Evidence of the intent to harm - Conference The Doctors’ Revolt (Sasha Latypova), January 21, 2023

Video Transcript:

Thank you very much and thank you for all of you attending. I'd like to say is an introduction. I'm a private citizen. I left the industry. I wasn't working in it. I didn't want to. And I became very concerned and I started my own investigation because I recognized my own government was lying to me and the health officials who I previously trusted and respected were telling our tried lies and so I wanted to find out for myself. I started my initial investigation was into as Johnson and we actually exchanged emails with Jonathan for a while on this topic. It was into the good manufacturing practice compliance in relation to these products. For you to understand what good manufacturing practice means in practice, it applies to drugs and it applies to food and other mass-produced products that are consumed. And for example, if you buy in your favorite beer today and then you go to buy it again a week from now or months from now, your experience is the same. It shouldn't be a thousand times different experience. The same goes for medicines like aspirin that you buy in a pharmacy and again you don't expect it to be a thousand times different a week from now versus today. That's why everywhere in developed world, most of the world we have what's called good manufacturing practices. And as a highly regulated industry pharmaceutical manufacturers, as opposed to comply with them, and this means that the product that they claim that they make, it would the ingredients that they claim that they make, is supposed to be in every vial, every shot, every pill, over and over and over again, and they should be almost identical to each other. So that was my first investigation. And what I first found, and this was my first few months of investigation, was evidence of very bad manufacturing practices indeed, with relation to these mRNA injections. And to set myself a baseline of what a vaccine product, similar product, should look like. I looked first at the VAERS, which is a vaccine adverse event reporting system of CDC. And I looked at historical flu vaccines. This is data for 30 years that exists in the database. There are dozens of manufacturers, manufacturing hundreds, thousands and thousands of lots of this product in the US, about 50% of the population gets the flu shot. And by the way, here, I'm not endorsing flu vaccines or any vaccines anymore, because until this investigation is investigated fully, nobody should be taking anything. That's my professional opinion. But just to give you an idea of what he's doing, historically typical vaccine would look like. And this is, as I said, data for 30 years, dozens of manufacturers. As you can see, it doesn't vary a lot. All the adverse events on the vertical axis, these are serious adverse events and deaths reported per each lot, which is just arranged on the horizontal axis. You can see that they vary very little. Somewhere under 10 reports, there are very, very few deaths here. And the maximum we ever found was 37 per lot, and those were just two outliers in the whole historic period. So when I looked at the same exact graph for mRNA injections for the US, I found this. And here, the whole flu dataset sits below that red line. And even visually, you can see that there are three different manufacturers here. You shouldn't be able to see that. They're claiming it's the same product. And so we see Janssen, Moderna, and Pfizer. As you can see, there were lots that had almost no adverse events reported. And again, only looking at serious adverse events and deaths. There were almost no adverse events reported in some lots and some lots had thousands. And they had hundreds of deaths. And so this is not good manufacturing practice compliant product at all, like I don't not even close. And then we later found out the sizes of the loads adjusted by the size of the load, by the number of the doses, the story doesn't change. The picture doesn't change. There still have variation, a thousand times load to load. And here's another view, similar, but here I'm just looking at Moderna. And the horizontal axis is all the loads with date of manufacture, by date of manufacture, and then on the vertical axis and blue, it's serious adverse events and orange it's deaths. So what's very, again, bizarre, well manufactured products should not look like this at all. Another point I want to make is these products were rolled out, mass rolled out in the US, starting some where late December early January 2021. On January 18th, Orange County, California, Health Department flagged this particular lot of Moderna for what they called excessive number of allergic reactions. Nothing was done about it. The injections were not stopped. In fact, this lot was being sold all over the United States until it ran out in late March. And as you know, there's salmonella in salad. They will recall the entire product from all the shelves in the country, right? That's what you should do. As a manufacturer, all manufacturers have systems to detect this. And majority of recalls of products are voluntary because they don't want this to happen. Yet here, nobody stopped. Not the manufacturer, not the health authorities of Orange County, not the CDC FDA, whoever was supposed to monitor this. It's continued selling this lot. It's now associated with over 65 deaths in the US and over 3,000 serious adverse events. So after something like this happens, everything that follows is intentional. And I would like to, you know, everybody at this point, people were asking why are the regulators not acting? So they see all this data. I'm not the only one. I've collaborated with a number of people who brought the same great analysis. Jessica Rose brought numerous analysis on various data. There are hundreds of researchers literally looking at that data set and screaming at CDC. Why don't you do anything about it? Yet they look back at us and they say, we looked at it and say if an effective go get vaccinated. That's the answer everyone receives. So why? Why were they all behaving this way? And why authorities in Europe behaving exactly the same way? South Africa exactly the same way. Australia exactly the same way. Why they were following the same script. What I found ultimately, I met this wonderful legal researcher, Catherine Watchy, writes amazing, it's called Bailey Wick News. And her legal research really filled that question in that puzzle. And so what we now jointly collaborate on is revealing the structure, the pseudo legal structure, it's not lawful. They made it legal on paper only of this criminal cartel of government, pharma, military, criminal cartel and it actually is operating all over the world. So the first, I'm now kind of talking about the US based structure but it does extend all over the world. So in the US they used emergency use as a realization, they kind of perverted that law that was put in place in 97. It was at the time very narrowly defined for only conditions that didn't have alternative treatment and only very severe ones. So but they started using it very broadly and as far as I know now almost hundreds of products have been emergency use authorized without any evidence of emergency. They just go ahead and roll over everyone and just saying, oh no, this is emergency, we can also rise it and no safety or efficacy testing applies. In addition to that and this is what is less understood by everyone is that the Department of Defense in the US ordered all these COVID products which includes vaccines but also includes therapeutics, monoclonal antibiotics, diagnostics, even masks and staffing. And so there is the whole huge spending ordering these so-called COVID countermeasures under this contracting framework. It's called other transaction authority and it was put in place in the 60s only for NASA and now 11 federal agencies use it. Department of Defense is a particular huge user of this contracting method because it allows them to contract without following any federal procurement rules and regulations with a lot of secrecy and they can specifically order products from otherwise regulated industry such as Pharma without following any regulations and also without even disclosing IP and things like that. So it's a lot of secrecy. They typically use this framework to order weapons from defense contractors but now they're using the same framework to order what they tell us is a pharmaceutical product. And finally all this, the structure clicks into place when HHS Secretary or the Department of Health and Human Services in the US declares a pandemic or a public health emergency and of course they declared that immediately after the WHO declared it based on 40 cases in 8 billion people in the world. So they just decided it's time to declare a pandemic and in the US they declared public health emergency. So when all of this comes and played together what happens is there is this interesting law in the US, this particular US code is cited here which says that the use of emergency use also raised countermeasures is not a clinical investigation under public health emergency. That explains why they need to extend the public health emergency in perpetuity because that allows them to implement this crime. And the significance of this is that if countermeasure cannot be a clinical investigational product then no pharmaceutical regulation applies to these products. So here's the lie that our government told to us and told to the world and the governments over the world repeated to their citizens. They were claiming that it's a health event. They were claiming that they're producing pharmaceutical products to the good manufacturing standards. When they perfectly well knew, I'm sure you, they were all aware of this. They perfectly well knew that no pharmaceutical regulations apply to these things, countermeasures. So this word countermeasure is a very interesting word. It has, it's a very fluffy definition, there's no real definition. If I, somebody attacks me, pick up a rock and throw at them, that's a countermeasure. So anything can be a countermeasure. They're just, it's just a category of things. And so, but once they designate the message, they're no longer pharmaceuticals. They're just lying to you that these are pharmaceuticals, they're actually not. Now in the US also, the