With the 1200+ deaths and way more recorded severe side effects in what was already a mismanaged and biased trial, the only possible excuses for releasing the drug after trial are malice and greed.
And, yes, every single government official and pHarmaCo exec who had early access to the trial results (before the judge forced the slow release of Pfizer data) yet pushed the inoculations du jour out onto the public anyway, should be tried and made very gory public examples.
"They" should be hung. THEY....... need to be named. THEIR names widely circulated. And the malice with which the extermination of babies was encouraged need to called out for what it is--murder in the first degree, with malice. Personally, in the vitriol of the moment, their needs to be blood bath.
Brook Jackson's whistleblower lawsuit specifically targets Pfizer for fraud.
Their response in the case does not deny fraud. It instead says the feds knew about the fraud, and is complicit because the government hasn't prosecuted.
They also list legislation (for the DoD tied to HHS) that allows the use of the general public for medical experimentation without informed consent.
Unless the government is kicked right in their racketeering gonads, and hard, lawsuits aren't going to be much help due to the legislation allowing the public to be treated as guinea pigs.
That's the saddest thing. Pfizer says well the government knew we were a fraud. Health authorities say the studies from Pfizer say whatever. Nobody knows anything. Nobody takes the fall. Just a cycle of Hell
Thank you for that. Naomi Wolf's stuff tends to be trustworthy but it is obvious that when you are sifting through piles of data and spreadsheets that is intentionally opaque and unreadable that it is easy to make mistakes. It should be a simple thing in a transparent world to find pregnant women who were jabbed and to follow the women throughout the pregnancy and after the baby is born to track any long term health outcomes, compared to control group of unjabbed also pregnant women. The fact that this wasn't done speaks volumes and a lot of people are trying to nail down that number. Actually the number I've seen variously reported as 273 (by the Naked Emperor in this post) to 270. I don't exactly know what to correct in my writing yet. I try to wrap my head around the big picture but it would be great if we all knew what dataset is being used in various sometimes conflicting pieces of writing and how they came to their conclusions.
I get it all jumbled reading 10 substacks and Children’s Health Defense, etc every day, too.
At the end of the day, Pfizer had one job. That was to keep track of their trial folks, particularly the pregnant and children, and report back what they observed in order to end the vax program for any harmed cohort. That’s not hard. There were fewer than 300 pregnant women for heaven’s sake. Just based on the fact that they “couldn’t” or wouldn’t keep up with fewer than 300 pregnant test subjects, I say yeah, they need an overhaul and in no way shape nor form should it involve MORE $$. We typically hand over MORE $$ to successful entities.
As devastating as this is, we’re what, only halfway through the data dumps they wanted to stretch out over 75 years? Think the worst things would be included in the first or last dump?
Told a jab pro old friend that we needed to see how this round of babies turned out. He chuckled, said his friend, an EMT, said everything was safe. He effing chuckled at me. Now that he himself is having jab reactions, I am having a bit of trouble being super duper sympathetic for his pain. Arrogance, the price, your life.
Joe and Aimee, A couple of things you probably already know, but Pfizer, Moderna, and all of pharma, does their utmost to present their data in a format that is consumer un- friendly. I wouldn't be a bit surprised, if Pfizer has department that takes the data, disassembles it, then reassembles to make it a headache to interpret. I think is was Jessica Rose, who drew attention to this feature some time back.
The Pfizer mission statement is, "How to Commit Fraud and Get Away With It." You need a good data disassembler.
It’s maddening that we have to be so careful, but they absolutely don’t. The whole situation is a big fraudulent mess, but this type of mistake really does damage, unfortunately. Alex Berenson is gloating like a pig today.
They aren’t following outcomes, and now they don’t even have to do clinical trials. Insanity.
Indeed. If they knew this beforehand and still pushed these shots it indicates malice at scale though
With the 1200+ deaths and way more recorded severe side effects in what was already a mismanaged and biased trial, the only possible excuses for releasing the drug after trial are malice and greed.
Greed is one thing Malice is another. They should be hanged
I think it's a combination of both.
