The DS asks if people had known that there was a clause in the contract stating that the efficacy and long term safety of the vaccine were still not known, would they have rushed to get jabbed? I think the answer is yes, they would have. Because it was common knowledge in Dec 2020 that the newly developed novel gene-based 'vaccine' could not possibly have been tested for long term safety; it was rushed to market in the space of less than 12 months and efficacy and safety trials were conducted over just a few short months. The mass vaccination campaign WAS the long term safety and efficacy trial. But people still queued up to get jabbed and proudly posted selfies of themselves 'doing the right thing'. By Sept 2021, it was pretty obvious, if not exactly widely publicly known, that the 'vaccine' was useless at preventing transmission, even that it probably enhanced your susceptibility to infection. Anyone could have discovered this information within minutes, but people still queued to get their boosters and eagerly encouraged their kids to get jabbed prior to going back to school or college.
The violation of medical ethics here is too outrageous for words. To administer a vaccine where we can't vouch for it's safety and efficacy is bad enough, but to mandate that people receive such a vaccine just to be able to go about their normal daily activities is beyond the pale.
Before weed was legal, I knew a grower. He said the best way to hide his covert activities was to do them as obviously and publicly as possible, without a shred of hiding anything. Worked for him too, except when the deer ate his plants which happened often. Make the illegal look like 'normal' business, and most folks don't bat an eye.
Where are the Numbers is a latterday and very welcome and meticulously researched, Book of Revelations: the egregious abandonment of hitherto standard safety procedures, public health norms and basic freedoms, along with graft, propaganda and nudging must be the scandal to end all scandals, yet still the omerta prevails.
Yet the latest jabberwocky is coming to a place nearby any day now:
"the long term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known"
Which is why I refused to take it. Much to the surprise of absolutely everyone else who seriously believed their governments would not tell them to take a jab of an unknown substance if the long term effects and efficacy of the substance weren't known. Many/most of those people still believe this to be true. Even if they were to see the documents from Slovenia they would still remain convinced of the goodness of their government.
Public Citizen has identified several unredacted Pfizer contracts that describe the outcome of negotiations. The contracts offer a rare glimpse into the power one pharmaceutical corporation has gained to silence governments, throttle supply, shift risk and maximize profits in the worst public health crisis in a century.
We describe six examples from around the world below:
Aug 31, 2023·edited Aug 31, 2023Liked by Norman Fenton
Robert Kogon published it long ago. He had been asking Terhes the rumanian moEUP about this...this group is pretending an opposition and achieved nothing. Why didn't they ask Sahin as CEO of BioNTech. No they went there and had some champagne....
"COMIRNATY has been shown to prevent COVID-19 however it is not yet known whether it prevents transmission or asymptomatic disease."
So the fourth paragraph in the original TGA media release dated 25 January 2021 reads:
“Provisional approval of this vaccine is valid for two years and means it can now be legally supplied in Australia. The approval is subject to certain strict conditions, such as the requirement for Pfizer to continue providing information to the TGA on longer term efficacy and safety from ongoing clinical trials and post-market assessment. COMIRNATY has been shown to prevent COVID-19 however it is not yet known whether it prevents transmission or asymptomatic disease.”
But the fourth paragraph in the currently showing TGA media release dated 27 August 2021 now reads, ie minus the last sentence of the original release:
“Provisional approval of this vaccine is valid for two years and means it can now be legally supplied in Australia. The approval is subject to certain strict conditions, such as the requirement for Pfizer to continue providing information to the TGA on longer term efficacy and safety from ongoing clinical trials and post-market assessment.”
First of all they use a novel technology (mRNA and lipid nano particles). This approach could have just about been justified for people at extreme risk, but not for anyone else.
But the story does not finish here.
This technology is continued despite increasing concerns about its efficacy and safety.
There is no consistent monitoring of the side-effects across the globe as you would expect for a new technology.
Moderna has given 400 million USD to the NIH and is opening plants in the U.K.
Pfizer must think regular updates to safety only need to be given every 75 years...what a joke... an inept company run for profit without one ounce of regard for any safety.
I must profess I was completely unaware that a fully unredacted version of the Pfizer contract of the EU even existed (would love to get my hands on a copy for analysis). The Daily Sceptic's surprise at the lack of knowledge stems from the fact there's been a total lack of *coverage* (sometimes, repeating stories numerous times until they 'settle in', is necessary).
It isn't simply a case of writing one article and then considering the topic 'done', that's only half of the journalism fight. One must proactively raise awareness of a topic as well. Which does mean repeating things ad nauseam. The easiest way to do this is to just make throwback references to prior writings in future articles ('remember the time we found...' or 'previously we had reported on this...'); so as new readers join the fray, they can follow the connections back.
Do you have a copy of the contract hosted somewhere as a downloadable? I'd like very much to read it for a technical and legal analysis.
Yup, reading these contracts, including those published by Ehden on his Telegram channel, first alerted me to the scale of the impending disaster. It beggars belief that Governments are still trying to cover up this tragedy.
The DS asks if people had known that there was a clause in the contract stating that the efficacy and long term safety of the vaccine were still not known, would they have rushed to get jabbed? I think the answer is yes, they would have. Because it was common knowledge in Dec 2020 that the newly developed novel gene-based 'vaccine' could not possibly have been tested for long term safety; it was rushed to market in the space of less than 12 months and efficacy and safety trials were conducted over just a few short months. The mass vaccination campaign WAS the long term safety and efficacy trial. But people still queued up to get jabbed and proudly posted selfies of themselves 'doing the right thing'. By Sept 2021, it was pretty obvious, if not exactly widely publicly known, that the 'vaccine' was useless at preventing transmission, even that it probably enhanced your susceptibility to infection. Anyone could have discovered this information within minutes, but people still queued to get their boosters and eagerly encouraged their kids to get jabbed prior to going back to school or college.