government lied to us about this being a health event to begin with. When they told us it's a global pandemic, it's a virus, it's a virus from a wet market. In reality, what they did, they organized the response to it as if it was war. So in the US National Security Council was put in charge of COVID pandemic response. National Security Council is advisory body to the US president and it's, it's consists of defense heads and intelligence heads, mostly no healthcare representatives on it. Yet for some unknown reason, it became in charge of a so-called health event. And it was even more important. And I'm using their own slides. These are not my slides. These are from the US government, Department of Defense, Barda and Operation Warp Speed. So here's the slide from Operation Warp Speed presentation where they discuss an organizational structure of this effort. And it's interesting, it's an org chart and it's turned on the side. So as you can see, the who is in charge of this operation? The chief operating officer is the Department of Defense. We were told, oh, they're just, you know, doing logistics. No, no, they're not just doing logistics. They're running the whole thing. And the HHS here is Chief Science Advisor. And now you can see also the whole structure on the top layer here. It's executive structure. It's all US government, National Security Council, Department of Defense, Barda. And they're doing everything. They're doing all these functions that normally from the pharmaceutical companies are very sensitive about. They normally need to design their clinical trials themselves, safety monitoring themselves. But here it's government is doing it for them. They're designing clinical trials. They're, in fact, even hiring the contractors, like a clinical contractor search organizations to run them. They have legislative affairs so they're interacting with Congress on their behalf. And they have Office of General Counsel, which is the Department of Justice defending them. In fact, when, you know, there was this famous case where Pfizer or it was said that Pfizer or FDA didn't want to release clinical trial date of 75 years, well, who was arguing in court on behalf of Pfizer? Pfizer lawyers were not even in the room. It was the Department of Justice. So why is US government defending presumably a private commercial interest of a pharmaceutical company? So here you can see that the pharmaceutical companies are a third level down. They're not in charge, but they're getting tremendous amounts of money to shut up and follow the orders and do as they're told. But the whole operation is run by the Department of Defense and the US government. I'm not absolving farmers, by the way of any responsibility. They're criminals in this cartel and they're collaborating and they're co-conspirators and should be persecuted together. But as Dr. Malone actually mentioned, and I completely agree, here we have an implemented model of fascism. This is how it's done. Government merges with private corporations. You can't even say who's wagging the dog, but they're merged and then they align and then they extend this liability to the private commercial entities from which they then extract commercial interest or whatever interest they want to extract. So my question is, who's really manufacturing these injections? Well, again, in the same presentation operation or speed and further, we're bragging about their vaccine manufacturing portfolio. And you can see that on the right hand side, they call it vaccine supporting efforts. These are all established defense contractors. The contracts for these were released through FOIA and they go back to at least 2012, maybe earlier. And all of these are established defense contractors who already had established vaccine manufacturing based. And at that time, it was called PAN influenza in early 2020, they simply switched to COVID. On the left hand side, they call these vaccines. But read the words carefully. They're telling you the truth. On this side, it's called demo. All of them say demo. That's what the government ordered, a demonstration which is fake by definition. On the right hand side is the manufacturing. These are the companies who are really making these products. On the right hand side, from about a year ago, also from Barda, from their public event. And here they're bragging about how much money they spend very quickly. So, you know, US government prints the money, throws it from the helicopter. Here we have half a billion for one company, two billion for another company, a billion here, two billion there. You know, they spent four or five trillion dollars on this. And on the right hand side, you can see what they put for these billions. Again, a whole bunch of demonstrations. These are not, they're very carefully, these words are very carefully designed. They have legal meaning. And that's what they exactly what they bought. They bought demonstrations. They spent 47 billion. And again, Barda is bragging about their achievements. 