Shaun Newman Podcast - #1131 - Allison Inquiry Day 1

Episode Date: September 21, 2026

The Allison Inquiry opened September 8, 2026 on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, as Conservative MP Dean Allison convened an independent, citizen-organized hearing so Canadian lawmakers could listen to people reporting COVID-19 vaccine injuries and loss. More than 1,400 Canadians applied to testify; a smaller group of selected witnesses began sharing sworn personal stories after opening remarks, with U.S. Senator Ron Johnson among those who spoke.Cornerstone Forum 26’https://shaunnewmanpodcast.substack.com/Silver Gold Bull Links:Website: https://silvergoldbull.ca/Email: [e-mail] Grahame: [phone]Bow Valley Credit UnionBitcoin: www.bowvalleycu.com/en/personal/investing-wealth/bitcoin-gatewayEmail: [e-mail]’East Apothecary - USE promo code SNP for 15% off your order.https://thepowerofplants.ca/Get your voice heard: Text Shaun 587-217-8500Shaun Newman Podcast Join the SNP community to support independent Canadian media, gain full access to all Cornerstone Forums, interact with recurring guests, and gain exclusive access to courses not found anywhere else.

This is Brett Weinstein. This is Tom Lomago. This is Bruce Party. This is Alex Krenner. Hey, this is Brad Wall. This is Dr. Pierre-Core. Hi, this is Frank Paredi. This is Daniel Smith.

This is James Lindsay. This is Vance Crowe and you're listening to the Sean Newman podcast. Welcome to the podcast, folks. Happy Monday. How's everybody doing today? All right. Well, we've had a few different setbacks. First starting with the vehicle, then a storm came in,

knocked out the ferry for a few days. so we're on the rock for this week we're on until Thursday and I'd been wanting to do more with the Allison inquiry regarding just broadcasting when it first came out and I thought what better way than to you know make the best of not a bad situation because everybody's healthy and happy and I got real no complaints on the rock other than the wind is just a touch cool but hoping to run into a few more people but we've kind of been it's kind of been a hectic few days so I thought, well, I couldn't do much when it was going on in Ottawa, but what I certainly can do is I can share it far and wide on the podcast. So that's what we're doing this week. We started on Thursday. We had a little bit of a mix-up in communication on what data release.

We released day four on Thursday. Today is day one. Tuesday will be day two and Wednesday will be day three. So you're going to get Allison inquiry all week just if you missed it. Well, now you have it. and if you've already listened to it, well, you'll just have to share it far and wide because the podcast is going to host it all week. We're going to make sure that all the voices get heard as far as we can broadcast it. So this week coming up in the next three days is going to be Allison Inquiry Days 1, 2, and 3. And we're sitting on The Rock here in Newfoundland currently. Everybody's healthy, happy, waiting for a ferry to come in Thursday and we'll be on our way again.

So before we get to day one of the Allison Inquiry, let's go to Silver Gold Bull, shall we? Silver Gold Bull, Bull Valley Credit Union. Obviously on Mondays, they team up as the first two sponsors on every episode, and they're bringing the Cornerstone Forum back to Calgary, May 15th, 2027. And when it comes to precious metals, buying, selling, storing precious metals, I point you to Silver Gold Bull. It doesn't matter where you are at in North America.

They can get you squared away. And if you got questions down in the show notes, You can text or email Graham for details. And once again, when it comes to buying, selling, or storing precious metals, look no further than silvergold bull. Silvergold bull.ca, silvergold bull.com and they can get you squared away. In Alberta, Bow Valley Credit Union, it's all about lending deposits, real financial advice. You can open accounts through lending options and get help with banking on a space design for conversations, not transactions. If you want smarter banking with gold, silver, Bitcoin, sell money, and personal freedom.

Think BVCU for all your banking needs. to Bow Valley, CU.com. When it comes to firearms here in Canada, while I point you to Prophet River, they're out of my hometown. If you're driving through, make sure you stop in and see their showroom. Otherwise, go to Profitriver.com, okay?

They're the major retailer of firearms, optics, and accessories. They serve all of Canada, meaning it don't matter where you sit. You go online, order it, and they're going to ship it right to your doorstep. Carly Clossin and the team at Windsor Plywood, well, they're the builders of the podcast Studio table and when it comes to character wood, when you're building something you want to be proud of

and make sure it doesn't fall apart, you want quality wood and that's what they do. Windsor Plywood and Lloyd Minster, 3605, 51st Avenue. If, you know, it doesn't matter the project, mantles, decks, windows, doors, sheds, podcast studios, podcast studio tables. Turn to Windsor plywood, all right? Now, we have a whole bunch of things going on in substack. We obviously have the bonus questions this week. they will be for the first few days.

They won't be there. But you can go on Substack and find the bonus questions, the week in reviews coming out every Sunday. And then, of course, you've got all the episodes coming out there as well. Not to mention Tanner Nadez master class on The Life of Paul. Just finished, we had 10 different episodes there and more to come that way. So if you haven't hopped over to Substack, super easy. Just sign up and you get an email.

anytime we're doing things and we seem to be doing things on this side. Well, we try to do some cool things and I think Substack does a wonderful job of it. Now, if you're listening or watching on Spotify, Apple, YouTube, Rumble, X, Facebook Substack, make sure to, you know, subscribe, make sure to leave a review. Make sure to comment. Make sure to comment. Send me things. Love hearing from you guys.

Make sure to share with a friend, okay? And if you're tired of mass produced wellness that doesn't deliver nor east apothecary craft small batch tinctures, teas, and salad. on their PEI farm, clean health and wellness for your entire family, visit the power ofplants.com.ca and use code SNP for 15% off. I've been using the shampoo and conditioner, and I tell you what, Dr. Laura did not disappoint. They've been fantastic. Of course, I'm talking about Dr. Laura Braden.

That's her company, Nor East Apothecary. Once again, the power of plants.ca is down on the show notes. Use code SMP for 15% off. All right, without further ado, day one of the Allison inquiry. Thank you for tuning in. Most importantly, I want to acknowledge the more than 1,400 vaccine injured Canadians have applied to appear as a witness before this inquiry and many others who continue to come forward. To each you, thank you for trusting us with your story. We know we cannot hear from everyone during these four days, but that does not mean your experience is any less important.

We still want to hear your story, and we will. will continue collecting and documenting these experiences. Over the next four days, our primary focus will be listening to Canadians who reported serious injuries following COVID-19 vaccination. We'll hear what happened to them, how their lives and families have been affected, and what happened when they saw it medical care, answers, recognition, and compensation. And the federal government's own numbers provide important contexts. Health Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada's COVID-19 vaccine safety report

recorded over 59,000 adverse event reports following COVID-19 vaccination, including over 11,000 reports classified as serious. But even those numbers may not tell us the whole story because one of the questions we need to examine is how difficult it was for some doctors and patients to have suspected vaccine injuries formerly reported and recognized. At our August 13th press conference,

Dr. Charles Hoff, a family physician who served patients in and around Linden, British Columbia, for decades, described his own experience. Dr. Hoff told us that after caring for many of these patients for 28 years, he began seeing serious medical problems

following vaccination that he believed that needed to be reported. He said the all of the hospital. that ultimately he submitted over 14 vaccine injury reports to provincial public health authorities. And according to Dr. Hoff, every one of those 14 reports were rejected or dismissed as coincidence. A physician who had known many of his patients for nearly three decades believed he was seeing serious safety signals, attempted to report them to his system, and he says he repeatedly, encountered barriers to having those cases recognized. That raises an important question for this

inquiry. If doctors had difficulty reporting suspected injuries, how many Canadians may never have made it into the official statistics at all? Then there's a question of compensation. The Federal Vaccine Injury Support Program received 3,500 claims under its former administration. Of those, just over 3,000 were deemed admissible, yet only 252 claims had been approved by the Medical Review Board, with an additional 11 appeals approved. The federal government reports approximately $21.5 million in financial support was paid to claimants. And I want to acknowledge the journalists who helped bring greater scrutiny to this program. I want to thank to Mayor Yugallini from Redal News. She's in the room today, as is Dr. Hoff, for their relentless percentage.

pursuit of answers, including through access to information requests and digging through documents and documentation and numbers surrounding the vaccine injury support program. Their reporting helped bring information into the public domain that Canadians might otherwise have never seen, and it underscored why transparency and accountability matter. I also want to thank global news for pursuing the same story last fall and bringing a wider public attention to the difficulty surrounding the program and these questions of accountability. Free Press has an important role to play in asking questions, obtaining information and putting facts before Canadians, particularly when institutions themselves have not provided the transparency

behind that people deserve. Those numbers raise important questions, but behind every number is a person, a family, and a story. That is why we are here. The The purpose of this inquiry is to hear those stories and to examine the experiences of Canadians seeking medical care, recognition and compensation. But before we do that, I believe we need to understand the broader context of how we got to this place. More than 30 countries have undertaken some form of review or inquiry in their pandemic response. In Canada, has still not concluded this kind of comprehensive national public inquiry that many Canadians have been asking for. South of the border, one of the people who has spent years asking difficult questions and examining the evidence is United States Senator Ron Johnson. Over the past five years, Senator Johnson has convened dozens of meetings, hearings, and roundtables examining different aspects of the pandemic response and has heard testimony from doctors, scientists, researchers, and other experts.

I've asked Senator Johnson to begin her inquiry by giving us an overview of what he has heard. and what he has learned through that work? I believe that context is important for the vaccine injured Canadians. We will hear from this week. Ultimately, this question is about people hearing from those who are injured, understanding the challenges they have faced, assessing care and compensation, and ensuring their experiences are documented and heard.

But before we examine where we are today, we need to have a better understanding of how we got here. Senator Johnson, you very much for taking time out of your very busy schedule. I understand these things. I know in your role, you're that much busier to join us and to share what you've learned over these past five years. My name is Sean Buckley and I'm Inquiry Council and I would like to thank everyone who is watching. I would like to thank all of those volunteers that have tirelessly worked to have this happen. And I'd like to thank the vaccine injured that are

are traveling, often at great cost to be here and the experts who have donated their time. When this Allison inquiry began, we set out with a single purpose of listening to vaccine-injured Canadians. And we knew that these people were the nations. These were Canada's dirty little secret, the vaccine injured. Doctors are forbidden. to speak about them. A doctor in Canada today cannot openly be questioning the COVID-19 vaccines and not face discipline by their professional college. MPs are forbidden to publicly speak about the vaccine injured. Before this inquiry, we met with MP after MP after MP, and this would be about six months ago. And at the time, and we were just asking, would it be possible for you to sit at a table and publicly listen to vaccine injured Canadians speak about their injuries?

And the answer unanimously was, no, this is not politically possible. It speaks volumes that the support for this inquiry and the bravery of the MPs that are at the table currently right now, and we thank them for being here, and the MPs that will be sitting as this week goes by. But they are not allowed to speak. We're hoping that this inquiry will allow all groups to speak. I will say that it seems that CBC journalists, but let's extend that to the wider mainstream media, because it's the mainstream media that sets the pace

and sets the message for much of this nation. But we learn something else, which is deeply troubling. We learned that families in Canada are forbidden to be speaking about vaccine injury. I'd like to speak about two people that we selected. As MP Dean Allison, the chair of this inquiry, has correctly stated,

we've had over 1,400 applications. And most of the nation doesn't know we exist. So the fact that we've had 1,400 applications from people willing to test them, in itself speaks that the number of people that are vaccine injured is dramatically higher than any of us have estimated. But they get sorted and they go through this funneling process and by the time they get to me to interview, they're largely vetted. And there were some that we interviewed and they were excited about coming, they committed to coming, we've, we slaughtered them in,

and then they backed out because of family pressure. So one of them told me, you know, my daughter-in-law made it clear that if I testify, I will never see my grandchildren again. Think about that. This is September 8, 2026 in Canada, and a family will be torn apart and destroyed if somebody who is vaccine injured publicly shares their story with us in this committee room. if I testify at the Allison Inquiry and share my story truthfully. Seeing injuries. Another thing that occurred in our preparation is I'm interviewing the potential witnesses. And many of them, as you'll see, they're in wheelchairs.

You know, one of them couldn't testify when we wanted them to because they had to schedule dialysis for while they're in Ottawa. and so we had to move them in the schedule. A different one, not only is he in a wheelchair, but his bowels don't move. So he's got two IV bags, one going, because the only way you can eat is IV straight into his veins

and then a very slow drip into the stomach. Actually, we had to get an extension cord so that the batteries on his pumps are functioning when he testifies in this room later this week. I'm expecting, I asked these people the question, you know, at the end of the interview, what's been the hardest part of this journey? And I'm expecting, I lost my kidneys, I'm waiting for a transplant, I'm in a wheelchair, I'm in chronic pain.

And almost invariably, that's not the answer. Almost every time these witnesses have said the worst part is not being heard. I'm injured. Did we go offline? Okay, so we'll stop and start again. Sorry everyone we've gone offline. That's interesting. When did it first drop?

Okay, start with? So for those of you watch? Online, we're having some technical difficulties, which is very curious for a committee room, committee room 415 on Parliament Hill in the Wellington Building. I would expect that when normal committees are sitting in this room, that they have flawless internet, and that things run absolutely perfectly. So you're just going to have to bear with us because the reality is that we're having internet problems, even though we're trying with various things.

Can I ask David or a V person any idea at what point when I was speaking that we got cut off? Okay. So trusting that you heard what I said earlier, and again, this is just part of the journey and part of the experience and part of the story. This is a live inquiry being broadcast live and we appreciate you all being here. So I was sharing about how, when I ask these people, what's the worst part that they're sharing that it's not their injuries, it's not their suffering. It's not being heard. You know, we have one witness that we have a video of him walking, or trying to walk. It's awful.

And the neurologist is telling him at that time to go and see a psychiatrist. And with the days he's hospitalized for six months and it's in a wheelchair and this is the wheelchair. and this is the gentleman that has two feeding tubes. So, and that's just an example. Witness after witness explains that they're, and they use the word gaslit, that they're literally gaslit. Can you imagine being seriously injured? And when you go to engage medical attention,

every single time that you're going to expect to actually be ridiculed, made fun of, to be treated with absolute derision, so that accessing medical care becomes a traumatic experience. I've had several of the witnesses share with me that actually they would rather die than engage the hospital system. And this is Canada in September of 26. Now the witnesses that are attending here, the vaccine injured witnesses are attending voluntarily. This committee does not have subpoena power. we're not compelling any of them to attend.

