Sunday, November 21, 2021


 There seems to be no end to the incredible audacity being displayed by the COVID vaccine pushers, as they continue to trample down even the most basic calls for decency and transparency.  Two weeks ago, we referred to the drama involved in the eventual release of the Contract document between the EU and Vaccine manufacturers for parliamentary and public scrutiny.  After a prolonged and persistent struggle by some radical members of the European Parliament, the pharmaceutical companies agreed that the document could be released in a “redacted” form. And that turns out to mean, simply blotting out entire pages on and on! See here again for that unbelievable video clip.

An equally incredible version of the same tale is currently playing out in the US.  While on Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) status, a developer of a medical product is not obligated to reveal the actual contents of the product. And you bet, none of the developers of the COVID jabs provided such a detail.  However the law requires that all relevant information must be provided before full licensure.  With full approval now given to the Pfizer’s  COVID vaccine (marketed under the brand name Comirnaty)  a group of more than 30 academics, professors, and scientists from the most prestigious universities in the US, requested access to the data and information submitted to the FDA by Pfizer to process the issuance of the license.   The request was hinged on the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and could not be legally rejected.

It took three months to obtain a response from the FDA.  And that response was an appeal to the Courts for leave to release the documents in batches over FIFTY-FIVE years.  In short, the plaintiffs (and the general public) should exercise patience till the year 2076 before obtaining the required information! Read details at

This incredible and outrageous request by the government agency, FDA, was based on the claim that the documents requested are voluminous and it would require the said 55 years to review and redact them prior to release to the general public.  However, it had taken the FDA only 108 days to purportedly review all the same documents as submitted by Pfizer, leading to the issuance of the full approval in August!  Furthermore, Title 21, subchapter F of the FDA’s own regulations stipulates that the agency “is to make ‘immediately available’ all documents underlying licensure of a vaccine."

Meanwhile, based on the official availability of an “approved” vaccine for COVID, the US government (and stooges all over the world) could now legally require citizens to be jabbed if they want to keep their jobs and continue to have basic access and interactions with the rest of society!

With straight faces and claims of desperately seeking the public higher good, governments are insisting that unless unvaccinated members of the public receive the injection into their bodies, the vaccinated cannot be protected.  The simple question however, is:  if the vaccine did not protect the vaccinated, why would it protect the unvaccinated if they should opt to receive it?  Apart from the illogicality of the position, factual evidences from a place like Gibraltar, with 100% vaccination status, and yet a gory COVID-19 situation confirm the utter uselessness of this expensive medical intervention being forced on all mankind. See the latest news from Gibraltar where “booster” shots are now routine and Christmas has already been “cancelled” as a result of spiraling Covid cases. (see

It will be recalled that in Nigeria, the NAFDAC makes no pretentions about ascertaining the safety of the vaccines “donated” to Nigeria.  A statement on her website clearly states that the NAFDAC will use “Reliance” or “Recognition” to expedite Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) for vaccines already approved by more “matured” regulatory authorities elsewhere.  In plain terms, the NAFDAC simply rubber-stamps decisions made by more “matured” counterparts in foreign countries!

No comments: