Interview: Pfizer’s Former Chief Toxicologist Exposes the “Vaccine Mafia”

0:00Dr. Justin Trudeau, Dr. Thomas K. Dr. Thomas K. Dr. Thomas K. Dr. Thomas K. Dr. Thomas K. Dr. Thomas K. Dr. Thomas K. Joining us now is Humbit Sturts, and he wrote a book, The Vaccine Mafia. I think we all know who the don of that mafia is in this last event here. We're going to talk a little bit about what happened and it's not just a critique of what happened in 2020, but he's a toxicologist, and he worked for Pfizer. He was a chief toxicologist. There's a matter of fact. We want to talk about what he would do there, typically, so we get an idea of what was skipped, and also his ideas of what need to be done in the future. Thank you for joining us, sir. Thank you very much for inviting me. And again, the book is the vaccine mafia. And tell us a little bit about what you did at Pfizer as a chief toxicologist. What does a toxicologist do? Look at the safety, I guess. Yes, absolutely. And it depends very much in which position you are. You start with treating animals with new compounds in order to make sure that these compounds

1:08before they go into men. Do not show toxicities that are not acceptable. It depends, of course, very much on the compound. If you're treating, if you're searching for a anti-coff medicine, then the side effects must be really disappeared or must really be avoided. Whereas if you're searching for an anti-cancer compound, it is clear that the number of, and the severity of the side effects may be much more important and acceptable, because these people are fighting for their life. Whereas for an anti-coff medicine, that's comfort. I say yes. Yes. At the beginning of my career, I was myself working with animals in order to make sure that the compounds were not toxic. And later on, especially at the end with Pfizer, I was more in a managerial position and

2:13I coordinated the work in the institute. I had an institute with 150 people of whom about a third were scientists and the other people were technicians. About how long were you there from what dates? From 2001 to 2008. And I ended my career there because Pfizer had decided to close the site. I don't worry about toxicology. I had too many laboratories for toxicology around the globe. And so the French laboratory was shut. So here in the United States, we have different procedures, of course, if it's a therapeutic versus a vaccine, different amounts of time, I guess, to take a look at both the safety and the efficacy of that. But what were the procedures in Europe, for example?

3:15Were they different than the US? The procedures are not different in Europe or in Australia or whatsoever because the companies always want to have the global market. And therefore, they have to follow the international guidelines. Informatimes, every country had its own guidelines. And that was a nuisance because if you wanted to sell your compound in the United States, you had also to follow the FDA guidelines. And so the community of scientific community, not only in the pharmaceutical industry, they put their knowledge together and they created internationally acceptable guidelines, such as the ICH guidelines, International Consortium of Harmonization. If not, there are guidelines from the WHO, for instance, for vaccines. And they have been followed partly by Pfizer and Biontech.

4:18But there are other guidelines specialized that we follow for the FDA, for instance regarding pregnant women and young individuals. Yeah, and that was kind of the concerns about pregnant women being given vaccines. There have been kind of been eradicated. Pretty much was on the way to doing that before we actually had the COVID vaccines as well, wasn't it? They were really easing up on those restrictions one day. Yes. Also ever compound, be it a chemical compound or a vaccine, there was a golden rule which said you never, really never treat a pregnant woman with a new compound. This has completely been forgotten. Yes, it has. It truly is amazing. And it happened so rapidly. I remember how they were pushing it heavily towards pregnant women. It's like, well, the narrative that we heard was that this is just affecting older people.

5:21And now you're pushing it for pregnant women. It's crazy. Yeah, that is interesting. Now, one of the things, of course, I really indulged and drenched into my memory was Donald Trump saying how he was ordering the FDA. He's talked about this subsequently. He said, yeah, they were taking too long and I told him, you get that done right away or you're out of there. That was the threat that he made publicly at the time. He made that to the head of the FDA. And he boasted about it afterwards. And so I guess the question is, you know, when we look at the rules, you're talking about international set of rules. I don't know what the, you know, if I guess because it was approved by the FDA and the US, did that help to move it with the international rules? Or did they just wave all that because the so-called emergency? No, it was all more or less going with the same speed. And in the United States, there was no approval in an ordinary way. It was an emergency use authorization, which meant that for the duration of the prep

6:29act, this compound could be used. And whenever the prep act would end, then this use authorization would also be terminated. And it's interesting to see that the prep act will survive until the end of 2029. So, for many years ahead. And interestingly, and I was really set up that Kennedy did not do what he had promised namely to take these vaccines, these Mesonsha RNA vaccines off the market. On the contrary, he declared them ordinary vaccines. Yeah. It's now the doctor who has to decide whether he wants to inject them or not. Yeah. And here we have this law that gives them legal immunity for vaccine damages for children. It's one of the reasons many of us believe that they pushed it to get authorized for children. So they could get that same kind of immunity. How do you see that in terms of legal immunity?

7:31Well, this is a relatively long story. This possibility to get out of the responsibility for its own products started with the vaccinations of children in the 70s and 80s when the pharmaceutical industry told the president, if you don't take this burden off our shoulders, we will get punk wrapped. So I think it was which president was it? Reagan. Reagan, Reagan, Reagan. Reagan said, okay, now it's this state of the country that will take over these responsibilities and the cost for helping the people. The same thing doesn't hold true in Europe. In Europe, the normally the project holder is responsible and will remain responsible.

8:33But there is a clause in the European purchasing contract with Pfizer, which says that well, the company does not have the responsibility for damage. Only if there is a willful misconduct, willful misconduct, that's very difficult to prove because it's an act or a mission taken intentionally to achieve a wrongful purpose knowingly without legal or factual justification and in this regard of known or obvious risk. So that great harm can happen and to prove this will be very difficult. So in fact, the Pfizer will not, most probably not be held accountable in the European community as long as we cannot prove that they knew exactly what they were doing and that they were

9:35doing a willful misconduct, it's a very dirty game from my perspective. Yes. And of course, as all this was happening, there was a report that came out with an industry a trade publication, Stat News. I don't know if you're familiar with that or not, but they put out information saying that there was, I forget what the three countries were now, but one of them, they were all in South America because everybody needed to have this vaccine for their citizens or they would basically be a no travel zone. They were essentially blackmailed by Pfizer, that to say that if you don't give us immunity, talk about willful negligence, they typically had the kind of immunity because it was a rushed emergency situation, but it said we want additional immunity against negligence in terms of manufacturing and other issues very extensive and they said, and we want to have collateral for that. We want to have us some collateral that is outside of your country and it was really,

10:39are you familiar with that? No. It was reported by Stat News. It was, yeah, they were talking about it, some of the people come in on the said, well, they want like embassies or something as collateral that are outside of the country because they were worried that they were going to find some kind of maybe willful misconduct there, I don't know. Well, before we move on from what is normal in terms of the childhood vaccine and stuff like that, how does a childhood vaccine schedule differ in Europe to the United States? It's quite a few less, isn't it? I didn't get to your question. The required childhood vaccine schedule. I mean, we have a vaccine schedule where we have a lot of different diseases that the children are vaccinated for and they do it repeatedly. I mean, we have several different doses of the same vaccine. What is it like in Europe? It's less frequent the vaccination of children, but still it's most probably too much, especially

11:42under the discussion about autism, this is coming up. I think we have not more than 12 or 15 obligatory vaccinations in children, but this may still be too much. We know and it has been proven that autism is increasing in a traumatic way because we inject the children at very young age frequently. If you challenge the immune system in such a way, you must expect side effects, especially if the children develop fever and all this happens also in the brain area. If you have fever, you get seizures and you may have an outcome that is equivalent to autism. In countries or in areas, even in the United States, for instance among the Amish who are not

12:44really fans of vaccination, you have a much lower level of a number of autistic children. We had a situation here in Tennessee. I've talked about it a couple of times. We had some family that moved to Tennessee because they wanted to homeschool their kids and some other things like that. Then they got a divorce. As part of the divorce proceedings, the wife's mother knew that the judge was a big fan of vaccination and told the judge these kids have not been vaccinated. He said, well, I think that's child abuse. He said, whoever wants to agree to get their kid caught up on the vaccine schedule gets custody of them. She said, I'll do it. She took them out. They gave the three kids. The older daughter didn't get all the vaccines at once because she didn't have any reaction to it. They gave the two younger boys the vaccines to catch up all at once. They both immediately went into the intensive care unit and were there for many days. The youngest one was there for the longest amount of time. After he got out, he is so severely autistic, he has to wear diaper.

13:48He's just in communicato. That happened instantly just as they gave them all those catch up vaccines. I guess that's my next question to you. As a toxicologist, were there ever any tests in terms of the cumulative effect, one vaccine with another or the fact that they put in adjuvants in the vaccine to motivate the immune system to react to it? Is there any testing that is typically done in the past that would look at the cumulative effect or the interaction between these different vaccines and adjuvants? As far as I know, we have to distinguish between clinical trials and preclinicals, not toxicology trials. The only trial in rats that was performed with the vaccine of anti-COVID, that was a vaccine, that was a trial where the mother rats were treated not during pregnancy. Thereafter, when they had delivered, the youngs are observed.

14:56And normally, among these young pups, you have also to perform behavioral tests, but they were not done. We were doing an auditory test and an ocular test, but the behavioral test and the learning test and all of that was not done. Would we have been able to discover this? That's another question, but it was just omitted. And as far as I know, but I'm really not a specialist in clinical experiments, I do not believe that these compounds are ever treated against another compound or accumulation. And another important fact that it's lacking with a compound of Pfizer and Piontech, that is they have never tested for interference between the vaccine, mother vaccines, or other medications, because as you said at the very beginning, it was very clear that this was

15:59a vaccination, especially in order to save or to help elderly people. And elderly people very often take X-X different compounds in parallel every day. So it is interesting to see, does the vaccine have an impact on the other compounds that I'm taking? I myself have to take an anticoagulant and an antirritmic. So it would have been interesting to see what the interactions are, but they said we don't need that. It was really, it was like a Swiss cheese, more holes, more holes in the dossier than tissue. That's right. It truly is crazy what was lab, but of course we have seen. That's the first time we saw the emergency used in such an extensive way, but that basically has become the favorite governing tactic of our president right now. He declared everything to be an emergency, so he removes any guidelines.

17:01I mean, we had emergencies about tariffs, for example. And so it doesn't have to be something that even you could argue is a serious matter. He just declares an emergency arbitrarily and sweeps aside all guidelines and restrictions. But going back to this, when you're talking about the interaction between different things, that reminds me, what about a placebo? I mean, did they run a test or when they look at, let's say the efficacy of it? What do they use for a placebo? Did they use other vaccines? They could use other vaccines that's even a standard in the development of vaccines. You do not test them against placebo. However, in the context of the Pfizer compound, I believe that this was a placebo. They at least called it placebo. Was it another vaccine? I just don't know. But it would have been normal to test against placebo, which means not a solution with aluminum

18:04or all the other ingredients, but really an inert and neutral. Something like a saline solution or something like that. I seem to have seen, I don't know if it was COVID or if it was something else, but when they would run the test, the placebo was, for example, the meningitis vaccine with all the adjuvants in it and everything else. Yeah. Much easier to compare with another vaccine because you can say, oh, it's not worse than it than the other one, but it doesn't prove that it's better. That's right. It doesn't prove it's safe, does it? So we've seen everything just kind of swept aside in emergency. We already had a questionable series of tests that would be done on this. As a matter of fact, when we talk about the testing of therapeutics and of vaccines here in the US, I know of the three phases that they go through of testing. The first part of it is really kind of focused on the toxicology exclusively. Then as they start to test individuals of it, it's a therapeutic and they're going to be addressing the condition.