But I think that it's more fair to say that even though we're not compelling them to be here, that they're not coming voluntarily, they feel obligated to take this single opportunity to share their stories. Many of them are traveling at great personal cost. Some of those that you watch testify, they're going to be brave, they're going to sit straight, they're going to answer our questions and share with us their journeys, but they're going to be in bed for weeks or months. They're going to suffer terribly for both the journey. They're coming from across Canada and for sitting in the chair.

And the experts are also all volunteering their time, which is a huge commitment, and we need to honor them. Now, many who are watching this, and we pray that the entire nation will be watching this, But many that are watching this do not believe that the COVID-19 vaccines caused much harm at all, let alone, you know, significant harm. And they have a concern about vaccine hesitancy, and they have a concern that these proceedings will cause vaccine hesitancy. And, you know, I say to you that listening is the first step to regaining trust. Because the reality is a significant portion of this nation no longer trusts in our health care system in public health.

And if you have concern about vaccine hesitancy, if you don't believe that these vaccines caused harm, that's okay. And you can continue with whatever belief system you want, but understand listening to these people. Don't change your mind, but listen to them. didn't mean that, don't change your mind, but you don't have to. That's up to you. That's voluntary. But listen to them because that's the first step to regaining trust. And listening with an open mind, just listen to this, listen to their stories. It's the first step to regaining trust. It's the first step for us taking a step forward and treating them properly. And I'm going to make everyone watching this a promise that if you watch all four days of the Allison inquiry,

You will never be the same. It literally will be as if you walk through a door and the door's closed behind you and then you realize the door is locked and you can't go back. Your perception will have changed. We are about to be honored here. In the next four days, we are going to hear from vaccine-injured Canadians who have traveled at great cost to share their story with us. They've traveled to share something precious with us.

and they've traveled, literally, to free us. They're traveling for us. And so I'd like to just say, God bless them. Now, I'd like to call our first witness, who's already been announced. U.S. Senator Ron Johnson. Senator Johnson, will you take the Bible in your right hand, please? Senator Johnson, do you swear to tell the truth,

the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Now I'm going to introduce Senator Johnson before he's questioned, but I would like to say that it may be that history is being made today. It may be that never before in Canadian history, as a U.S. senator, testified in any committee room in Ottawa, let alone under oath. And Senator Johnson, we thank you for coming. I'm going to spend a bit of time outlining some of...

what Senator Johnson has done some of his responsibilities. And it's just so that those watching who don't know Senator Johnson come to understand that the amount of time that has been spent looking into COVID issues in an official and unofficial capacity. So Senator Johnson, I'm going to go through things. If I get anything wrong, just correct me afterwards. But Senator Johnson is an elected U.S. Senator been so for 16 years. From 2015 to 2021 he was the chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and he remains an active member of that committee to this day. The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is the Senate's primary oversight committee with broad

jurisdiction over government operations generally and the Department of Homeland Security. The Committee of Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs has almost unlimited jurisdiction regarding oversight of the United States federal government. Senator Johnson is currently the chairman of the US Senate permanent subcommittee on investigations. The permanent subcommittee on investigations is the committee's chief investigative subcommittee so of this Senate Committee on Homeland Security and it has the responsibility of studying and investigating the efficiency and economy of operations relating to all branches of government this subcommittee the permanent subcommittee on

investigations is also tasked with studying and investigating the compliance or non-compliance with rules regulations and laws investigating all aspects of crime and lawlessness within the United States, which have an impact upon or affect the national health, welfare and safety, including syndicated crime, investment fraud schemes, commodity and security fraud, computer fraud, and the use of offshore banking and corporate facilities to carry out criminal objectives. Now, together, the Committee of Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and the U.S. Senate permanent subcommittee on investigations are arguably two of the most powerful government committees in the world. Senator Johnson has unique expertise into COVID-19 and the COVID-19 vaccines. The government response in the United States to COVID-19 was within the Committee of Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, jurisdiction, and responsibility.

When this pandemic broke out, Senator Johnson was the chairperson of this committee that had the responsibility, the legal responsibility placed upon them by the electorate to investigate how the government was handling COVID-19 vaccines. As chairman of that, committee and I'm not I'm only going to go through things that jumped out at me to highlight to you the experience that Senator Johnson has but starting on February 12th

2020 he chaired an committee investigation into are we prepared protecting the US from global pandemics on March 5th 2020 he shared the federal interagency response to the coronavirus and preparing for future global pandemics. On May 6th, 2020, an inquiry into COVID-19 how new information should drive policy. In June 9, 2020, evaluating the federal government's procurement and distribution strategies in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. June 24, 2020, the role of the strategic national stockpile in pandemic response. In November 19, 2020, early outpatient treatment, an essential part of the COVID-19 solution.

December 8, 2020, carrying on that same investigation. He has organized events outside of his role as committee in July 15, 2021. The first time in the world, he chaired an event where vaccine injured persons, persons injured by the COVID-19 vaccine were able to share their stories. In November 2nd, 2021, he chaired an expert panel on federal vaccine mandates. He had expert speaks on several issues concerning the the vaccine mandates. On December 8, 2021, he didn't address to the U.S. Senate concerning COVID and the vaccines. I'm going to skip ahead here, but I think I'm making the point

that Senator Johnson has for years now, for six years, been involved specifically in conducting investigations. More recently, as chairman of the permanent subcommittee, on investigations. On May 21st, 2025, he chaired an investigation titled the corruption of science and federal health agencies, how health officials downplayed and hid myocarditis and other adverse events associated with the COVID-19 vaccines. On July 15th, 2025, that committee inquired on issues of vaccine injury on September 9, 2025, an inquiry, and it's titled How the Corruption of Science has impacted public perception and policy regarding vaccines. I noted when I was preparing that Toby Rogers, PhD, spoke about how early CDC data

showed that the COVID-19 vaccines actually had negative efficacy after six months, meaning that you are more likely to get COVID. April 29, 2026, an inquiry into how Biden health officials purposely turned a blind eye towards COVID-19 vaccine safety signals. If anyone wants, that is going to be an exhibit. An appendix four of that lists a number of activities that Senator Johnson has been involved with and that I'm not going to mention. And finally, on June 3, 2026, an inquiry plausible mechanism. of COVID-19 injections causing cancer and attacks on scientific publications and research. Senator Johnson, in investigating COVID-19 issues and COVID-19 vaccine issues, has access to information that the rest of us do not have.

And as I go through this, I hope that everyone can absolutely appreciate that you prepare for each of of these hearings. You speak to experts. It's like, you know, court. You know, there's five hours for every hour in court at least. So I'm introducing you, Senator Johnson, as the person, the government official that has investigated COVID-19, government response to COVID-19, vaccines, injuries caused by COVID-19 vaccines, more than any other government official, elected or unelected in the world. and you have investigated this as chairperson of committees that have a duty and responsibility to look into this. And on behalf of the Allison inquiry, we welcome you. Perhaps we should start just with me asking the question to, if you can tell us something about yourself,

I know I've gone on for a long time here, and how this journey started for you. Before I answer that, let me just, first of all, thanks for your kind introduction. I want to make a couple quick points. I genuinely and sincerely love Canada and Canadians. That's without dispute. I started traveling up to Canada as a teenager, living in Minneapolis, driving 24 hours up into Manitoba, past the paw to fish at a Reed Lake in a little lake called Lake Macrossin, where we crazily portaged our fishing boats through over Beaver dams, over a hill into this little lake.

I'm not quite sure why my dad thought we had drive 24 hours to get good fishing, because for the last 40 years, I've been making annual trip up to Lake of the Woods, and I've got to place Pipestone Point Resort, just south of Kenora, and I've enjoyed shore lunch chopping on your walleye for virtually every year in the last 40 years. My trips to, you know, the wonderful national parts, Bamp, Jasper, Whistler, Black, I'm always in terms of just getting the accommodation set, talking to people, you know, being greeted and, you know, those individuals who are running the resorts, just the kindest people. And again, it literally breaks my heart to see in one sporting event where America's national anthem was booed.

And again, I'm not assessing blame. We come from the same basic heritage, Anglo-Saxon, Judeo-Christian, our governments were, where they differ, they're still premised, foundationally, on the magnificent Magna Carta. So I just want to start out, because there will be things that will be critical here. There's no doubt about it. But I need to convey, I love Canada, and I generally love Canadians, and we need to repair that breach. We need to focus on those areas of agreement and move forward as strong allies and strong nations. second point. I'm going to be violating my own basic rule in terms of opening statements.

I'm pretty much a till of the hunt. I say five minutes, six or seven hundred words. But as we discussed yesterday and last night, this inquiry really does require the table being set, really taking a look at what's happened before. So I'm going to drone on along on that. But what I'll try and do is I'll probably interrupt myself. Do a couple charts. I like charts. but I encourage, and I truly appreciate the members of Parliament here showing up here. Interrupt me. Ask questions. I think this should be a discussion.

Rather than have long periods of, you know, the guy I'm a new, a senator, I know how to take a sick thing that this is not your traditional vaccine. And jot that down as a question to ask and we'll kind of delve into definition of gene therapy, how they change the definition of a vaccine during the pandemic. But those are my first points. And it seems you led with the question, too, just in terms of my background, what I brought into the pandemic. You know, I'm an accountant by educational training. I ran a manufacturing plant for 30-some years supplying, quite honestly, the medical device industry. So I know all kinds of things about GMP and traceability and what the medical industry does to ensure quality.

I was Gizs-Ack chair leading out the pandemic, and we held hearings on biotax simulations. Again, we'll probably talk about event 201. There's nothing wrong in trying to prepare for these things. The problem is we took those preparations, threw them all out the window and engaged in what I would call tyranny. Probably the most relevant part of my background that impacts how I approach COVID was the fact that our first child, daughter Carrie, was born of the very serious congenital heart defect. It was called transposition to the gray arteries. So her order and pulmonary artery were reversed.

She, in effect, had two circulatory systems, one that just circulated bread through her lungs and one that circulated blood through the body. Now, when you're in utero, that's fine because you've got holes in your heart that allows that blood to circulate. So the first day of life, when she was diagnosed, a wonderful pediatric cardiologist came in one-thirty in the morning. catheterized her, put that catheter through that hole in the heart, blew up a balloon, ripped it through that membrane to allow her blood to oxygenate for, they hoped it would be two years.

Carrie got down streamed about eight months, at which point when her heart is the size of a small plum, in seven hours of open heart surgery, they completely rebaffled the upper chamber heart. Now medicine has progressed to, they just changed. arteries, right? Makes sense. That was about a 50% mortality procedure back then. So they rebaffled the upper chamber of her heart. Her heart operates backwards to this day. But she's 42 years old. She's the mother of two wonderful children, my grandchildren, through surrogacy. And I raise that issue because I come into the pandemic with just a deep appreciation for doctors, for nurses, who in many respects are the primary care givers.

The doctors come in and they've got all their expertise, but it's the nurses that are sit there and putting the IV lines and watching the patients and providing the care. A deep appreciation for it, a deep respect for how far medicine is advanced, what we can do. I always heard the term medical practice and viewed that as a building, a clinic, a hospital. but it was during that

appeared with my daughter, I realized what the term medical practice truly meant. Practice. It's how we have advanced medicine. We've allowed doctors to take that Hippocratic oath, be first responsible to the patient, use their skill, use their training, and they practice medicine. And the relationship between the patient and doctor

should be inviolate. That should be what should have been driving what we're doing during the pandemic. Imagine what could have happened during the pandemic. If we didn't have federal health agencies establishing these protocols, if we didn't have the experts

who were completely wrong, but instead, if we allow doctors to be doctors, practice medicine, practice the new tools, the internet. You know, back in the Spanish flu, we didn't have antibiotics. We didn't have the internet to rapidly, instantaneously transmit information.

I don't know if you remember. Remember those doctors in New York? I remember one in particular. I knew his name at one point in time, but he would, after a 14 or 16-hour shift, he'd come in front of his little camera. It would convey to his colleagues around the country, around the world. This is what we're seeing. This is so unusual.

People are coming in ambulatory, talking with unbelievably low oxygenaries. So we've never seen anything like this before. There were doctors in California that were using these cheap generic drugs and having success. All those voices were silenced. They were canceled. And so if you ask my background, that's, you know, I came into this with a deep appreciation of reverence for doctors and medical establishment. And I was profoundly, and I have been profoundly saddened. but what we witnessed over the last five years.

So with that, let me start my, we'll continue my filibuster, but start my formal written testimony, distinguished members of Parliament, Mr. Allison, Mr. Buckley. First of all, thanks, thank you for this opportunity to testify, but thank you for having the courage to hold this inquiry. I would thank all the witnesses for coming and testifying.

It's truly an honor. Although the coronavirus pandemic has had a tragic and lasting impact on global society, I feel and understand why so many people want to forget what happened and simply move on. But we can't. Now if you want to ensure that the mistakes made in our miserably failed response to COVID aren't repeated the next time. And right now, it just seems like some people are hoping and praying for next time. It's sick. It's hard not to believe that.

Without dispute, the early news and images coming out of China, Italy, and New York City, as they were coping with SARS-CoVi 2 were alarming. Images are responders and health officials in moon suits and reports of COVID hotspots and deaths dominated news cycles. We didn't know if this new virus would be as deadly as Ebola, with an infection fatality rate of 40%, MERS at 30%, or is her as 30%? or SARS-CoV-1 and an 8 to 10% infection and fatality rate. By March 17, 2020, in an article published in stat news, Professor Stanford Professor John Eunitas analyzed the data from the Diamond Princess

cruise ship that had been quarantined due to a COVID outbreak. From that data, Professor E.Nus is projected an infection fatality rate for SARS-CoV-2 of 0.1 1.25%. Point, 125%. The predicted range somewhere between 0.05 to 1%. Now, perspective, an average flu season has an infection of fatality rate of approximately 0.1%. By April 2020, Oxford's Center for Evidence-based Medicine was also predicting an IFR, ranging somewhere between 0.1% and 0.35%. Probably no worse than that. bad flu season. Again, this is in March of 2020. Because the rest of the world is freaking out, we're starting to get data that, okay, this could be a deadly disease, particularly for elderly, particularly if you have certain comorbidities. But for the rest of us, if you have a good immune system, it might be pretty bad flu. Don't freak out. I certainly wasn't immune to the early justifiable fear caused by the unknown. But those two predictions provided valuable perspective.