The violation of medical ethics here is too outrageous for words. To administer a vaccine where we can't vouch for it's safety and efficacy is bad enough, but to mandate that people receive such a vaccine just to be able to go about their normal daily activities is beyond the pale.
Before weed was legal, I knew a grower. He said the best way to hide his covert activities was to do them as obviously and publicly as possible, without a shred of hiding anything. Worked for him too, except when the deer ate his plants which happened often. Make the illegal look like 'normal' business, and most folks don't bat an eye.
Where are the Numbers is a latterday and very welcome and meticulously researched, Book of Revelations: the egregious abandonment of hitherto standard safety procedures, public health norms and basic freedoms, along with graft, propaganda and nudging must be the scandal to end all scandals, yet still the omerta prevails.
Yet the latest jabberwocky is coming to a place nearby any day now:
https://www.itv.com/news/2023-08-30/flu-jab-and-covid-booster-programme-brought-forward-in-england
In case the scare-ometer has fallen out of the Red Zone, here is another attempt to induce crippling anxiety and compliance:
https://www.itv.com/news/2023-08-07/what-is-disease-x-the-deadly-virus-scientists-are-racing-to-protect-us-from
"the long term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known"
Which is why I refused to take it. Much to the surprise of absolutely everyone else who seriously believed their governments would not tell them to take a jab of an unknown substance if the long term effects and efficacy of the substance weren't known. Many/most of those people still believe this to be true. Even if they were to see the documents from Slovenia they would still remain convinced of the goodness of their government.
Public Citizen has identified several unredacted Pfizer contracts that describe the outcome of negotiations. The contracts offer a rare glimpse into the power one pharmaceutical corporation has gained to silence governments, throttle supply, shift risk and maximize profits in the worst public health crisis in a century.
We describe six examples from around the world below:
https://www.citizen.org/article/pfizers-power/
Robert Kogon published it long ago. He had been asking Terhes the rumanian moEUP about this...this group is pretending an opposition and achieved nothing. Why didn't they ask Sahin as CEO of BioNTech. No they went there and had some champagne....
Pleasure Sir. Thanks for your amazing work and taking time read my very small "contribution".
In Australia, a sentence has gone missing from the currently showing TGA media release dated 27 August 2021 for the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine: https://www.tga.gov.au/news/media-releases/tga-provisionally-approves-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine which is different to the original TGA media release dated 25 January 2021 (I have a copy of this original media release):
The missing sentence is:
"COMIRNATY has been shown to prevent COVID-19 however it is not yet known whether it prevents transmission or asymptomatic disease."
So the fourth paragraph in the original TGA media release dated 25 January 2021 reads:
“Provisional approval of this vaccine is valid for two years and means it can now be legally supplied in Australia. The approval is subject to certain strict conditions, such as the requirement for Pfizer to continue providing information to the TGA on longer term efficacy and safety from ongoing clinical trials and post-market assessment. COMIRNATY has been shown to prevent COVID-19 however it is not yet known whether it prevents transmission or asymptomatic disease.”
But the fourth paragraph in the currently showing TGA media release dated 27 August 2021 now reads, ie minus the last sentence of the original release:
“Provisional approval of this vaccine is valid for two years and means it can now be legally supplied in Australia. The approval is subject to certain strict conditions, such as the requirement for Pfizer to continue providing information to the TGA on longer term efficacy and safety from ongoing clinical trials and post-market assessment.”
What do you think about that?
I am absolutely flabbergasted by this whole saga.
First of all they use a novel technology (mRNA and lipid nano particles). This approach could have just about been justified for people at extreme risk, but not for anyone else.
But the story does not finish here.
This technology is continued despite increasing concerns about its efficacy and safety.
There is no consistent monitoring of the side-effects across the globe as you would expect for a new technology.
Moderna has given 400 million USD to the NIH and is opening plants in the U.K.
What is going on?
Why is this technology still continued?
So many heads need to roll.
Pfizer must think regular updates to safety only need to be given every 75 years...what a joke... an inept company run for profit without one ounce of regard for any safety.
I remember!!!
I must profess I was completely unaware that a fully unredacted version of the Pfizer contract of the EU even existed (would love to get my hands on a copy for analysis). The Daily Sceptic's surprise at the lack of knowledge stems from the fact there's been a total lack of *coverage* (sometimes, repeating stories numerous times until they 'settle in', is necessary).
I say this as someone who has read the redacted Brazilian contract (see: https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2021-02-23/held-to-ransom-pfizer-demands-governments-gamble-with-state-assets-to-secure-vaccine-deal), the shocking ramifications of which are seemingly worse than the EU's contract (shortstop: Pfizer attempt to seize sovereign physical assets as 'payment' like a mob), and who raised huge awareness of the EMA leaks.
It isn't simply a case of writing one article and then considering the topic 'done', that's only half of the journalism fight. One must proactively raise awareness of a topic as well. Which does mean repeating things ad nauseam. The easiest way to do this is to just make throwback references to prior writings in future articles ('remember the time we found...' or 'previously we had reported on this...'); so as new readers join the fray, they can follow the connections back.
Do you have a copy of the contract hosted somewhere as a downloadable? I'd like very much to read it for a technical and legal analysis.
"Safe and Effective"
Yup, reading these contracts, including those published by Ehden on his Telegram channel, first alerted me to the scale of the impending disaster. It beggars belief that Governments are still trying to cover up this tragedy.