The source document sent to me appears to be from those released under @AaronSiriSG@IamBrookJackson legal actions to investigate fraud in the Pfizer vaccine study that the FDA said they needed 75 years to release the documents.
Yet they assessed the 450,000 pages in 24 hours?
I'll say that again.
There were 11 MILLION total documents (44,000 patients, minimum 250 pages per patient plus 350,000 assessment and summary documents).
The FDA was given the glossy summary on the 10th December.
The vaccine was "approved" on the 11th December.
The committee meeting is still online - 8 hours long.
The whole day was used for the meeting.
The drug was approved the next day.
Give me a break.
These images should have been enough to prompt an investigation but nobody cared.
The deal was already done.
The VRBPAC committee meeting was Kabuki theatre.
Just a reminder as to what this is about - this is what a normal (and technically relatively clean) Western blot might look like - from the EMA official analysis. Note that this image has severe dithering artefact close-up. None of that malarkey for our pfraud-convicted pfriends!
And more examples of real Westerns in the thread here
So we now have evidence of:
▶️Extra mRNA in the product that has never been analysed by sequencing.
▶️Fabricated protein analysis
▶️Rubber stamp approval with NO ASSESSMENT
The TGA & MHRA copied the FDA and did not perform any independent assessment.
You were lied to about the Merck measles vaccine develop in the 60s. When injected into babies it caused fevers, rashes, diarrhoea and febrile convulsions.
Why?
I'm going to show you.
@SecKennedy @RetsefL @MaryanneDemasi @DrJulieSladden @RWMaloneMD
Merck claimed that the "measles vaccine" was an "attenuated version of measles" giving the impression that it was a virus that was made safe.
That was a lie.
It was just measles, passaged in cells in a lab.
We injected our babies with actual measles.
How do I know?
Recently released Australian Road Deaths data confirm that the @epiphare study claiming that COVID vaccination reduced road deaths by 32% was, as suspected, a complete fake.
Here are the actual road deaths data plotted from the Australian BITRE data repository using a trendline for 2000-2019 (excluding 2020 as it was a quiet year)
The pink area shows the inflection and increase in road deaths over the predicted number.
Note that road deaths have a downward trend despite an increase in population (due to safety measures and slowing of traffic).
So the question becomes...
"what is the probability that - if the @epiphare study was real (showing a 32% reduction in road deaths after vaccination) - the Australian road deaths (where nearly 100% of the adult population was vaccinated) would increase by 36%"?
Debbie's tweet was about her case against @HHSGov when her son developed Type 1 Diabetes after a routine vaccine, when he had a negative glucose test prior.
So it was clearly vaccine linked, but her case was denied.
Not only was the case denied (despite clear evidence of a new diagnosis immediately after vaccination) but the case was used by the "judge" to essentially ban ANY further cases that alleged a link between new diabetes and a routine vaccine.
Here is the clip from the (decent) interview with Pelle Neroth Taylor of @RealTNTRadio.
In it Boyle is asked whether the mRNA vaccines are themselves biological weapons and he explains that because "in your system, it generates the COVID-19 cells" they would be.
But of course that's incorrect, because mRNA vaccines don't recreate the COVID virus (the biological weapon - assuming as we now know that it was synthetic not natural).
So his explanation was incorrect because he misunderstood that the mRNA only provides the spike protein and he would have been destroyed on this point in court.
Of course he never got to court. And never gave an affidavit for the Dutch court - confirmed here (8/3/25):
I'll say it again. The vaccine industry [KNOWINGLY] hijacked cell pathways that cause cancer in order to induce antibody responses so that they can claim that their product "worked" by demonstrating those antibodies - even if they offered zero protection.
To explain, when you induce an immune response you have an immune debt to pay. You can't just keep creating an immune response - or, as in the case of cancer, you will die.
A vaccine creates an artificial immune response...
Which might be fine if it was done every now and again. But what they didn't tell you was that the human body will not respond to an injected antigen alone. It will ignore it (thankfully) and the generic immune system will mop it up, no antibodies required.