He's my concerns and made me highly skeptical of the scaremongering and draconian response measures being proposed and implemented. But fear was exactly what those in charge wanted to stoke, so they can use that fear to increase their power and control over our lives. even though on February 8th, 2020, February 8th, Anthony Fauci privately confided to his diary a similar case fatality rate for COVID, quote, more likely 0.2 to 0.3% rather than 2%. That's a quote in his diary. With transmissibility, quote, like a bad influenza, unquote. publicly, it is March 2020 testimony to the House Oversight Committee, he predicted overall

mortality around 2 to 3 percent, 10 times higher. It's about 10 times higher than the flu. He used a scaremongering to push mandates and societal lockdowns that devastated. And I mean devastated people's lives and global economies. In March 2020, I publicly stated that we tragically lose 39,000 people. in traffic fatalities each year, but we don't shut down our highways. From the White House podium, Anthony Fauci said that comment was, quote, way out. Actually, my comment was highly appropriate analogy.

There was no way we shut down our economy to slow the spread. We had to continue on with our lives. Now, federal workers could work from home, ask another white collar office workers. teachers. But blue-collar workers, the people who actually make our lives livable, make and deliver our food, other products and necessities, they had to go to work to keep our economy operating. And they did. The inequity of shutdowns didn't end with the disparity between blue and white-collared workers. Small main street businesses were shut down by government edict and went bankrupt, wiping out the lifetime savings of their owners.

But the big box stores, big tech giants, not only stayed opened, they thrived as their smaller competitors were destroyed. Using Forbes' World Billionaires List, Oxfam reported that the 2,357 billionaires on the global list increased their wealth by $3.9 trillion from March 30th to December 30th, 2020 through the pandemic. So let me interrupt myself right now because I think this is I want to put up a chart and I've got the clicker. I haven't quite understood why this chart, well I actually do understand it, but this chart or similar charts should have gotten a lot more attention. What this chart shows are the blue bars. Those are new cases per day. The orange line

is the percent of the U.S. population vaccinated. Now, what's important about this chart? First of all, recognize the number of new cases pretty well peaked by January of 2021. Again, this is U.S. government data. I'm not making this up. This is real hard data. And you can see how precipitously

the new cases were falling. The pandemic was fading. By the time you had any kind of significant increase in vaccination, The, you know, already by March, it's, again, it's way down, and vaccination rates are only 12%. Now, had the vaccine actually worked, I mean, the way I would have thought the vaccine actually working is once 60, 70% of Americans were vaccinated, you'd see just a long tail, and the pandemic would be over. That's not what happened.

You know, very early in the, during the administration of the vaccines, I became aware of a Belgian doctor, Dr. Gert van der Boch. He's not only a doctor in veterinary medicine, but he's a PhD in immunology. He worked in all kinds of biotech businesses, Glasgow Smith Klein, Novartis. He also worked for the Bill and Linda Gates Foundation and for Gavi. This is a respected virologist. He knows something about vaccines and immunology. He was out saying that mass vaccination in the midst of a global pandemic was probably the worst possible thing you could do.

Because the virus, which evolves rapidly, would evolve to evade those vaccines. And you would literally drive variants That second peak you see in this chart, that's Delta, which according to the doctors that I knew that they were out there treating, actually treating COVID patients, found it to be a far more deadlier version variant than the alpha. This variant was followed by amicrom, which was less deadly but more transmissible. So again, that's what we were actually dealing with, but public health officials, they weren't acknowledging this. They want to make sure they got that experimental gene therapy in every arm. Let me continue.

I've labeled those who impose multiple forms of pandemic tyranny on society, the COVID cartel, the Biden administration, federal health agencies, big pharma, the legacy media and big tech social media giants. The assaults on freedom and other malign actions have been nothing short of breathtaking. Mask mandates, forced lockdowns, vaccine mandates, suppression and censorship of the truth, lying to and withholding information from the public, vilifying and destroying the careers of doctors and others who disagreed with the cartel. So much of what it was being said and done by the global cartel simply made no sense. have we always believed that early disease detection prompts early treatment and produces better outcomes? Why was that fundamental tenet of medicine not only ignored but sabotaged?

Why were frontline doctors who had the courage and compassion to treat COVID patients from the start of the pandemic censored, vilified, and had their careers destroyed? How could health officials deny the effectiveness of natural immunity when our practically half of the fact? for the people testing positive for COVID were asymptomatic. Does that a sign that your natural immunity is preventing you from getting ill? And if they denied national immunity, they wanted that injection, every arm. The NIH guideline for COVID was to get tested. If you tested positive, you go home and isolate yourself. In other words, do nothing and hope you don't get so sick that you require.

hospitalization. Far too often, the stories of COVID hospitalization were horrific. Parents lost their, patients lost their freedom. Family members could not visit and comfort dying loved ones. Patient and family member requests to administering multi-drug protocols using cheap, widely available. FDA-approved generic drugs were rejected in favor of highly expensive remdesivir, which, by the way, nurses often called run. death is near because it knocks out your kidneys and other organs, but also ventilators with a depressingly low rate of success. Athlete America, with 4% of the world's population, all this mental technology, all these experts, all these federal health agencies accounted for 16% of COVID

deaths globally. And we won't talk about how those deaths were probably overstated. I don't know how anybody could review the results of our response to COVID and conclude it was anything other than a miserable failure. The human toll of the economic devastation caused by shutdowns that didn't work is incalculable. The global economic cost of our response to COVID has been estimated as high as $17 trillion. Hundreds of thousands of lives were unnecessarily lost because early treatment was sabotaged. to ensure a vaccine and injection would obtain emergency use authorization. We'll talk about that. I've got the FDA guidelines here.

Ask me that question. The deaths and disabilities caused by the experimental gene therapy pushed on billions of people globally are still being denied. But as you will hear over the next few days, they are real and devastating. By the time the COVID vaccines obtained their emergency use authorizations, The cartel was firmly in control the narrative. Phrases such as follow the science. Remember that one? And remember who was the science.

Safe and effective. No one is safe until everyone is safe. Which, by the way, if the vaccines were that effective, why would you care whether somebody else is vaccinated? As long as you. I mean, I never made sense to me. No one is safe and tell everyone is safe. Or is everyone is vaccinated?

This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated. vaccinated. Vaccinates will keep it from getting affected and spreading it. If you get vaccinated, you will not die. These phrases were used as nauseam to bludgeon, bludgeon the public into submission. A few months into the vaccine rollout, my investigations have shown that the FDA and CDC were not, were not doing sincere safety surveillance. And it appears this willful ignorance was a worldwide phenomenon. Every time one of their tools showed a safety signals, they denigrated that tool and stopped using it. We have multiple emails to explain exactly why. Making the public aware of safety signals would cause, quote, vaccine hesitancy.

They wanted that experimental gene therapy shot in billions of arms, and they weren't going to let anything stop then. That attitude and objective continues to this day. For perspective, in 1976, the swine flu vaccine program was terminated after approximately 45 million doses, resulted in 400 or 500 cases of Guillain-Barre syndrome, and a couple dozen deaths being associated with that vaccine. He was shut down. They pulled the vaccines. By the end of April 2021, just four and a half months in the COVID vaccine rollout, Vez was reporting 2,926 deaths worldwide, with 39.5% of those deaths occurring on the day of vaccination than one or two days.

And this is April 2021. When I asked NIH Director Francis Collins directly about what Veyers was showing at that point in time, he acknowledged six deaths that been attributed to the Johnson-Jolson vaccine, but it's to the other 2,920 deaths report on VERS. he simply and callously stated, Senator, people die. Senator, can I interrupt you? You said we could interrupt you. For those that don't know what VAERS is, would you maybe explain that term?

That is the CDC's vaccine adverse event reporting system. It's a voluntary system, and I'll enter into the record here, the CDC Commission Harvard University Pilgrim Study, when they looked at Vayers and reported in 2010, 2011, it only reports about 1% of adverse events. Now, it's voluntary, but that's what Vayers is. And again, we should get into a much more robust discussion of Vayers. By the way, when I asked Francis Collins about 2,920 deaths,

when you go back, they were being deluged. They had to be freaking out. Their contractor, they hire a contractor to load them into the VAIR system. You know, they get them in, you know, self-reported. Then they need a contract to do that. That contract had to hire another 290 people. They were so backlogged. The contractor's worst-case scenario prior to, you know, as they got into this, was a thousand a day.

In 2021, we averaged 27,000. 700 adverse events. So again, they were so backlogged when I talked to Francis Collins, because I'm watching this stuff. And we'll talk about why I was watching this, because I had conversation with Dr. Michael Eden. We need to talk about that. There's all the 2,900 20 deaths. Now that we've actually got the VAIR system, we go back in history, by end of April, there were actually 6,971 deaths. Not 2,900, 6,900 deaths, ordered reported. It just hadn't been loaded in the system. Wasn't public yet, with 40% of those occurring on the day of vaccination or within one or two days. Okay, I know Vayers, they always say

doesn't prove causation. I got that, but that's a correlation. I mean, 40% of deaths occurring on the day of vaccination. You know, I know if I had a loved one that went in perfectly healthy, got vaccinated, dropped dead, didn't wake up from their sleep. I know what I blame, but our federal health agencies didn't. That pretty well sums up U.S. Federal Health Agency's ongoing attitude regarding their limited concern over COVID vaccine injuries and deaths. As a result of that indifference and lack of acknowledgement, those who have been vaccine injured are largely ignored

and are unable to access effective treatment. You want to know my bad, the reason I'm still doing this, the reason I ran for a third term is because I got connected to the injection injury. nobody else was advocating for them. That's why I am so appreciative. God bless you for advocating for them and letting them tell the stories here over the next few days. Go to my next chart.

So this chart, I guess in my mind, mine is famous, infamous to the COVID cartel. Because when I would talk about this chart, and I would be on a, let's say a radio program, that radio host would be deplatformed by Facebook. Now, these aren't my numbers. These are numbers coming right off of the VAIR system and the Thayer system. That's the FDA adverse event.

That's on drugs. Viers is about vaccines. So what do you need to understand about this? This is to date through April of this, no, through July of this year. And what I was always doing is because, again, I was advocating for early treatment using ivermectin, a Nobel Prize winning drug, hydroxychloroquine, that was actually targeted early on in the SARS-MERS as potentially an effective antiviral to treat SARS. But as comparing the COVID injections and remdesivir to these other drugs. And you can see, ivermectin in the scheme of things is a pretty

darn safe drug. And yet the FDA mounted a campaign, if you remember that, famous tweet, come on, y'all aren't a horse. And this is a Nobel Prize, it's saved, I don't know how many millions of people from river blindness. And now we find these antipyersetics have an antiviral, possibly anti-cancer properties as well. Senator. But they're cheap. Just on Ivermectin, I mean, my understanding is, it's the World Health Organization. I'm just picking a number, which is likely accurate. But I think they've distributed about

400 million doses of that in the third world because it's so low. effective as an anti-parasite without any oversight, without any prescription at all. And you already mentioned it had received a Nobel Prize. It might be one of the most widely used and safest drugs in history. And yet doctors had their medical license, if not pulled, threatened, for curing people, curing them. I mean, I didn't have people contact me that I could refer to those very few or low percentage number of doctors who'd actually risk their careers to prescribe ivermectin, and I would hear remarkable stories. You know, couldn't breathe within six hours, all of a sudden they got the breath back.

So, again, I am thoroughly convinced Ivermectin worked, okay? But it was denigrated. You'll see, as of today, there's about 1.7 million adverse events reported worldwide to the Veyer system. Again, Vares is conversant. It takes 30 to 45 minutes. Doctors don't report things here. But about 50 to 60, I think 60 to 7 percent of reports are by medical professionals. Yeah, the health agencies doing, oh, these are self-reported, a bunch of anti-vax, you know, fanatics.

No, I mean, a majority of these things are actually reported by medical professionals. We're up to over 39,000 deaths. Currently, it's about 24% of those deaths are occurring on the day of vaccination within one or two days. So again, this chart, and I started producing this thing, I think to go along with my first hearing with the injection injured in Milwaukee in June of 2021, it's been censored. It's been censored. It's, you know, people who've had me on showing this thing, been deplatformed by Facebook. They just, they just didn't want to look at the truth. So again, as of July 31st, there were 1.7 million adverse events. I won't repeat that. As long as I can remember when faced with a serious medical condition, the recommendation

has been to seek a second and possibly a third opinion. Once again, that basic tenant of medicine was violated. The health pandemic, only the narrative and recommended approach of the COVID cartel was allowed. Anything contrary to the edicts was labeled dangerous misinformation or a brand new term for inconvenient truths, malinformation. True information, but boy, if it goes against that COVID cartel narrative, now is malinformation. As the U.S. Senator, I tried to expose the insanity of our COVID response with hearings in 2020,

by as chairman of the Senate committee on Homeland Security, governmental affairs, and public events in 2021 and 2022 after we lost the majority. In May 2020, my hearing featured Dr. Johnny Anitas testifying about the Princess Cruz analysis and Dr. P.R. Corey for the first time, testifying about the use of the use of the U.S. of corticosteroids in hospital treatment. I remember he was vilified after that hearing. Until I think about eight weeks later, they actually ran a trial with dexymethosone,

which is corticosteroid, it was effective. Now, they always underdosed it, so they didn't use it, utilize it effectively, but again, he was first vilified until he had a study that proved it would work. In November, December, 2020 hearings on early treatment, Dr. Peter McCulloch, George Fried, Pierre-Cori talked about the successful multi-drug protocols using hydroxychloricine and ivermectin. My first public event after losing the majority was in June

of 2021 in Milwaukee where five vaccine injured individuals told their stories. In November 2020, I held another event on vaccine injuries, injection injuries in D.C. that included medical experts and the injection injured. On January 22nd, 2022, a host of five-hour-long public event in D.C. titled COVID-19, a second opinion. That event was organized around Dr. McCulloch's four pillars of pandemic response, limiting the spread, early treatment, hospital treatment, and vaccination. At that time, it had been viewed by over 5 million times demonstrating the public's desire for more and better information. I've continued to hold hearings and conduct oversight, which were not ridiculed and vilified, which is generally been in the reaction, have been largely ignored by legacy media.

It is disheartening that so few in government, the medical establishment and media have shown any interest in examining our destructive response to COVID. And again, I applaud this inquiry's effort to overcome that apathy and the cover-up. The good news is that after four years of Biden administration stonewalling my oversight requests, we have finally begun obtaining the documents required for a COVID reckoning. The world owes the debt of gratitude to HHS Secretary Kennedy and his commitment to radical transparency. Early releases were exposed to cover-up by U.S. federal health officials of the safety signals who were screaming at them and the lies they told the public. Dr. Fauci's diary and text

messages also confirmed that my oversight was on target and has revealed the truth. Because the diary and text messages were Dr. Fauci's, even the legacy media who have been complicit in the cover up have been forced to report on it. And I hope to report on this inquiry. By uncovering and exposed to the truth or not, but uncovering and exposed to the truth will not be easy. The COVID cartel will never admit that they were wrong. They can't afford to admit they were wrong because the body count from their corrupt actions is simply too high. And unfortunately, considering who the members of the COVID cartel are, they will use all the awesome power at their disposal to frustrate every effort to expose them and prove them wrong.

But once someone's eyes have been open to the truth, it's almost impossible to close them. Does more and more people become aware of what has happened and what is happening? I have to believe. Truth will have the power to overcome the lies. This inquiry is an important step in opening up more eyes. With that, again, thank you for allowing me to testify. Senator Johnson, when you're talking about Anthony Fauci, My understanding is he was the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease in the United States.

Correct. He held that position for, oh, something like 40 years. I think he retired as the highest paid government employee. Issued billions of dollars for the grants, which came in pretty handy when he wanted to cover up his involvement in gain of function research that probably produced the coronavirus. has been revealed now in his diaries that he utilized the government resources, employees to apply for awards during the pandemic, which put over a million dollars in his pocket. Thereby certainly violating federal rules about utilizing federal employees and federal property for personal gain. He's a bad man.

And I'm just wanting, because Canadians will be familiar, but I just, I want to you know, make sure that everyone understands. So he held an official role and we will have seen him on TV standing first beside President Trump and then beside President Biden. And isn't he the gentleman who said basically I am the science? He was the main spokesman, I think, for the entire world, setting the case for COVID. So I just want the audience, those watching to understand that we're talking about the fellow that was on TV as the world expert directing this. And you're saying when you talk about his diary, can you explain? Because my understanding is he basically kept a daily diary, an electronic diary, on a government server. And that has now been disclosed to the public. Now, first of all, it took us tell literally about a month ago to obtain that. But we're still having a hard time. Even though Secretary Kennedy is absolutely committed to radical transparency, there are, again,

you still have the tens of thousands of bureaucrats inside Health and Human Services Department that were probably complicit in this. They're sabotaging the effort. They are not cooperating in terms of giving this information. But yeah, because he kept his diary on government device, we were able to access that and finally show the public what a complete hypocrity was. And again, there have been, and I truly appreciate, I know Dr. Jessica Rose in the audience here, I mean, those people who've kind of crowdsourced that,

I've literally not had time to read the 1100 pages out myself, but haven't had to because once that was made public, that transparency, that we've had all kinds of people, the researchers that are reading that and revealing, he said this, he confided this to his diary, but this is what he said publicly. And again, I think the most egregious lie that he told the public was, again, when he privately was thinking is,

you know, maybe twice the bad flu season, which you wouldn't shut down the economy for. You wouldn't force a experimental gene therapy into billions of arms for something like a bad flu season. And that publicly, so we could impose those measures, so we could gain that level of control. So I don't know, 10 times worse than the flu. And continue to scaremonger, which, by the way, like he did with HIV,

he did the exact same thing. I know I've been vilified for pointing that out, but it's true. he scaremongered HIV he scaremongered the coronavirus pandemic as well Mr. Giovanni it did work I guess it does work

I'll try to be as brief as I can because I know there's a lot of people that have questions and want to ask but it's this is wildly close to my heart so I'm looking at my phone because I made notes as you were speaking Senator so number one

Dean M.P. Allison Thanks a million. This is really, really well done. I really appreciate you being such an inter, an amazing intervention for this, such an advocate for it. I don't know how many Wednesday morning Ontario caucus meetings you brought this up. And so I just want to say thank you from the bottom of my heart. You truly have been a leader on all of this. Secondly, Senator Johnson, I've never had a chance to meet you before. I can tell why you've been elected so many times. You're really a real class act.

That's really awesome, especially in the midst of the midterms, where you could be in the United States stumping for other folks. You care enough to come here. So thank you very much, Senator. And with that, and I mean this very honestly, if you ever want to have a really good fishing trip, you contact me. We'll go to way northern Ontario and we'll do a fly-in fishing trip. I just happen to maybe know the person or maybe I own the outfitting business. The reason this is so near and dear to my heart today, why it's why it's so darn important for me to be here.

So I was elected at the end of 2019. I call myself a 2019 political baby. And everybody from the class of 2019 is in the same shoes as I am because we literally were elected at the end of 2019, I believe we got to sit in December for about two and a half weeks.

We got one week in January, two weeks in February roughly, and on March the 6th, they said, get home, go home now, don't come back. It's way too scary. And I remember literally leaving the House of Commons, them literally making the speaker making an announcement, get out now.

And we could have swore that the sky was falling, Senator. That to be said is, all that to be said also is, because I was a political baby, I really only had about three months under my belt, Senator. But let me tell you, sir, the amount of people that contacted my office, So my writing is Essex, which is right next to Windsor. So next to the busiest international border crossing in North America.

Doctors, nurses, first responders, business owners, everything come crashing down very, very quickly in that if they didn't get the shot, they didn't cross the border. And so being a first responder myself, I knew that I was saying, I was. hearing various stories from other locations in that if you don't get the shot, you don't respond to the fire department. You don't, you can't be a home caregiver. My parents were driving me crazy. Chris, please get the shot. Please get the shot. I said, I don't want the darn shot. They said, please get the shot. And the only thing that got me to get the shot is I realized I was representing 131,000 people from the Great Riding of Essex. And I was, you know, allowed back in the House of Commerce on the green carpet of the House and Commerce of Commons

unless I got the shot. That's the only reason I didn't get one but two shots so I could represent the people. I'm going to take it a step further and this is going to get personal. That's a good thing I got these right here. Because I do, I am leading up to a question, Mr. Allison. Ironically, one of the people that was on my bum the most of getting the shot was my mother, my best friend. And shortly after she got the shot, she came down with esophagus cancer. And I'm not a conspiracy person, by the way. I just want to put that on the record. However, I just want to just, because I just got a text, I asked somebody. I just text my father. and the doctor called it turbo cancer.

The vaccine accelerates, the spreads, the cancer. I'm not going to mention the doctor's name, but I do have it here. He explained the same thing to my father. London doctor said, if the claim that made major settlements is possible. Got through that one better than I thought I was going to, but I guess because I was reading. I guess my question is, Senator, by the way, I had a really good chat with Congressman Heisinga just a couple weeks ago. What a great man. I guess my question to you is, have you heard about this acceleration of the turbo cancer? Is that something that's on the radar? I don't

have any answers for it. All I know is my best friend's been gone for about three years now. and I don't I realize everybody passes but I know it real fast she was in the hospital for 13 days thank you mr. Allison so MP lose first of all my sincere condolves was on your loss no I have absolutely heard of terrible cancers the plausible net mechanisms for the injection to cause cancer and there's multiple plausible mechanisms for that we I actually held a hearing a couple months ago about the plausible mechanisms of the injection causing cancer and the corruption of medical journals. Because one of our witnesses, Wafik-Elduri, director of cancer for Brown University, until they stripped him that title because he issued a study on published it on Onco Target. Onco Target was immediately targeted or hit by denial of service attacks.

And he's been vilified ever since. But now this has been a concern for really a number of years. It's been largely covered up. It's very difficult to prove. Remember, what Pfizer did in its trial is very rapidly, they unblinded the trial. And so the placebo group also got injections. So now you've lost the ability to monitor long term serious side effects. They knew what they were doing. Okay, the best way to cover up side effects is unblind the placebo control and you've lost all the data.

What I found very frustrating, still find frustrating, is it was almost impossible to get autopsies during COVID. I mean, we've heard the stories of, you know, people breaking the neck of motorcycle accident, being brought to the hospital, expiring, you know, in the emergency room, testing positive for COVID, that was a COVID death. But I would really urge anybody that has a suspicion on this is to request an autopsy and do a tissue sample and look for evidence to spike protein in those tumors. And I think if we had, the more optopsies we had, the more evidence we might, mount that maybe, maybe the medical establishment, federal health agencies will at least open up

their eyes that possibility because, remember, this MRNA technology is not going away. As much as those of us who view this is, you know, a deadly shot, this is a highly profitable platform. They've been work on this for years. I mean, this was their goal. I mean, this was their opportunity, and they seized that opportunity. In the U.S., we just had the Moderna flu-MRNA vaccine injection approved. And they approved on the basis that it's only 0.1% higher serious adverse events than the current flu shot.

This is not maybe a bad time to just talk about the difference between absolute versus relative risk. Now, let's not do that. Because we're talking about turbo cancers. But again, I'll just conclude. I think it's extremely important that anybody suspects that request, at least a tissue sample and get it, and I'm not sure the, you know, Jessica Rose can probably tell you later on exactly what the test is, but test to see without there's any evidence of spike protein in particular tuber.

No, you know, Dr. Angus Gogh, Dalglish, highly expected oncologists from London, also test fighter hearing. And again, he's and just clinically, he just sees these turbill cancers, you know, people in complete remission and their cancers

come roaring back, but it's just one of those things that federal health officials, Big Pharma, Pfizer-Moderna, they're just bearing their heads in the sand because they don't want to look at it. They don't want to admit it. Mr. Giovanni. Thank you, M.P. Allison. Thank you, Mr. Buckley.

So, Senator Johnson, thank you for being here and thank you for your comments and sharing your observations and what you learn through your process. You know, we heard at the beginning before you spoke about some of the stigma around this discussion and how difficult it was for some people who want to share their personal stories and how their families have been affected to even be here today or be here over the course of this week. it's one of those examples of what I feel is a war on common sense in politics that often takes place. So it is puzzling to me that on one hand we can have a political culture where talking about these issues is controversial or difficult. And yet on the other hand, we literally have a program in the federal government designed to compensate people for vaccine injury. So just to give you some background, I don't know how familiar you are with it in Canada, but since June of 2021, there has been what was then called the Vaccine Impact Assistance Program, has since been renamed, or sorry, at the time it was called the Vaccine Injury Support Program.

Now it is called the Vaccine Impact Assistance Program. And since June of 2021, over 3,500 claims have been filed. over 250 have been successfully approved by the Medical Review Board, and over $21 million of Canadian taxpayer money has gone from the federal government to compensate people deemed to be vaccine injured. So it is confusing that that could be happening with our public dollars, and at the same time, this is considered a controversial thing to talk about. So I think two questions I'd like to ask you for your thoughts on.

One is, in terms of the specifics of vaccine injury, or as you put it, injection injury, what kind of data do you think our government should be collecting for programs like this to be optimally successful? Because right now it has gone from what was a third-party administered program over the last four and a half years to now being a government administered program, which in theory means we can collect better data than we have been. and I think it would be good to get your thoughts on what kind of data and what kind of questions our government should be asking. The second question I have for you is just, why do you think the war on common sense seems to be so effective on this issue? And I would say since I became a member of parliament two years ago on many other topics, it seems like there is a gap between the kind of sensible conversations that Canadians are able to have with each other versus what we, are able to talk about effectively in political spaces.

Is it MP Jiamani? Giovanni. Javani. Yeah. First of all, thanks for coming. Thanks for your interest here. This is actually an area where Canada is ahead of America in terms of the compensation of these injection injured.

I think our program is CICP. I think it's countermeasure injection compensation program. Last time I looked, we literally had paid out less than $100,000. Now, it's probably more than that. now. We've got something, I think, 11,000 people on the list. It's very similar to the childhood vaccine injury program in America, too. The way they manage the funds is they just deny vaccine injuries. They deny injection injuries. So there's obviously a certain narrow type of injury that they've kind of acknowledged, like myocarditis or something like that. And they'll

be grudgingly, okay, we'll approve that. But they fight these things tooth and nail. The dollar amounts, I mean, the liability, if these programs were actually administered, honestly, would literally be in the hundreds of billions of dollars. I mean, the expense, she was Breanne Dresson. Again, she testified in my June 2021 hearing. By the way, at least two or three of them in that initial event,

I had, they volunteered for the trials. She was subjected to Astorzeneca trial and severely injection. She literally has hundreds of thousand dollars of bills. And of course, Astorzeneca, I think at one point sent her a check in settlement of all claims, some like $1,300 or $1,700. I mean, these farm soup companies completely abdicated their responsibility to the trial participants. They just turned their back and walked away. Got liability protection, right? So it's really sick.

You know, as a fiscal conservative, you know, I fear the dollar amount that we're going to owe these people if they're actually treated fairly. It literally be, I believe, hundreds of billions of dollars. Again, we got, I think, Breed just sent this to me, by the way. React 19, and they've got a corollary group here in Canada. React 19 has 40,000 members in the U.S., 20-plus partners' organizations all over the place. 75% of their members never had COVID. So it's not long COVID, which is, I think, the big escape hatch that's being used by public health officials for a lot of these injection injuries. Well, it's long COVID.

Now it's injection injuries. 53% of their members had the onset within 24 hours, 80% onset within a week. Surveyed over three years, only 5% have recovered. 94% have symptoms, three or more organ systems, complex multisystem syndrome, and we can maybe read you later, Janet Woodcock's email that we now have made public where she was hearing from these folks and admitted that this is going to be very difficult to diagnose. Unfortunately, where you're behind, at least in America, there are some doctors, very few who are willing to acknowledge these injection injuries and treat the patients. Here in Canada, there are few of none.

And Brie told me a story. While she was actually testifying one of my events, they were contacted by an injection injured Canadian citizen, a mom, whose husband left her, whose husband told her children. deliver and she's so despondent that I guess Canada has a way out. By the way, I always knew that Canada had a assisted suicide program. I never realized until Brito, you have an acronym for it made. When I heard of that, the first thing I thought it was Logan's run, that science fiction of its dystopian future, where they forced executed people once. they reached 30, they called it renew. But unfortunately, that mom availed herself of made that dystopic acronym and lost, you know, had medically assisted, or medical assistance in dying, I guess what it

stands for. That's what they helped her. So what we found, um, After that June 2021 event, I want to talk a little about this, is because that was misinformation, right? That was malinformation. And so it's been discovered through the Missouri-Louisiana lawsuit against Dr. Fauci and the Biden administration. The Biden administration is putting a lot of pressure on these social media companies to police and shut down and, you know, the platform misinformation. So Facebook shut down their support groups. So these people who are being gassolid whose doctors are saying it's all in your head weren't getting treatment anywhere other than an AIH, and we should talk about that from my report.

The only salas they had were their support groups on Facebook and other social media. And so after Bree and these four other brave individuals just told their story to the Milwaukee press, Facebook started shutting down the support groups, so they had no solace. So suicide rates, unassisted suicide rates within the U.S. React 19 groups increased. And by the way, they're increasing now. In that event, their plea was they just wanted to be seen, heard, and believe. You'll probably hear that over the next. They just, they want to be seen.

They want to be heard. They want to be believed. So they can access treatment. All the verb, we got to get into this much greater detail, but in my April 29, 2026 report, where the real revelations, Peter Marks was warned of the algorithm was going to cover up safety signals. They were shown safety signals. They denied them to this day.

In the same report, we also reveal that in March of 2020, a study was being a study was being undertaken by a doctor named Dr. Nath within the NIH and team of researchers where they were diagnosing in treating people like Briand dressing. So they were acknowledging the injection injuries. They were treating them somewhat successfully. They told, I think it was, I can't remember something like 23. I can't remember the exact number of people being treated. They told them, be quiet. Tell no one. We don't want to disseminate the information until we complete the study and we can go to the medical community and we can tell about, okay, here's the best practice for treating your injuries.

And, of course, they weren't going to tell anybody because they want to continue to be treated. The problem is they never went public. With the injection injured, people like Bree were told, and actually Dr. Nath told her before the June 21st event, you know, make this point. that early intervention is crucial to successful treatment. At the NIH, CDC, FDA, they never, they never, well, eventually they took that study in like the summer of 2022, put it on a preprint server and told no one. So to this day in America, there's not guidance. There's not the FDA, and I say, hey, these injection injuries are real. and here's the best we know in terms of treating them right now.

They haven't done that. Which again is why this inquiry is so vitally important for those people that were harmed by this countermeasure. Senator Johnson, early on you had mentioned that you wanted to speak about whether or not the COVID-19, what we call vaccines or vaccines, or something else. Can you address that for us now? Sure.

It was not so curious, but suspicious, that September of 2021, let me back up. Remember how safe and effective these things are, right? But we all had to get injection because nobody's safe until everybody is injected. And again, if, you know, Fauci on May 16th, Fauch said, people get the vaccine become dead end to the virus. And transmission was extremely unlikely. But three days later, you're saying, well, I'd probably need a booster. In July 2021, Biden said, you're not going to get COVID if you get these vaccinations. In December 14th, he said, this is a pandemic of the unvaccinated. Make sure you're vaccinated so you don't spread the disease.

I mean, that's the message, right? Got to get vaccinated. If you do, you're not going to die. This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated. But in July of 2020, 2021, in Provincetown, Massachusetts, they began reporting a major outbreak of breakout cases. People who were fully vaccinated getting COVID. By the way, I think the number one adverse event of a COVID injection was getting COVID. Don't tell anybody that. Can I just stop you and keep you on that point for a minute? Because there was some chuckles here.

But there's actually a lot of research, I think the first being the Cleveland Clinic, showing that with each shot, you're more likely to catch COVID. And I know many people watching that. We're going to be calling an expert later in these proceedings using Ontario data for the first time, showing that, you know, after about six months into the pandemic, our vaccination program, you are more likely to get COVID if you were vaccinated than not. And I think for a lot of people, that is a new idea and shocking. For people that believe our concerns are long COVID, thank goodness, we took the vaccine,

or we had the vaccine to reduce long COVID. It might be a shock to be, no, the vaccines caused COVID. The leading, likely the leading side effect of the COVID-19 vaccine was COVID. It's like negative efficacy. When they say, well, safe and effective, well, effective at what? Effective at getting COVID. So can you spend a bit of time on that? I can assure you that it's a brand new idea to many people of view it.

Well, again, you definitely quiz people like Dr. Jessica Rose here about, you know, with every booster shot, I think it's after the third or fourth of the booster, the antibodies that it produced IG4, are the same antibodies that, like an allergist, tries to boost up with you because it suppresses your immune system to the allergen. So you don't get all inflammation, that type of thing. So, I think, again, they actually understand the mechanism because they're testing the type of antibodies with each successive booster. So that would be one plausible mechanism. But again, I'm not a doctor, not a medical research.

That's my layman's knowledge of that. There's another point I was trying to make within that, too. Repeat your question on the... Well, I'm just hoping you can really parse out that a side effect of the vaccine is COVID itself that really we're dealing with. negative efficacy. So the point I wanted to make, and this is kind of another one of those things like, well, if you're so sure the vaccines are effective, why do you care where somebody else is vaccinated? I was never, I was, I was, I was never an anti-vaxter. Okay, I got them all. Okay. I didn't get this because it's not a vaccine. And I talked to Michael Yeedon. But what is always

astonished me was the arrogance of people like Fauci, like Peter Hotez, like Paul Offutt, like, oh God, I'm trying to think of the god Stanley Plotkin, okay? What is a vaccine or what is this gene therapy? What does it impact of the body? What is it the immune system, right? What kind of arrogance would you lead you to believe? Yeah, but what we're producing here, all these vaccines, you know, this injection, will only have a positive impact on the immune system. Don't do anything negative. It's only going to enhance your immune system.

How do they know that? I've stated a number of times in some of my public events of the very tail end is, I am truly amazed at how much knowledge mankind has accumulated over the millennia, how rapidly our knowledge is increasing, But that being said, no matter how much we know, I would argue that what we don't know vastly exceeds what we do. And when you come into any situation, I think you need to bring that level of humility and modesty into diagnosing the problem. But no, again, I've heard the medical explanations probably didn't do a very good job.

You'll have other experts, McCulloch, Jessica Rose, do a good job. But no, I think that's a definite real phenomenon. I'm fully aware of it. And I've heard a plausible mechanism of why getting more and more boosters actually starts reducing and reducing your immune system and increases the likelihood. I think Fauci got COVID a couple times. By the way, he also had a pulmonary infart, which was one of the side effects that Peter Marx and senior FDA officials were warned about

in March of 2021, pulmonary infarction, sudden cardiac death. They were warned about that. June of 2021, in his diary, he admits that definitely he had a pulmonary infarct and told no one. So can I ask another question? You talked about what they knew versus what they told people. Could you talk a bit about the timeline? Was there like, you know, when they knew something versus when they told the public? So on February 8th, I don't want to conflate things here.

I mean, I'm going to set aside what Fauci knew. I'm going to talk about my April 29th, what I would consider a bombshell report. My staff, I got, we're not very serious about oversight, truthfully, in the United States Senate of Congress. We want to spend money, but, you know, let's not worry about how we spend it. So even though I'm the premier subcommittee of investigations in the Senate, unlimited unilateral subpoena power.

I've got six full-time investigators. So HHS, the people inside the agency, when Bobby Kennedy demanded that they be transparent, they didn't give us the information to our targeted requests. You know, communications between these two. They dumped 11 million pages on us. Boom. That was not designed to help us. But fortunately, I've got good staff when we have things like AI and search engines.

So out of that 11 million pages, my, my, staff, first of all, uncovered that they admitted to a signal on myocarditis in May, and rather than issue a full health alert network, they just clinical considerations on their website. So rather than say, okay, we have a signal for myocarditis, let's warn the medical community so they're on the lookout. So when a young person comes in, ask them the question. When did you get vaccinated? So we get some sense. I mean, is it a real signal or not? That's not what they did.

They quietly issued a clinical consideration. But that's minor compared to the real bombshell, which is on March 1st of 2021, one of the premier data mining experts within FDA, Dr. Anna Sharfman, working with the inventor of the algorithm, the analyzed Vayers, Bill Dumashell from Oracle, briefed Dr. Peter Marks, who was head of Seber, the Center for Biologics, evaluation, and review or whatever. But they approve vaccines and they do safety surveillance. So they warned him that the current algorithm that they were using to analyze this delugeevae reports who's going to hide in mass safety signals.

And they told him, we've got a new algorithm. It's just going to unmasse them. So they did a data run, and by March 26th, they presented to senior FTA officials a data run, and I'll go to my chart here. We've assembled this, but these are the safety signals. And you can't really read this, but you'll have to go with me here. I want to find the exact route. Using the new algorithm, they uncovered 26 safety signals, including things like sudden cardiac death, pulmonary infarction, bells, palsy, different types of strokes,

agonel stroke, basal ganglia stroke. You can see the list. It's on my website. But rather than tell the public, they ended up telling Dr. Anna Sharson to cease and desist. Don't do any more data runs. You work at Cedar, not Cedar. Why are we allowing Dr. Sharsman to have access to their data? Shut it down. So the world has to understand that by March of 2026 or 2021, three months into the administration of these injections, the FDA knew, but there were safety signals, including sudden cardiac death.

And they told no, they are covering up to this day. And by the way, so I guess, Sean, you have a question. I just want to make sure I understand what you're saying, because I'm not. I think it's important for people to understand. So people are reporting to this adverse reaction system called VERS. And so there's all these reports. And the FDA has a computer program to analyze those reports to show if there's any safety signals. The person who made the program, who wrote the program the FDA is using, says,

actually, the program you're using is going to hide safety signals. I've rewritten the program. so that it doesn't hide safety signals. The term was masking. And the FDA refused to use the new program from the actual person that wrote the program they're currently using saying it doesn't work. But another person within the FDA,

who also is involved in writing the program, ran the data anyway, using the new program, and it showed horrific safety signals. And so the FDA is being told your program's wrong, like by the guy who wrote the program, and they're being shown data with the corrected program showing horrific safety signals, and they actually tell the person stop running the data.

Right. Like, stop creating this data of harm. And just, and correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is, is so like, let's say there were 10,000, I'm just making fingers up, but let's say there were 10,000 reports of myocarditis, like, you know, for the Pfizer vaccine,

the problem with their program is if there were also 10,000 reports of mycarditis with the Moderna vaccine, it would look at the two and say, well, I don't really see a big change in the Pfizer. Let me just, so I put up a new chart here. And what this is, is these are deaths reported to Vayers on an annual basis since Vayers was established in 1990. And through 2020, before the COVID injection, on average, Veyers would have 280 deaths per year reported on VIII. layers, okay, 208. The year of the injection, 2021, over 21,000 death reports, 21,000.

Now, again, I don't need a sophisticated algorithm to tell me, wow, that's a serious safety signal screaming at me, right? And in this kind of analogy I used last night, roughly the 21,000 deaths, about half of them were associated with Pfizer, half of them were associated with the Moderna. And so the masking issue, look, again, you didn't need to be a data mining specialist to realize we can't do that. What they would do is they compared, they looked at Pfizer, and so there's, these algorithms are looking for disproportionality.

What's out of whack? You know, what isn't matching with, for example, what we see other vaccines, right? So what they did is they looked at Pfizer, 10,000 deaths, but they compared it against Moderna at 10,000 plus the 280 other normal deaths. So you're looking at 10,000 versus 10,000 280. Nothing to see here. I mean, you know, equally safe, equally dangerous. Then they looked at Moderna, 10,000 deaths, compare that to Pfizer 10,000 plus the 280.

Nothing to see here, boss. Again, they knew it. I mean, we've now got emails that are, like in 2024, oh, we're aware of that limitation of, boy, we dodged a bullet. I can say, no, we can't. This hasn't been full, this algorithm hasn't been tested. We got to stick with the algorithm we've been using for years. They just happen to know hide safety signals.

So I can go to the American public. I can go to the global public and say, we're just not seeing safety signals. And I can tell you, we are now they're completely unrepent. It's just, it's literally,

it's literally like a two-year-old. You can't have a cookie. You hear the cookie jar break. You go in there, the kid's got a cookie in his hand. I said he couldn't have a cookie. I don't have a cookie. Yeah, you do.

You got to, I don't have a, It's like talking to, it's like talking to a wall. They look at this and not see anything here, which I got to bring up one of my oversight letters. This was written on December 21st, 2023, because we're hearing this. So, well, I mean, Senator, I mean, you got to, there were billions of doses done given, you know,

so, I mean, still, I mean, this is a fraction. I mean, this is still, these still, rare and mild, right? I don't know. Sudden death, 21,000. I don't consider that rare or mild, but that's what they're saying, rare and mild. Billions of doses. So I started asking, what's the death per dose? So this is in 2023 with data available. So we compared the death per million doses of COVID injection versus the flu. And again, you don't have real good data here, but as good as we could do, we calculated that there were 25 points. 5 deaths per million doses of the COVID injection versus the flu, and we know how many doses

were distributed, we don't know what was administered, so we took the midpoints. We assumed 70% of doses distributed were administered. If you do that with the flu vaccine, you end up with 0.46 deaths per million dose. So the whole argument that, well, yeah, well, there's so many deaths because there's so many, there's billions of doses, okay, well, what's it per million doses? 25.5 per million doses versus 0.46. It's a 55-fold increase. And so I write that letter to HHS Secretary Bucera on December 21st, 2020, this is actually a rapid response. I get it in June.

All you get is pages and pages of, you know, we do all this phenomenal safety surveillance, you know, they tell you nothing. They don't address this. They don't, they don't, you know, they don't confirm your numbers. But, again, that's what I've been dealing with until Bobby Kennedy got there. Now we're actually using some information. So my investigations really have only just begun. I wish we were a lot further along, but they've only just begun.

I've got Mr. Dawson, and then I've got Mr. Folk. Thanks, Dean. Thank you, Senator Johnson for being here. I think it's important that we hear your testimony today. On October 5th, 2021, the Canadian Broadcast Corporation headlined a story titled, Anxious About Unvaccinated Guest at Thanksgiving, here's some advice for those difficult discussions. The byline for that story said, and I quote, I think it's fair to ask the question, have you been vaccinated or not?

Ontario top doctor said. It went on to say, and I quote, people shouldn't hesitate to set personal boundaries around what they feel is COVID safe and what isn't COVID safe? And if another person has a problem with that, will we have the right to set our own personal limits and boundaries? Here in Canada, perhaps more than in the US, Canada trusts our government and media for fair, honest reporting to help make informed decisions.

If you would comment for me on how you feel reporting around the COVID pandemic, and in particular, reporting around the vaccines as impact of trust in public health and the legacy of media reporting in the US and here in Canada. Well, first of all, I think it's just a shame that so many public health officials from around the world listen to Anthony Fauci and listened to the Peter Marks the world that we're covering all this up. Again, as an American, I really regret that. But I think what it showed was the tendency of people in power to understand. to increase their power. I talked about, you know, our shared heritage with Magna Carta, which is really about the individual liberty and freedom, right? One thing I didn't tell

about myself, I'm not a fan of government. I know I serve in it, but I think the American founders were geniuses in the fact that they realized that we're not angels. If you don't want to live in anarchy and chaos, you need government, but it needs to be limited because government's not capable of fixing our problems. But from my standpoint, our founders realize this government's something to fear. Because as government grows, our freedoms recede. And if there's a one word definition of government is power. government can impose the capital punishment, right? There's no greater power.

And so government is power. And as British Lord Acton appropriately said one time is, you know, power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. And I've witnessed now. Again, coming into government because we're a mortgage of our kids' future, I knew Obamacare wouldn't work. That's the reason I ran in 2010 as part of the Tea Party movement. But I came with a goal of how do you limit the size, scope, and cost to government.

So we can retain our freedom. And if COVID taught us one thing is you give government officials power, they're going to just want more. And that's what we witnessed. And so I'm not sure that really necessarily answers your question, but that's kind of my philosophy on things. I think the solution here isn't fixing government. It's not making it bigger. the solution literally is limit the powers, as I said earlier, what could have been if federal officials globally would have allowed doctors to be doctors and practice medicine and utilize

the tools we had, the cheap generic drugs, the internet disseminate information. I think we would have been, again, I remember Pierre Corrie coming in early December with a manuscript. He had all these studies of the effectiveness of Ivermectives. Pandemic's over. Just get me on that stand. You know, give me in front of NIH.

I'll deliver that manuscript. We know how to treat this, okay? Boy, I said, I would be so sure. And I hate to admit that I was right and he was wrong. It didn't end because they didn't want it to end. I guess you got one more question.

Millions of people seem to the lost transparency in government and especially now medical professionals it seems. Where do we go from here? Where do we go as governments? Where do we go as the vaccine injures? How do we move forward? Well, as I said, this inquiry in Canada is incredibly important step in the process. We need a complete COVID reckoning.

It's not just the injection injuries, as much as that was the reason I ran for third term, just to advocate for them. We'd go all the way back, and maybe this is a good time to talk about what led us here. Gain a function of research. What are we doing? It is insane. I mean, I really give Senator Paul a great deal of credit. I mean, he's been on that doggedly now for years.

I have to mean, I've not been as interested in investigating the origins of COVID, because I pretty well assumed it was manmade very early on with a fear on cleavage site, what I knew about Ralph Barrick and Peter Dasick and, you know, the Wuhan lab. But what are we doing creating these? chimeric, highly dangerous, highly pathogenic viruses. Let me, you know, wait for nature to do it and we'll address it then. But again, I believe the reason we're doing it is to evade the biologic weapon conventions and treaties, right?

Because the out, the loophole as well, if you're creating these dangerous pathogens, these viruses, it's okay as long as you're doing it to create the vaccines. injections, the countermeasures. So we need a very honest reckoning. Now, I think the Trump administration has now banned gain of function. Is it really? I mean, Obama, to his credit, Obama banned, had a moratorium on gain of function. The problem is just a completely ineffective ban, which Anthony Fauci just completely circumvented. If you're already doing gain of function, keep going. We set up this process to evaluate and never use the process. You'll say, They were absolutely doing gain-of-function research, which is why Fauci would deny it in congressional hearings and just lied through his teeth.

But we need to look at that. We need to look at, you know, why did they sabotage early treatment? Here's why. Let me read it. This is the emergency use authorization of medical products published by the Food and Drug Administration. For FDA to issue in emergency use authorization, there must be no adequate. approved and available alternative to the candidate product for diagnosing, preventing, and treating the disease or condition.

Again, I kept going, why aren't we doing early treatment? Why was the NIH guideline go home? Don't do anything. You know, maybe Tylenol. Why were we spending hundreds of millions of dollars with an operation of war speed on treatment? I'd ask Francis Collins, very early asked her, what are you doing in terms of exploring these cheap, generic drugs? Because I'd held those hearings.

and you go, oh, Santa, we're spending hundreds of millions of dollars. Well, prove it. Send me the documentation. Of course, I got no documentation. I told the story last night. I was working very early on with the CEO of Novartis, a maker of hydroxychloroquine. My concern, this was in March after a state senator from Michigan went public and said, boy, I used hydroxychloroquine and I got cured of COVID.

Wow, was there of treatment? So I was very excited about that. So was President Trump. Of course, that's what killed hydroxychloricum. President Trump suggested it. Anyway, so I'm concerned at this point in time, if this is an effective treatment, can we produce enough? So I'm on the phone to the CEO of Novartis, and he was all excited about.

He said, yeah, we've got a bunch of trials. We're going to be unveiling these things in, you know, mid-May, hopefully they have great results. And, yeah, we've got the manufacturing capability. They'd already donated 30 million tablets to our national stockpile. But we weren't distributing them. What was interesting about my connection with the CEO from Novartis about the end of April, he went radio silent.

I've never heard from since. So he's all excited, but something happened. You know, they, the powers to be, apparently decided there's not going to be early treatment here. We've got Operation WorkSpeed. We're going to use this MRNA platform. We're going to call it something else. By the way, I never really went through that analysis. Did I in terms of, would this be a good time to do that?

September 2021, decision of CDC's, by way, and Miriam Webster, that's how powerful those people are. You get Miriam Webster to change the definition of a vaccine in the dictionary and went from a product that stimulates a person's immune system to produce immunity That means that you don't get sick to a specific disease, and they change it to a preparation that is used to stimulate the body's immune response against diseases. So now all of a sudden, all they're doing with these MRNAs is, well, does your antibody count grow up? That's your body's immune response to it. I guess you could actually, and by the way, doctors would say this, it's like, God, I've got this really bad inflammation. I'm not while it's showing it's working.

God, I really got, well, just doing his job. Unbelievable. Let me finish this off by, here's the definition, which is why I call this. I'd go back and forth, you know, everybody calls a vaccine. It always galls me when I make that mistake. But here's the FDA's definition of gene therapy, quote, human gene therapy seeks to modify or manipulate the expression of a gene or to alter the biological properties of living cells,

the therapeutic use. In my hearings, I kept asking these doctors, would you just explain in layman's terms what the MRN does? And I've now, as a subcommittee chair, I've had a couple of Democrat witnesses, doctors, you know, TV doctors, one head of an oncology society, come in, and it's obvious, they don't know what MRNA really does. So let me, in my layman's terms, again, I'm not a doctor, but let me, as it was described to by Dr. Michael Yeedon. This is not a bad point to talk about him. Fortunately, because I was advocating

for early treatment, that type of thing, I got connected Dr. Michael Yeadon in 2020, late 2020. Dr. Michael Yeadon was the work for Pfizer for 30-some years. In the end, he ended up as a senior executive vice president, his background of research. His background is in toxicology. He left Pfizer and actually was doing joint ventures within his own own biological company. But he was literally beside himself when he heard what his colleagues were doing in terms of devising this gene therapy. He said, Ron, there is a long list of ingredients. We do not put in injectables because they're toxic to the body. So when I heard my colleagues were going to devise a, a share.

shot is going to turn yourselves into a manufacturing site for a spike protein that's toxic too. There's no way that's happening. There's no way. That's exactly what they did. So what the MRNA is, it's not true MRNA. That's the first thing these doctors had testified before my committee to get wrong. I said, do you think, is this like regular MRNA that degrades very rapidly within hours

or days? Yeah. No, it's not. It's modified with pseudo-uridine to make it not de-a-eurodine to make it not de-reduing. grade. And we've actually got, I think I've got this, the MRNA in these injections. It does a degrade. It's, again, modified with methyl pseudyardine. The Yale University Listen study says the spike protein from injection has been detected 29 to 709 days post-vaccination. That's why I recommend, you know, get biopsies on tumors. Studies show the

RNA in blood plasma of 14 to 18 days, in tissues and lymph nodes 30 to 60 days, some studies one to three years in exosomes and biopsies. Okay? So that's what this is. I mean, this is not a vaccine is either a live virus or an attenuated or a dead virus. That, by the way, doesn't excite your immune system well enough, so they have to add adjuvants like mercury and like aluminum to excite your immune system to react. to that particular dead virus or tenuated virus.

This is something else. This literally is encapsulated lipid nanoparticles, which now there's another study coming out showing how toxic just the lipid nanoparticle is. And then you got the MRI, which enters the cell, turns it into manufacturing site for the spiked protein, which again, the body recognizes is not of itself,

and so the body attacks it. And when the body attacks something in a cell, That's called inflammation. That's what myocarditis is. But Senator, I just want to make sure that the panel understands what you're saying. So a normal vaccine, you know, pre-COVID, let's say for a virus, they would put pieces of a dead virus and ejected into us. And our immune system, the theory is, is then would identify us foreign and create antibodies. So we're kind of primed if we run across that. But what you're speaking about is this is actually a genetic modification.

So MRNA just stands for modified RNA. So this goes into our cells and causes our own cells to manufacture the spike protein, but the spike protein is the toxic part of COVID. So I could call it a poison and I wouldn't be wrong. So our body is basically these shots make our body manufacture a poison. is there an off switch to this? Because it's actually our own cells that now are modified

genetically to be permanently manufacturing a poison. Is there an off switch to our bodies to stop manufacturing this poison that then creates immune response amongst others? We don't know, but again, they found the actual spike protein up to 700 days. They just didn't study it further.

So two of the major lies that they told about the injection first of all is the lipid nanoparticle, or the injection would stay in the arm, right? But the lipid nanoparticle is designed to permeate, difficult permeate barriers, like the blood brain, like the centa barrier. And by the way, they knew that, they had a study in rats, that the Japanese regulators foyered and got this study, by distributed all over the body and, you know,

accumulated in the adrenal glands in the ovaries that type. So, again, they said it was going to stay in the arm. They knew there was going to bi-distribute all the body-distribute all. all over the place. And the other lie was that this, you know, it's MRNA. No, it's it's modified RNA. It's modified not to degrade. And so, yeah, so again, these studies, again, we haven't done even close to the number of studies we should do because they don't want to know. Again, government funds so much this research, when government does something, they don't want to fund a study that proves what they did is killing people. So we just don't have the information. That's what I'm

saying we're asking a lot more questions than we can really provide answers to him. Mr. Polker. Thank you, MP Ellison and Mr. Buckley for the work that you put into this inquiry. I think it's important that Canadians have an opportunity to share their experiences of COVID and the injection injuries that they may have experienced as a result of that. I want to thank Senator Johnson for being here this morning and for your testimony and the insight that you provided to the inquiry. It's been very, very informative and very interesting.

You know, I get asked almost on a weekly basis as to the accountability that there will be for officials as to the information that they spread during COVID. In particular, the Prime Minister and his health minister on a daily basis were telling individuals, telling Canadians that they needed to get vaccinated with this COVID shot. and you talked a little bit about the information that people like Dr. Fauci and others were spewing in the United States. But here also we heard a progression of stories from our officials, including provincial health officials that bought into whatever information they were receiving. But it started off very simple. Get the injection and you won't get COVID. They found out that that didn't work. So then they said, we'll get the injection, at least you won't spread it. Well, that didn't work.

And then it changed, we'll get the injection, you won't end up in hospital. Well, that didn't work. We'll get the injection. At least you won't end up in ICU on a ventilator. Well, that didn't work. And then they said, well, at least get the injection so you don't die. That didn't work neither. So one of the questions that people in my writing have been asking me, my constituents,

is what kind of accountability will there be for individuals that told us to do something that they knew wasn't true? That's number one. The second question that they have, and lots of them experience ongoing symptoms and illnesses that they believe are caused by their injection injury, they're failing to get recognized by their medical practitioners, and that's a frustration. This is an opportunity for them to share that. But they're asking, is there hope for me? A lot of them are experiencing neurological systems

where they have skin irritations and inability to function. Can you answer the first question first about accountability, what in the United States, if there's going to be any, what you perceive could be here in Canada, but also can you give some of these injection injured folks hope as to is there is there solutions for me going forward is there is some kind of protocols that are apparently working sure and and we know we know from the time when when our health officials were giving us information they as you stated in your comments they demonized treatments like ivermexamine and hydroxychloroquine and to the point where you know they

mocked people that even thought about it or considered using it. And today we know that there seems to have been some effectiveness in those treatments. So in terms of accountability, you know, I get the same thing. When are you people going to go to jail? First of all, that's going to be difficult. The federal government in the U.S., at least, is almost impossible to sue. The agents of the federal government are kind of protected that same way. And again, these people aren't stupid.

they hide their crime. We've seen, you know, instance after instance, the most famous one now is Dr. David Morins of key aid to Fauci, who, by the way, he tried to distance those from his email. Well, I've got this FOIA, he's showing me how to make emails disappear. So there is a very broad knowledge within these agencies that FOIA is there and be very careful what you put in writing. So they don't.

