which is unusual, especially for children. The animal testing was stopped because the animals were dying. This means that the American people are essentially being used as guinea pigs for this experimental vaccine. Despite the rising death count, businesses are considering making the vaccine mandatory for employees, which is concerning.

The speaker questions the safety and effectiveness of COVID vaccines, highlighting the lack of proper testing and potential side effects like myocarditis. They call for a thorough investigation into the misinformation surrounding vaccines and the unnecessary vaccination of children. The speaker criticizes the government's fear-mongering tactics and calls for a public inquiry.

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.