19:06The individuals or people have that condition that they're giving you the therapeutic for. Then they look to see if it helps them. That's the basic thing. But if you're doing that with a vaccine, I know that when this was happening, there were a lot of people who were very afraid of the emergency that had been created in the media. They were volunteering to be a challenged tester. I recall when they were talking about that, they said, well, we don't do that. That's unethical. They're going to vaccinate you for disease and then expose you to the disease and see if you catch it, which is really, I guess, the whole point of a vaccine, isn't it? At least it used to be. Yes. There is a special point. That is, at the end of this phase three study, they proposed to all the placebo-controlled people to take the vaccine. And with that, they destroyed immediately the whole control group, which is fantastic, I mean, unbelievable.

20:07Is that something that was never done before as well? I think that that hasn't happened before because they said, this disease is so dramatic, it is unethical not to give them the controls, the chance to be vaccinated and to be protected. So this was completely falsified as a feeling of ethics. For me, it's, we are talking about Amaphia. And for me, the mafia is not just the pharmaceutical industry. On the contrary, the pharmaceutical industry, from my point of view, is a rather tiny part of this of this mafia. For me, the really relevant parts, they are in a much higher level. It's the government's, it's military. It is organizations such as WHO, UNO, NATO, they are all involved.

21:10I agree. I agree. The tech giants, the foundations of Gates, Gavi, CEP, Sauras, because they are all earning money with that. And for them, it's important that the money flow is great. And they also do the same thing with the military industry. So they're just investing, making money. It's not important where it comes from. And also the climate policy is involved in this. So this mafia is only around making a lot of money. And it's a web of criminal interests. And it's at high levels of the state and government and of the private sector. And here I would like to remind of a word that President Eisenhower said in 1961 when he

22:14gave his good, a good, a very well driven, a fairly, a fairly speech. He said, pay attention to the military and industrial complex. They will take over the power. And that's exactly what we have today. That is a very important message. And I'm glad that you brought all that stuff in. It is much bigger than just the vaccine companies as you point out. It is a giant web of institutions that are out there. It is a business model. Yeah, it is. It is. It's a business model just like the military industrial complex is. And the people who are designing weapons for the military industrial complex, they're not really concerned about anybody that gets hurt with any of this stuff. And I think that's one of the things that we certainly, they made no secret about it here in the United States. Actually bragged about operation and warp speed being tied in with the military. But I think that lesson has been lost on a lot of people. And of course, the connections with DARPA in terms of developing the mRNA stuff is also

23:14very concerning. Did you talk specifically about the unique issues of mRNA? Well, this is the point, the crucial point in the whole thing because one thing is the COVID, COVID-19 is not over. And they are still using this vaccine. And it has to do with the dangers that are coming from the manufacturing procedure. And you must probably know that many compounds are in the pipelines of the companies that are against all sorts of different diseases. And they are all based on this messenger RNA technology. And the dangerous thing is when you develop your compound in the preclinical phase or in

24:14the clinical phase before launch, you use a very pure DNA, which you can synthesize with PCR technology. And from this template, you translate your, the information for the messenger RNA. So you work with very pure material, but this is quite time consuming and very expensive. So at the end of the development before launch, they had to find a way to produce the vaccines much in a much easier and quicker way. And what did they do? They used the information for the spike protein and injected them into the DNA of E-coli. So into the DNA of a bacterium, and this bacterium develops very, very rapidly. Within hours and days, you can produce enormous amounts of what you can use afterwards for

25:16the vaccination. But, and here's the danger. You cannot avoid completely that parts of the bacterial DNA gets into the, the, the the JAP. So you cannot filter it out. And you know that the messenger RNA is packed into non-olipid, so very small fat bullets. And these bullets contain also the DNA from the bacterium. And this goes into human cells. And if the DNA of the bacterium gets in a human cell, it can pass into the nucleus of the cell. And there it can really create a disaster. It has a possibility to explain the cancer cases that we currently have an incandedromatic increase in cancer, the so-called turbo cancers, which you cannot any longer, very, very often you cannot treat them because the onset is so rapid.

26:17They pass the first stages of castenogenicity and go immediately into metastasis, metastasis and processes, which cannot be controlled. And that is something that has been pursued and warned against very early on by Professor Dahlgey from England. He said in 2021, pay attention. We, we risk of having cancer. The other point is, despite the fact that there are much less injections to play, we see that the fertility goes down. Continuously goes down. Of course, everybody will say, yeah, that started already with the introduction of the concept under contraceptical pill in the 70s and 80s. There is a tendency for lower fertility. But now with the vaccinations, it's dramatically going up. Oh, if you like, it's going down, the fertility.

27:20And therefore, there are risks that we do not manage and that may be prolonged. So with the end of the vaccination period in the context of COVID, there may still be cases where the people die or are infertile or other side effects appear, despite the fact that the injections were long ago. So it's, it's like a demo class sword that is hanging about the people, especially those people who are constantly getting booster. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. So it's not, it's not over and the other thing is what that I said, they are having projects for many different diseases where they want also to use this new technology and this technology is intrinsically dangerous. So I called up from the very beginning a genetic code injection because, you know, if you're

28:21going to bring in something, maybe, you know, you understand more about the mechanics of it than I do. But the way it was explained and the way it was on Moderna's site was that we're going, you know, this is the messenger mRNA that does copying and that type of thing. We're going to turn your body into a manufacturing facility for the active part of the ingredient. I said, okay, where's the off switch? Exactly. I can now have this turns off and for a lot of people, it hasn't turned off as part of the issue, I think. One has seen that even after three years, the spike protein is still available in tissues. It's very difficult to degrade this to metabolize it. So we were, we were given a lot of false information. It didn't stay in the muscle where it was injected. It did not disappear within a couple of days in the bloodstream, even the messenger RNA, which was more or less modified, messenger RNA.

29:22The modification meant that this substance would remain much longer in action in the body. That's what's the modification. And therefore, we were told, that was all junk that we were told. There were so many lies that, but the people didn't understand or the others, who were critical, they were just shut down. They were no longer invited. They couldn't publish. There was some sort of censorship. And therefore, many people, the existence of many doctors and scientists was just destroyed. They were just cut out and so nobody dared any longer to say something. And if you can't publish, and if you know that you can go even to jail, and if you have children and you have to nourish your family, then you're most probably going to say, okay, I'll wait until it will be over.

30:24And it were mostly people like me, after retirement, who spoke up. Thank you for doing that. I appreciate that. Yes. It truly is amazing. When you look at it, we're talking about this mRNA stuff. How radically different it was from anything else. Again, a compound is something that's very different. You would see that happening in these other drugs or vaccines or something like that. But this going in with an mRNA approach is something that was really radically new and then totally untested. And yet, when Donald Trump comes back in on his second day of actually his first day, it was the day after he got sworn in, very first thing he does is say we're going to partner with Oracle. I'm going to have AI design custom mRNA for you, for particular diseases. And so they're doubling and tripling down on this. They're accelerating it. They're not even cautious about it anymore. Are they? It would really be good if Donald Trump and also Robert Kennedy said regarding the childhood

31:29of vaccinations. Yes, we stop this because they have said it several times already. They have even tried to introduce a reduction of these obligatory vaccinations. But they must probably knew that this wouldn't have to be accepted by the judges and so on. So they lost. And we are back in the United States at an enormous number of vaccinations. If they really were interested in the health of the youth, they would just say do not vaccinate children before three years of age. Because then you would cut out the age where the brain is very much developing and is very sensitive to disturbances, fever and other things. So this was really be good. But he only sees business opportunities. Of course, when we look at it, you're talking about the mafia being a major network of all kinds of interest.

32:30Not just pharmaceutical company, but all these other entities and institutions out there that feed off of this. But another part of this, of course, that we can't forget about, is the media and how they have been absolutely controlled in this country since the mid-1990s when they start allowing them to do the ask your doctor commercials. Do they do that in Europe? It's not in the same way, but the media very much involved in the propaganda and fear mongering procedures. So they are one of them in the major institutions that are responsible for this disaster. I would also like to mention that if the doctors, I mean, these are people who have studied for ten years and then they have their professional experience, if they stood up in 2021 and said, we don't inject this.