You see it time and time again. Don't put this in an email. Send it to my Gmail account. Let's meet on this, okay? So getting the evidence to convict would be difficult. But from a standpoint of accountability, from my own standpoint, the first and the most important part of accountability is exposure. I don't want Fauci go down to history as St. Fauci,

the savior. No, I want him to go down as one of the most infamous villains, certainly in U.S. history, okay? The guy's a monster. Read Bobby Kennedy's book. So again, I think we've come a long way that way. I mean, the day in front of Homeland Security Committee, when he took the fifth, that was a very bad day for Anthony Fauci, the revelation of these diaries, now his text messages,

emails, we get more, you know, we're exposing the truth, and these people are going to be held accountable. Now, you know, government officials in Canada, I mean, I don't want to give him advice, but I guess I will. I would just, well, I was just listening to Fauci. I was believing what Peter Marks said. That'll be a viable defense. What's indefensible is how they treated, for example, the truckers. Okay? Quite honestly, how they're using made to put people by their misery as opposed to, can we try and treat them?

In terms of hope for people, this inquiries hope. You can argue, well, this should have been happening within months. But at least is happening now. I said the suicide rates of, you know, the COVID-19 groups are increasing because they're getting despondent. It's been five, in America, they don't even have an ICD code, which is what doctors use to bill for providing particular service. Now, talking to HHS, it's again, bureaucratic nightmare. It sounds like they'll get their ICD codes so doctors can start billing for it, which is kind of the first step in acknowledging these things are real. But again, this inquiry itself is probably the best hope they have right now because until federal health agencies, until the medical establishment, until doctors acknowledge these things are real, they're not going to start practicing medicine.

And again, I'm in connection with the injection injured, and they're trying all kinds of things. They're trying a lot of things. Some work, some don't. I know Dr. Peter McCulloch, he'll talk about spike detox. So, again, I'm not a doctor. I hope there's hope. But what I do know is Dr. Nath, when he was treating these people in March of 2020, knew that early intervention, which means early acknowledgement, is crucial.

And some of these people have been suffering for five years. So it might be a more difficult to ask. Thank you, M.P. Allison. Just on this line of questioning, I'm curious, because we have not heard the word Dr. Teresa Tam brought up yet, or at least I haven't. And I know that she, well, she was quite frankly on all of our televisions during COVID, just like Dr. Fauci was on American television.

I'm just curious, what was there, are you aware of any conversation between Dr. Creza-Tam, Dr. Fauci, the collaboration of such, or was there no collaboration of such? I'd be very curious to hear it in and through any of your witness testimonial or studies. I think it's important to this conversation, if you could expand on any of that, please. So as much as I love Canada, Canadians, I got enough news to Washington, America, so I've not heard of Dr. Tam. I may have, but the name didn't register. What I will do is I'll have that as a search term with the emails and text, and I'll see. We'll check it out.

Okay. And so if my staff, PSI staff is listening right now, dial in Dr. Teresa Tam. How do you pronounce that? How do you spell it? TAM. T.A.M. T.A.M. That's Trisa Tapp.

Good. She would be in our name. I was got in Canada. Yeah. No, we'll put that in. We'll just see if there's any. Please do. That would be very, very.

curious to know. Thank you. Okay, I do know, and I don't want to I'm sure we release anything, but we are finding there's a great deal cooperation between Fauci and federal health officials and Chinese officials, which is interesting as we get more and more information. We'll start releasing that. We kind of got to put the whole package together, but stay tuned on some of those things. Senator, I'm wondering if you can speak to us about what's called Event 201, because I think it'll shock some people that really there was a dress rehearsal

with shocking similarities shortly before COVID happened. So first of all, I'll help dispel some myths. The Trusted News Initiative didn't spring out of Event 201. I kind of always thought it did until I've done some research on this. the Trusted News Initiative, which was used to censor misinformation, disinformation, and the truth that they called malinformation. They actually sprang out of a BBC June 2019 Trusted News Summit. And the Trusted News Initiative was launched in September 7th of 2019, whereas I think Event 201 was October. Do you have the date on that?

Yes, I do. staying on a second, October 18th, 2019. So what's eerie about event 201 is they were talking about a coronavirus spring out of China. They certainly implemented and talked about how we're going to have to, you know, button up the information that, you know, people are going to be hearing because there's going to be a lot of misinformation, a lot of disinformation. We've got to hang together here and make sure that only the truth is disseminated. There's nothing inherently wrong.

I mean, as chairman of Homeland Security, I was aware of them. They had a blue ribbon panel on biologic threats, how to respond to it. So, I mean, government responsibly should do that. I mean, I'm not a fan of government, but that's one thing government ought to do. If there's a bioloc, you know, attack using biologic agents or, you know, there's a pandemic, you want government to be able to respond. Our problem is, you know, they took the plants and threw them out the window, And they listened to the science, you know, Dr. Fauci, who said mass weren't good effective,

then all of a sudden they were going to be effective. They need two or three of them. Again, they just scared the, you know what, out of people. But no, Event 201 is a very interesting, you know, sponsored by Johns Hopkins, I think Bill Melinda Gates Foundation. And I think Bill Gates's fingerprints is all over these things. Okay. And I have not personally done investigation, but I've certainly read reports of how we

invested in bio-entech and cashed out of that. And he's obviously using his wealth to really have a great deal of influence of not control a lot of these world health organizations, big into mass vaccination. I think he probably needs to be investigated and held due account as well. So you mentioned plans. And I think I have a question of whether the U.S. did the same. but viral pandemics, it turns out, have been happening for ages. And we've learned lessons from them.

And the federal government, the World Health Organization, and every province in Canada had a plan in place and an agency to enact that plan on how to treat with a viral pandemic. And it appears that we did everything opposite. So every province abandoned their plan, the federal government abandoned their plan, and did the exact opposite of all the lessons learned in the past. Was that the experience in the United States,

and did different states have plans also that then were abandoned? And if that is the case, do you have any explanation as to, you know, why we would have plans from lessons learned? It seems the whole world, and we abandoned them for this pandemic. Well, what was generally true in America is states that were governed by liberal progressive governments, you know, we'd call them blue states, Democrat states, they generally kind of, they like government, they like using government power,

and so they seized it, and they, by and large, generally, went overboard, whereas red states, Republican-run states, were maintained greater freedom, okay? President Trump pretty well left up the states. He didn't want to impose federal, he didn't impose federal mandates.

He just kind of left up the states. I think where you really saw an abandonment of common sense, And this is where, again, as much as I am thankful and admire and revere doctors for saving my daughter's life and doing so many wonderful things for so many people yesterday and today and tomorrow, profoundly disappointed and saddened about the medical establishment in America and particularly hospital protocols. We're going to be holding a event, not going to do a hearing because really don't want, you know, the minority mucking it up.

I want to be able to hear from these people, but families, doctors, nurses that witnessed the protocols, you know, the victims. And one of the witnesses would be Attorney Ralph Rolf Lerrejo, and these are approximate numbers, but he started advocating for families whose loved ones are, sitting in the hospitals, on the protocols, just bang, I mean, they're dying.

How about give this a shot? You know, would you try the hydroxychloroquine protocol, you know, the FLCC protocol? Would you try ivermectin? Nope, nope, nope. So Ralph Laredo's attorney that went and started suing these hospitals. And again, proximate numbers of the 200 cases he represented families in, he won about 70 of them. And where he won them and the people were administered the drugs, he only only three people died. of the approximately 120 that he lost or couldn't get into court in time and they've seen on the hospital protocols, they all died.

I know that's not a random controlled trial, but that's pretty strong observational evidence that these things worked. But in reviewing the testimony, let me just read the common themes in terms of hospital protocols. Ivermectum was refused. Ivermectum was withdrawn. He was working successfully. It was withdrawn. It was a hospital protocol, and their progress was reversed, and people died. Early and inappropriate innovation, and innovation without consent.

Remdesivir administered without consent. I mean, there's so many people in the testimonies who had acute kidney injury. on their charge, say, do not administer remandestrian, because we know it can knock out kidneys. Got administered anyway. And hospital administrators lied to people. Both verbal and charted discrimination blaming unvaccinated. Again, these are witnesses from all over the country. I can't tell you how many report that a doctor or a nurse said, well, your dad's going to die.

What do you expect? He's unvaccinated. hopefully you learned your lesson. It's just time and time again, the same type of deal, and I think a suspicion if you're unvaccinated, but they didn't go the extra mile to try and save that loved one. Refuse, I'll just add this, refusal to treat bacteria and pneumonia. You know how to treat bacteria, you use antibiotics.

They didn't use antibiotics. They gave them remdesivir. So again, I mean, time and time again, hospitals just these things they again they were told and understand why they do this this is this is the upside down nature of our medical establishment right now doctors should be the top the treatment pyramid right they've got the primary responsibility patients they swear they're hypocratic oath federal administrations ought to be at the bottom provide recommendations against the doctor in consultation with the patient that ought to be making decisions

right now it's the doctors at the bottom they're being crushed by the dictates It's by Mr. Science like Fauci and these protocols, which then the hospitals, they pick up on them. I mean, Remdesphere is a highly profitable drug to administer. You put somebody on a ventilator, and you're going to be a really high billing for an individual. But if you follow the protocol imposed on you by the federal government, you're pretty well home-free in terms of liability protection as well. you step outside that protocol when you've got particularly when you got the FDA saying ivermectin you come on you're not a horse you got fauchy publicly saying well there could be some real toxic issues of ivermectum you it's kind of hard to blame the the hospital ministry saying i'm not

going to touch that with 10 foot pole if somebody dies they'll blame ivermectin we'll get we'll get sued out of business so again there are so many things that there were going on here but uh now hospital protocols, again, we'll have that event on the 28th. You can hear just heartbreaking, heart-wrenching testimony. Senator, I'm just going to go back to my original, to my opening remarks, because I would be remiss

if I, I only spoke about myself as a political baby, but what I didn't speak about is is my daughter who started at the University of Guelph and about two weeks into what was basically locked down.

into her dorm and end up crying and coming home. And she's one of many, and that was her first year of university. University of well, ironically, to be a veterinarian. So when you talk about Ivermectin, I got five horses at home, I know all what you're talking about. I also didn't talk about my five-year-old grandson. I heard you were a grandfather, and once you're a grandparent,

there's very little better in the world. And I think about my five-year-old grandson who basically lost two wildly important years of his life, wildly important. Some of the most important years of his life because he's an only child and he wasn't allowed to play with any friends.

And so I bring that up, Senator, because although we're talking about all the side effects, and I know I spoke about my mother this morning. What we have not been talking about yet, we haven't spoke about yet, is the mental illness side of what this, what COVID did to society for not one year, but close to two and a half years.

And so I think about myself and my responsibility as a lawmaker, yourself as a lawmaker, great folks around here as lawmakers. And I respect you immensely when you talk about get government out of the way and let people live their lives, however, and definitely respect our doctors. There's no doubt about it. But is there, I guess it really goes down to the question of, one last comment before the

question, I really don't believe to save my soul that if the government came out right now, at least in my region, and said, there's COVID, go home, put a mask on and get the shot. I strongly, strongly do not believe there would be people lining up getting ready to wear the shot or getting the mask or staying home, which is why I believe this is somewhat generational. Because I'm not even so sure in my lifetime, and I just turned 50. I'm not so sure that I'm going to see anybody really complying by the law, but then I go back to my grandson, who's five years old, who doesn't understand it, he lived through it, but doesn't get it. So my question is, is there anything as lawmakers we should be working on doing today?

to ensure that future generations, I don't even know what it looks like, but it just, it hit me. Anything we should be putting into law to ensure that we don't go through this again, full well knowing there's going to be viruses that come along. There's going to be various things, but I'm just trying to think about the mental health side, and sorry for blabbering on, but that's just where my heart is right now, Senator, if you could expand on. And again, first step is exposing this so people are aware. If you want to do something legislatively, I think you need to dramatically reduce the power that we've given government to control our lives in these situations.

Now, again, the world's going the opposite direction. We, America, you know, dodged a bullet under the Biden administration signing on to the who's, I can't remember exactly the things called, but, I mean, there's a new treaty that's going to really give the who all of the power to impose on everybody else. and we dodge that bullet for the time being, but they'll try and do it again. So don't allow a World Health Organization to gain power over your sovereignty. And by the way, I agree with grandkids. It's all the joy, very little responsibility. But they say grandchildren are our parents revenge on their children.

You find it's hard raising a kid. It was really hard during COVID. And as I said, my opening statement, you know, the teachers, they can take the time off. They lobbied hard so they didn't have to do their job. And, of course, when Sweden didn't lock down schools, remember how Sweden was excoriated, how they were ridiculed and vilified? They had far greater success on COVID than America did. And again, the psychological harm, I mean, listen, fear is an incredibly powerful motivator. And those government officials that wielded fear to gain that.

that power. I mean, that was the whole purpose of my May 2020 hearing with John Eden News was you know, don't be afraid. I mean, be aware. If you're elderly, if you have certain comorbidities, yeah, this could be deadly. Take precautions. If you have an experimental gene therapy, vaccination, fine, they'll offer it to the vulnerable. But give them the full information. Make sure that Pfizer doesn't lie about their studies. So again, that's why you need a covert reckoning. You've got to take a look at all the bad decisions made. If you're going to pass legislation, make sure that you don't give them the power to make those same types of bad decision in the future. Okay. Senator, I got a question for you. Regarding docs, I mean, we

utmost respect for docs, and I think some of the challenges, and you alluded to this in the beginning, was, you know, in Canada, the College of Physicians and Every province operates differently, but sort of the same. And a tremendous amount of pressures on our docks. A lot of docks that actually raise concerns. Some of them had their licenses stripped. Some were threatened. Some had a fight for their life to keep them.

Even today, you know, we've got a number of docs that are concerned and want to raise issues. And it could be on anything. But we're talking about this COVID-19. So any thoughts, you know, anecdotally, or what you heard through some of your testimonies. I mean, there's one thing for government to imply or, you know, implement certain things or have rules.

But I think we've got these quasi, you know, governmental bodies that aren't necessarily accountable to anybody, and which was a bit of the workaround for how these things were dealt with. I mean, in my opening statement, I talked with Dr. Havu. Actually, you know, the reporting seemed to be taken away from this voluntary mayors here in Canada and put with each of the provinces and then the provinces decided

what they would accept in terms of vaccine injured but more importantly, when doctors raised these issues, they were silenced and threatened. And you think of someone that spends, you know, 12 years of their life trying to become a doc and all of a sudden the thought of having their income and their livelihood destroyed overnight, you know, what is it we can do?