And, yes, every single government official and pHarmaCo exec who had early access to the trial results (before the judge forced the slow release of Pfizer data) yet pushed the inoculations du jour out onto the public anyway, should be tried and made very gory public examples.
"They" should be hung. THEY....... need to be named. THEIR names widely circulated. And the malice with which the extermination of babies was encouraged need to called out for what it is--murder in the first degree, with malice. Personally, in the vitriol of the moment, their needs to be blood bath.
Where are the lawsuits? Seriously, this is fraud. Informed consent was never possible.
Brook Jackson's whistleblower lawsuit specifically targets Pfizer for fraud.
Their response in the case does not deny fraud. It instead says the feds knew about the fraud, and is complicit because the government hasn't prosecuted.
They also list legislation (for the DoD tied to HHS) that allows the use of the general public for medical experimentation without informed consent.
Unless the government is kicked right in their racketeering gonads, and hard, lawsuits aren't going to be much help due to the legislation allowing the public to be treated as guinea pigs.
That's the saddest thing. Pfizer says well the government knew we were a fraud. Health authorities say the studies from Pfizer say whatever. Nobody knows anything. Nobody takes the fall. Just a cycle of Hell
Thanks for that explanation! It makes horrifying sense. I can’t believe this is my country. 😢
Might want to take a second look at that number.
https://nakedemperor.substack.com/p/fact-checking-the-claim-that-44-of?utm_source=%2Fprofile%2F45856071-ne-nakedemperorsubstackcom&utm_medium=reader2
Thank you for that. Naomi Wolf's stuff tends to be trustworthy but it is obvious that when you are sifting through piles of data and spreadsheets that is intentionally opaque and unreadable that it is easy to make mistakes. It should be a simple thing in a transparent world to find pregnant women who were jabbed and to follow the women throughout the pregnancy and after the baby is born to track any long term health outcomes, compared to control group of unjabbed also pregnant women. The fact that this wasn't done speaks volumes and a lot of people are trying to nail down that number. Actually the number I've seen variously reported as 273 (by the Naked Emperor in this post) to 270. I don't exactly know what to correct in my writing yet. I try to wrap my head around the big picture but it would be great if we all knew what dataset is being used in various sometimes conflicting pieces of writing and how they came to their conclusions.
I get it all jumbled reading 10 substacks and Children’s Health Defense, etc every day, too.
At the end of the day, Pfizer had one job. That was to keep track of their trial folks, particularly the pregnant and children, and report back what they observed in order to end the vax program for any harmed cohort. That’s not hard. There were fewer than 300 pregnant women for heaven’s sake. Just based on the fact that they “couldn’t” or wouldn’t keep up with fewer than 300 pregnant test subjects, I say yeah, they need an overhaul and in no way shape nor form should it involve MORE $$. We typically hand over MORE $$ to successful entities.
As devastating as this is, we’re what, only halfway through the data dumps they wanted to stretch out over 75 years? Think the worst things would be included in the first or last dump?
Told a jab pro old friend that we needed to see how this round of babies turned out. He chuckled, said his friend, an EMT, said everything was safe. He effing chuckled at me. Now that he himself is having jab reactions, I am having a bit of trouble being super duper sympathetic for his pain. Arrogance, the price, your life.
Jacquelyn, I guess that expression, "hows that jab working out for you" applies.
Just a head’s up … this 44% figure is incorrect per Naomi Wolf.
https://gettr.com/post/p1n6lmiaca4
Joe and Aimee, A couple of things you probably already know, but Pfizer, Moderna, and all of pharma, does their utmost to present their data in a format that is consumer un- friendly. I wouldn't be a bit surprised, if Pfizer has department that takes the data, disassembles it, then reassembles to make it a headache to interpret. I think is was Jessica Rose, who drew attention to this feature some time back.
The Pfizer mission statement is, "How to Commit Fraud and Get Away With It." You need a good data disassembler.
It’s maddening that we have to be so careful, but they absolutely don’t. The whole situation is a big fraudulent mess, but this type of mistake really does damage, unfortunately. Alex Berenson is gloating like a pig today.
Meant to say consumer "un" friendly.