33 billion went to vaccines. This is just for the R&D for these contracts. And you know, as you can see, they funneled a huge amount of money through this. These are all the contracts. They're publicly available. There's a link here. This is just a screenshot. There are about 400 contracts there. As you can see, all of them say, DOD. Department of Defense contracted these companies. That's how the money was spent. Robert Cutler, himself, allocated it to his friends to make sure. And it's managed through a manager, Advanced Technologies International, which is the first line here. Here's Advanced Technologies International. It seems very healthcare related to me. And they're, they're, they're, they're, uh, longstanding DOD manager of contracts. And they manage it again through OTA. I circled it up there. So, uh, other transaction authority. The contracts themselves are going to go through detail, but they're extremely, um, you know, micromanaging in terms of operations. How things are going to be done. They exempt everyone who participates in this regardless of where they're working. Uh, as long as they're following the orders, they're exempt from liability under prep act clause. Uh, that same prep act clause states that, um, this is dual use, uh, civil and military application product. Now for the international, um, that's how they exempt themselves internationally. It's Pfizer, forced, um, the countries or, or, well, negotiated with Ursula, uh, specifically by text to, uh, to sign these predatory contract clauses, uh, where the, the, the local governments have to lift a good manufacturing practice requirements or any drug importation requirements and look the other way. And, uh, in fact, if you citizens get injured and then you sue your, you sue Pfizer in Sweden, then Swedish government has to demnify them and put state assets such as military basis, embassies and other state assets as a collateral. So somebody asked me, why would the private, former manufacturer want a military base overseas? And they said, well, that's because it's the US government who wants that base, not the private commercial manufacturer. Um, and, uh, they also remove essentially national sovereignty by prohibiting the country from changing their own national laws with regard to the formal liability. Um, they also, while they're saying that, you know, if the product is non-conforming, that's basis for, uh, you know, the solution of this contract, they also prohibit testing of product and importation. So to date, nobody still knows what's in those vials. Like, they didn't know at the time of, of their approval. They still don't know. We still have that variability between the batches. We still know that there are clustering of deaths and some, uh, geographies and, um, some others are, uh, totally, totally seem to be fine. So, uh, we still do not know what's happening with the product itself. And here's just, uh, to show you a couple of these contracts. Um, a Pfizer, uh, I just want to emphasize the scale, the scope of the, of the, of the proposal for this, uh, contract is large scale vaccine manufacturing demonstration. The, uh, specific, uh, specific clause here about the scope of the project specifically says that preclinical, clinical trials, chemistry, manufacturing controls, which is all of those compliance issues and regulatory compliance are out of scope of this product. The government never bought it. The government never ordered it, never gave them money for it. And there is no way to enforce it because they also absolved them from all the abilities through the, uh, prep clause. Uh, a moderner contract is just showing you that, uh, sorry, it's a small language, but, um, the, the, the, it's, it gives them prep act, uh, close liability protection. And, uh, this is both civil and military application. And, um, so what, what really happened here is that vaccine development and approval, why, what, what, what are they doing when doing this? What, what they, they doing, they were play acting. They never had to follow those regulations by, by law that they wrote themselves. It's in illegal law. It's, it's not lawful. It's not constitutional, but they made it legal on paper that they don't have to do them. Yet they went and had, uh, hadn't did them in collaboration with FDA and CDC and all other agencies. And that was just to convince you the public that it really is a pharmaceutical product where it actually is not. Um, the clinical trials were never ordered. Um, the, the good, manufacturing practice compliance was never ordered. And, you know, legally speaking, there were never even clinical trial subjects or investigators because if you cannot have an investigational, uh, product, then there is no investigation. So FDA leadership and then global regulatory leadership, what they did, they impersonated the regulators so that you fall for this lie and go get injected. Um, and, uh, finally, Pfizer already invoked this in their, as a legal defense. Um, there, you know, if you maybe heard about Brook Jackson's case in the US, she's suing Pfizer and their false claims act that they defrauded the government. Well, Pfizer already filed motion to dismiss. The case hasn't been dismissed yet. Uh, but Pfizer already in court stated that, please dismiss this case judge. We did not defraud the government. We delivered the fraud that the government ordered. You