33:31It was over. But they didn't on the contrary. And the few who did got purged here in the US as well, just like everything else. In Europe as well. Well, it is. It is. And of course, not just the media, but of course, in the United States, we have the hospitals run by major corporations, and that was one of the reasons why this was happening. It was all fueled by money out of Washington. They gave them bonuses to do whatever they wanted. And then after they got them hooked on that, they said, well, now if you don't do the next thing, you're not going to, we're going to take that money that you got used to away from you. I mean, that is a classic organized crime tactic too as well. So it truly is made. So what do we do about this? We've been critiquing what happened with all this stuff. What as somebody who has worked on toxicology for, has a lot of experience with this, are there anything that you would suggest that need to be done? Of course, I think the top of the list would be informed consent and free speech, but what

34:34else would you have in terms of reform? A very, very important aspect is what we are doing this evening, informing people and waking people up. I mean, we will not be able to convince the pro-vaxxers that this is dangerous. It's like a religion. They adhere to it and they will not change their mind. But everybody else who doesn't have a very firm conviction about vaccination, he should wake up and he should be told, don't get vaccinated again. And obviously, not with the vaccines that are built on this mRNA technology. I mean, there are many vaccinations since many years that may have a positive influence. One can have a doubt about others because many vaccines were introduced when the disease

35:40or the problem was almost eradicated. And the pro-vaxxers obviously say, oh, look, we have eradicated the disease, which is in many cases absolutely not true. But they are almost probably interesting and important vaccinations, but one should in each case see together with one's doctor, is this really important for me. I have, everybody has a system that fights germs. So our immune system, since millions of years, keeps us in a healthy state. So why don't we stimulate our immune system so that we can overcome normal infections? There may be infections that need really vaccination, but in most of the cases, we should just rely on our immune system and we should eat correctly and so on. But this is more sociological question in many countries, also in Europe.

36:45The people just don't eat healthy food. And this may hinder our immune system to function normally. But I think that's one of the big things when I looked at all this, of course, the science of verology, science and quotes. Telling us that this is the way this works, we're going to introduce something here to train your immune system. This is going to simulate the disease and train your immune system. And then we had Fauci come out and break the fourth wall, if you will, and talk greatly to the audience and say, well, no, natural, if you had the disease, natural immunity doesn't work. It's like, how could that possibly be true? That's like saying, even if you've been in 50 dog fights as a pilot, you got to go back to flight school and learn this stuff. You know, when I let you fly again, unless you do that. Well, I don't want to comment on Mr. Fauci. He's got a whole mother book, right? Yeah, he's currently the scapegoat after having been the hero.

37:48I agree. It's really a little figure in this whole game. Only it helps to de-eat it, the view regarding the really responsible people. I agree. I agree. And I've said that myself, they make him the scapegoat so that everybody is turned on him and they don't see the bigger picture that you're talking about, which is the mafia that is out there. I agree. I realize that for him, because he's elderly, he's been given a pardon by Biden. He was given a commendation by Trump. So he's pretty much a safe guy. They know that they can heap the scorn on him. And not even he is going to have to really worry about anything happening to him. Yeah, and this was done in a very, very interesting way. I mean, why has he been a pardon for the time after 2014? In 2014, his institute in AIED started supporting financially supporting Gaina function.

38:55Gaina function. So he is personally responsible from 2014 for the support of what finally ended with SARS-CoV-2 and the disease that we went through. So yes, 2014 is a logical date from which he became on that. I remember when that started in back in 2014, there was an excellent series from USA Today by reporter named Alison Young. And she was talking about what was having at these biosafety level three and four labs and how there have been one accident after the other people working on disease, animals, and they escape out into the wild or you have exposure to different workers who are there. And everybody started questioning what we were doing in terms of Gaina function. Why are we doing this? Why are we really gaining? And what is the risk that we have here? At that point in time, they said, okay, stop the Gaina function stuff.

39:56And Fauci and his boss, Francis Collins, continued to fund that research in a couple of different areas, like the ones that you mentioned there. And when they produced their results, there were a lot of people who said, you were supposed to stop that. So what we just determined that we would do it on our own. And so again, there's no controls that we see in the American system for trying to stop this. Even when you're told and you have your funding cut for that, they find another way to continue on with it anyway. And so it really is laid at the, I don't know, Francis Collins, who is head of the NIA. I don't know if he got any kind of immunity or not, but seems to be lucky to have just as much culpability. But nobody talks about him because he's this nice guitar playing singing scientist, I guess that's out there. So he avoids the scrutiny that people have poured onto Fauci. But everything about this is just so far out of whack. It truly is amazing. The fact that we've got, and you point out in your book, you talk, of course, about

40:59my carditis, I could we not talk about this, without talking about my carditis. These are things that I'd never, ever heard of, but they became household words. And people might want to say, well, why do we have that as a household role now? Why do we have a situation where children who are going to participate in sports have to have an electrocardiogram before they participate in sports? Why is that the new normal? And everybody just goes along with it. It's absolutely insane, isn't it? That's again, how and where we are obliged to inform people and to wake them up, there should really be something like a revolution 200 and some years ago in France where we really stand up and say, no, stop. That's enough. I mean, we will not be able, if there, we cannot build on some heroes who will speak up. But the people have to get up and say, no, I don't let my children be injected.

42:02I agree. Fine. Yes. I hope people can, I hope your book gets a lot of traction because it is something that is really needed. And people need to see the bigger picture here. As you point out, focusing on Fauci or focusing on Francis Collins or focusing on Trump or Biden, that doesn't change anything because everybody's got their own personal baggage. People need to see that it is an institutional network that is out there. And it has taken over massive sectors of so many areas of our society. We're talking about the military, the press, or the corporations, or the multinational NGOs and all these other things. They're all working together. And it is such a huge problem that you're right unless people rise up from the grassroots enough of us, it'll never stop until we've said that we've had enough. I guess the equivalent would be, let them inject them RNA, right? It's a, it's a very interesting. You see, I also think during the development of this vaccine, inside of Pfizer, the toxicologists,

43:08did they have a say there? Did they oversee what was done? Did they comment it? Most probably not. They were, most probably not involved in the development and the toxicological development because there was not much. And even Dr. Borla, who is a veterinarian, so he should have understood what was going on. He should have asked the people in the laboratories, what have we done in order to make this component safe? No, nobody asked these questions. And the people at BioNTech, and that was the beginning of this, they were just not qualified from my perspective. They contracted the studies, the few studies they did. They contracted them out, and they must probably not know what to tell the contractor. So it was done in a, in the usual way. No, nothing special. But they knew that billions of people would be injected. So that should have been an alert, a real alert, in order to make these compounds safe.

44:13No, nothing. Of course, forming it out of somebody, I guess that gives them some plausible deniability as the CIA would say, right? No. Yeah, it's not as if it was other guys. We can point fingers in different directions, can't we? Well, you know, one of the, one of the things also that stuck out to me about all this was there were several European members of parliament. You probably recall this. They said, we want to see, you know, the reports that you've got and the information that you can see. And they fought and fought and fought as members of the European Parliament. Finally, they got some documents and they held a press conference. They said, this is what we got. And it was all redacted like it was something coming from the national security state. They have stone walled politicians even on this who want to have that kind of information ever. Yes, that's right. And it has, I mean, we know everything because some people just got these information out of the companies, but nothing happened. Yeah. Well, then maybe a beginning of progress, namely, by on tech, the partner of Pfizer was

45:21ordered by the court to give the information, all the information on, on side effects to the victims. So this may be a first step in the right direction. And what did that happen? Germany. Germany. Okay. But as by anti-conviser are working together, there will also be an impact on Pfizer. And here in France, there is a case where a private person is asking information regarding the safety of the compounds. And because he has lost his wife by a very rare disease, Coitzfeld Jakob, disease of the brain, and he says, my wife developed this couple of weeks after the injection. And well, the court at the beginning said, well, this disease develops over many years.

46:23So the injection cannot be responsible. But if it was after the second injection, if this injection creates a cytokine storm, then in the brain, several areas may be attacked. And this may result in this disease, which normally develops very, very slowly. And we also have now cases of Alzheimer's or Parkinson appearing in much younger people that are vaccinated. So there is a link, the biological link to the whole thing. And I hope that we can go on and can at least push the companies to care for the victims. This is for me, a very important point also in my book. These people, these are hundreds of thousands of people who are left aside.

47:23And they are very often unable to keep on studying, to do their jobs. And so on, they are just forgot. And it would be really normal to take at least the part of what the companies have earned to help these people, because most of them have to pay for their medical treatments themselves. They are ruined very quickly. And they are, as a very important point, many young people, after the vaccination, develop side effects that forces them to ask for a utilization. They go into Switzerland and get a deadly injection. It has increased tremendously. And this cannot, this cannot go on. Yes, terrific. The responsibilities have to be taken over. And it's not Mr. Fauci. It is on different levels of this criminal pyramid.

48:29I agree. I agree. Yeah, and we're talking about people who have been injured and their life has been changed. One of the individuals that I interviewed a couple of years into this had been an orthopedic surgeon. And after the injection, he just started trembling. And he of course couldn't be a surgeon anymore. And he went to one doctor after the other and they would look at him and say, I can't do anything. Get very uncomfortable about it. And he said, finally I got to a guy and he said, well, I think we know what caused this, but we're not going to talk about that. I'll try to do what I can to help you. I mean, the fear that it engendered into people, the fear and intimidation is really something that you expect to see out of a totalitarian society. And that's what this mafia has imposed upon us, isn't it? Yes, absolutely right. And it's crazy. Well, I'm glad that you wrote this book. And I hope that it has widely passed around and that people will understand this and pass this on. Maybe gift it to your friends. I mean, great way to do this. You have to get that information out there one way or the other.

49:32And if we don't get that out there, certainly nothing will happen. So first of all, people need to understand what has happened. And we got too many people are still in the dark because they have been lied to. They've been deceived by this mafia that is out there. So we got to break that ignorance before we can have any kind of light. And then it'll be difficult enough after we wake people up to do something about it. But nothing is going to happen if people don't understand what is going on with it. Thank you so much for coming on with us and talking about this book. And thank you for being honest and taking an honest look at this. So we're talking to Helmut Stertz. And again, the book, as you see there, is the vaccine mafia. Thank you so much for joining us, sir. Thank you very much to giving me the theater here to talk about my book and about general aspects of this criminal criminal. It is very criminal, actually. Yeah. I'm really I'm really I'm down. And I thank you very much.

50:33And this is most probably the most important way of giving the information because selling a couple of thousand books will not really help and to push the information into the public. I would love to get that information out there to people. Maybe they'll go a bit deeper, you know, and I'd love to sell a $330 million books in the United States. But this is probably an illusion. That's right. We actually call it common sense. This is the kind of common sense that we need right now. Thomas Payne pretty much had a book that was in the hand of every American. At the time of the American Revolution, we need to win those hearts and minds. We need to wake people up to the common sense. And it can be done with information because this whole thing has been initiated and guarded by disinformation and by censorship and punishment of people who question it. And that was one of the things I said from the very beginning and throughout all of it. Science has never settled. Is it? It's always questioning the conventional wisdom that moves science ahead.

51:34It's about time we start to question that conventional wisdom, I think. Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you. Have a good day. The Common Man. They created Common Core, a dumb down our children. They created Common Pasts to track and control us. They're Common's Project to make sure the commoners own nothing. They're Common's Future. They see the Common Man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary. But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God. That is what we have in common. That is what they want to take away. Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation. They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us.

52:35It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide. Please share the information and links you'll find at deedaveniteshow.com. Thank you for listening. Thank you for sharing. If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. deedaveniteshow.com.