You know, what do we do with a college of physicians surgeons, which clearly is without, you know, in any scope of government. Yeah, the doctor associations are a problem. But one thing I will definitely mention in our hospital protocol event is, you know, getting everybody to remember the unbelievably courageous doctors and nurses that were flooding into New York City and some of these hotspots. And, you know, New Yorkers banging pots and pans at the end of the shift, you know, thanking those doctors and nurses because again we're all you know we're all freaking out we don't we don't

again we don't know is this SARS is this merge is this you know we don't know and yet you have doctors and nurses who are who are treating those those people so again i go back to i've got reverence i've got deep appreciation for for members of the community and i've got a great deal sympathy because the the doctors that had that extra courage and compassion to to treat and publicly admit it and insist that the pharmacist filled their prescriptions of ivermectin hydrost chlorine. Again, if they didn't have their license pulled, they have their careers destroyed. McCulloch got sued, you know, fired for, you know.

So it doesn't take a dictator, too many people to hang something in the public square to get everybody in line, right? And that's so these doctors like McCulloch and Corey and these other people that did the treatment, they were made examples of and people paid attention to it. And again, I've got a great deal simply because it's a lot of work. time and effort to become a doctor or a nurse. And most doctors and nurses are doing it because they want to heal people. They want to continue to heal people.

They want to continue their profession. And they saw by the, again, the power being wielded by these bureaucrats, that that was being threatened. So I think just kind of recognizing that fact and in some way, shape, shield them. I, again, I think some of these, you need to expose, you know, where some of these doctors associations are, how they're getting reimbursed, you know, the money they make, and maybe reform some of those things. Again, you got to file the money. But again, I've just got, God bless the doctors and nurses who did it. And I completely understand, I mean, I'll get doctors, me anecdotally coming up hate, you know, and I've no other doctors. you know, talking earlier, you know, to come up, say,

thanks getting out there. Thanks for doing that. And I do not harbor any of will toward ever, toward any of them by them not. They're becoming a Pierre Corrie or Dr. McCulligan. I keep using those two. There's a bunch of others. But again, it's, it gets right back to how important events like this are. So the public can hear, just hear again, COVID-19, a second opinion. I'm not saying I'm right about everything. Again, there's just more questions I have than absolute answers.

But we need to be able to ask those questions. And doctors should have been allowed to practice medicine. They weren't. They weren't. Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Dean. We've heard Fauci's name. We've heard Dr. Tam's name.

What role did the pool play? We heard us at a minute ago, but maybe I missed it earlier, What role did the pool play in, I don't know, with each country, U.S., Canada, and other countries, on how the doctors, Dr. Fauci and Dr. Tam listened to the World Health Organization and whether it was good or bad with what the World Health Organization was portraying to the rest of the countries? So I'm not sure they played much a role at all. I appreciate the fact that in December 2020, they recommended against the U.S. of remdesivir. Appreciate that. I think they

certainly help cover up the origin. They're probably complicit in that. Other than that, I mean, the main culpability here, the main accountability really has to fall on federal health officials, federal, you know, elected officers, that type of thing. That, again, you used fear. Again, if you're doing a COVID reckoning, I think you really need to take a look at what were the things that people were, I mean, Biden's chief of staff, Jeffrey Zyte's, this is going to be a winner of death if you don't get vaccinated.

I didn't get vaccinated. I didn't die. I know a lot of people didn't get vaccinated. Didn't die. And it's, you know, one of the things we should talk about, too, is the stratification of the risk. Yeah, I don't deny if you're elderly person that COVID was, I was doing telephone town halls, warning my constituents, you know, take this seriously.

I know it's kind of become partisan. You kind of blow it off your Republican, you're Democrat, you're masked up and stuff. Talk about the psychological harm. I'm still seeing people wear masks in their cars. Now, some of those people have illnesses, and, you know, I've actually appreciated the Japanese culture when they have a cold. They wear a mask. I mean, so, but we've done so much harm psychologically from that standpoint.

But I started talking about Sweden, you know, how much better they did than we did. And I think you really need to analyze, you know, which were the elect officials who pushed the fear to gain control. Okay. Let me take look what the governor of New York did, Cuomo, shunned all the elderly into nursing homes. But it's like the worst possible thing you could do. You know, so again, there are just so many mistakes made. I mean, we don't have enough time to go through them all. So can I follow up?

Because there hasn't really been a discussion yet on the danger posed to different age groups. So it does seem clear. Just like a regular flu, it's elderly or people with health issues already that are at risk. Can you speak to in your investigations? For example, we started vaccinating children at six months. And we're still doing that in Canada. The vaccine is approved for use in Canada, the COVID-19 vaccines, from six months of age. In other countries, there's a list of countries that don't allow vaccine for 18 years of age and under.

Were our children at risk, or did the vaccine put them at risk in? Can you speak to the other age groups? So I think it's just without dispute that children had almost a zero risk of serious side effects. Unless there are certain comorbidies, okay? A healthy child virtually had no risk of serious injury or death of COVID. And yet, because they wanted this universal MRNA platform just introduced and become just part of daily life, again, it was unconscionable that they forced us on teenagers, particularly when they knew already by May, they were admitting.

It's one of the side effects they're admitting myocarditis, particularly in young men, and they still recommended its use. So, I mean, that's one thing they absolutely need to be held accountable for. But, yeah, I mean, there's generally age stratification. I mean, elderly are generally more vulnerable to just about anything. And they're certainly true in this case. It was kind of unusual, I think, about COVID, is children were almost without risk. And yet they still had this injected. So, I mean, you know, one of our oversights is, you know, Vinay Prasad issued a memo, leaked, and followed up on the 10 child deaths where they had autopsies, that the CDC FDA said, you know, probably were caused by the vaccine.

And that's, they're still covering that up. The people who issued those memos, I mean, they've rewritten the memos to soften it. Now I'm hearing there's three additional child deaths. But can you imagine being a parent who listened to these people lie, bought the lies, and, you know, did what they're. they thought was doing right in me. I don't want to see, you know, the grandparent die, okay, even though, you know, the Pfizer employees realized we never tested for transmissibility. We were flying the plane as we were building it. Those are quotes, okay? Can you imagine being

one of those parents and you get your kid injected and your child doesn't wake up? That's not a hypothetical. It happened. It happened. And that's why these officials have to be held accountable for this stuff. That's why, again, that's why they'll never admit they're wrong. But internally, they are. I mean, again, they're admitting internally. They got the, they got the autopsies. Yeah, this, that child died because he got a vaccine. Pretty much indisputable. By way, that's just the tip of the iceberg, because there weren't, there weren't many autopsies done.

I think you're on a very important point, and I just, I want to stay there for a little bit is my understanding and you're saying it yourself is that children really were at zero risk. I mean, anywhere in the world, a healthy child did not have any risk of dying of COVID. And yet we're basically forcing vaccination on children of something that can only be described as experimental. I mean, you didn't even need to read any papers or the clinical trial evidence to know there won't be much evidence there because it was right. didn't exist before at the mean reporting time was two months so we're basically forcing the treatment on a novel platform on children that we've really only tested for mean of two months we can't know the short-term effects let alone the

medium-term effects let alone the long-term effects like how could you predict what the effects going to be on an entire generation of our children And there was zero risk. And on your point that they can't do accountability, what do parents do? Because just in my circle, I know a lot of children that were seriously harmed, you know,

Mark myoceridicin, other things. And I don't know if I'm a parent, and I'm the one that made the decision to get my child vaccinated. And then later on, I learned, wait a second, they knew they weren't at any risk. and yet we're forced to do this. Like, how do you kind of even get there as a parent?

I'm wondering if part of the reluctance for society to accept what we've done is that people in decision-making authority, including parents, would then have to admit that they've done something harmful. First of all, understand their main sales pitch for the injection. It was 95% effective. Sounds really good, doesn't it? So you first have to understand risk benefit and the difference between relative risk and absolute risk. So let me, as an analogy, I'm not saying these are absolute numbers, but let's take, for example, if the absolute risk of you dying from something is 0.1%, and you have a 90% reduction in that risk, sounds really good.

Well, now you're 0.01. It's a 90% reduction, but again, your absolute risk is virtually nil. But, for example, with the flu vaccine, these are numbers published by the manufacturer, Moderna. The standard flu vaccine has a 2.6% rate of serious adverse events. Now, what is a serious adverse event? Death, a condition that will result in immediate death, permanent disability, or birth defect. And then there's also a more generalized capital. in terms of extent of hospital care, medical intervention, that type thing.

But again, serious stuff, 2.6%. For, again, if you're a young person, you're probably not going to die of flu. Do you really want to subject yourself to almost a 3% risk of getting a serious adverse event? Again, the cost-benefit ratio, the risk-benefit ratio is just totally whacked as it was with the injection for children. Now, what they just did with the Moderna, because they want to push this MRI, because it is profitable. You can rapidly react to whatever pathogen you're looking for. You know, the flu vaccines, they're always guessing, you know, what's the strain that we're trying to vaccinate against? So I understand the appeal for MRNA, but I also understand

the risk. So now Moderna comes out of the new flu vaccine. The risk of serious adverse events is 2.7%. So it's proved to flying colors. Because it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, Again, it's like comparing hemlock to arsenic, right? So they're equally safe, equally dangerous. But again, parents have to, you know, we're all going to have to take a look at the absolute risk of gaining the disease, having a serious impact from the disease, and the absolute risk of the intervention. And by the way, recommend to all your audience, Adam's series book, Vaccines, Amen. You take a look at some of these videos, the Brady's bunch, they're all laughing about that.

Oh, they all got measles. When did measles all of a sudden become an absolute deadly disease? In the Aaron series book on page 84, he's got a chart that shows the number of deaths of all these infectious childhood diseases the year before a vaccine was available. We keep hearing millions of people, lives saved by these vaccines. but if you total up all the deaths of all those trials of diseases that occurred in a year before the vaccine, it's less than 5,000. I'm not saying people don't die of these things, but we've got antibiotics now. Medicine is advanced since the Spanish flu. But it's become a religion of vaccinology, and it's a vaccinologist simply do not admit ever that their vaccines might actually have a negative.

impact. They always ignore the risk and overstate the benefit. And people need to understand that. And can I ask myself my own question here? Because we're talking, you know, you got to understand the lies we've been told and how to use the expert. So in one of our hearings, I think this is the one where my ranking member went out, this might have been voice of the vaccine injury, where my ranking member went out and did a press conference about an hour before the hearing. And again, are parents of children who are either autistic, they became autistic very rapidly after a vaccine or die to SIDS or whatever. They're telling true stories, okay? Rankin member goes out to the media and says, don't pay attention to this hearing. It's not credible. It's not worth your attention.

okay but in that hearing he trotted out the uh the commonwealth fund study on the COVID vaccine and how I've got it right here this is a study is conducted by I won't name their names but a faculty for the Center of Vaccine Development University of Maryland professor of applied mathematics and computational epidemiology at York University, a research scientist in epidemiology at Yale School Public Health and the founding director of Yale Center for Infections Disease. Now, these are heavy hitters, right? These are learned members from the app from academia.

They claimed, from their study doing their mathematics, all their complex, that the COVID injection saved 3.2 million lives in 2021 and 2020. two. So I'm chairman of the committee. I'm listening to, again, my ranking member, denigrate the hearing, denigrate my witnesses, and he trots out that study. So I put together three slides to show what rubbish the study is. So the first slide, it's up here right now, the solid blue, those are actual deaths per year dating back to 2010, I'm sorry. So up to through 2019, you see the compounded annual growth rate.

These are deaths in the United States, some total mortality in the United States. They're rising slowly by a little less than 1% a year to about 2.9 million people dying the year before the pandemic. Okay? Now, if it will continue to go, you know, 1% growth, that's the hatchmarked chart just shows you what deaths would have been. Next chart shows actual deaths. So you can see in 2020 increased by half a million deaths.

Something obviously happened. You know, there was a coronavirus. And some people denied, I mean, I think there was, okay? I don't know how many of those deaths were really associated to that with just the way we shut down hospitals. We didn't diagnose cancers. I mean, there's all kinds of things happening in 2020 to produce a half a million more deaths in the U.S. So you assume in 2021, once we start the mass vaccination case, If it worked, the deaths would have actually declined.

But they didn't. They increased to 3.4 million. And still we're above that, that, you know, normalized line in 2021 or in 2022. So again, how do you get 3.2 million lives saved for the actual results? Well, here's how they do it. You'd have to assume they were going to go from 2.9 million deaths in 2019. the year of the pandemic without a vaccine, where I hate to use a word,

we called the herd. I mean, the most vulnerable people died in 2020, right? You'd have to assume we were going to go from 2.9 to 3.4 to 5 million deaths. In both 20, 21, and 22, to come up with, you save 3.2 million lives. Now, again, I'm not a mathematician. I'm in a column that I can do. there is there is no way based on the actual data but yet you've got experts credentialed experts publishing a rubbish study like this that then a u.s. senators using a hearing

to denigrate the vaccine injured so no no this i mean these vaccines the the the the current injection this say 3.2 million lies what are you talking about senator johnson No, it didn't. So now extrapolate this to all the other studies. I don't know what the truth is. I know that's a lie. There's no way that this Commonwealth Fund study is accurate. It's rubbish.

But it's the experts. Just like the experts that told us to wear masks, six feet distancing, vaccinate your six-month-old child. We got to stop. We've got to stop listening to experts. Senator Johnson, can I just on that point? Because when I was preparing for the trusted news initiative, I had a list of questions as to whether or not they got anything new.

And just, again, so trusted news initiative is just, you know, BBC formed a group to basically vet misinformation. It was originally for election information, I think, because of the U.S. presidential campaigns. But then they started using it for COVID. Did anyone get anything right here? Because did they lie to us about masking? Yes. Like, absolutely, right?

Like, masking did not save lives. it wasn't necessary. Am I right about that? Yeah, I mean, actually, Michael Eden's got a list of 13 lies told during COVID. You ought to take that for your record. That's one of them. I mean, everyone in this room wore a mask at one point or another because of that. And we know now that they just made it up, right, because of things like the Fauci Diaries and other things.

Well, again, the pores in the mask are larger than the coronavirus itself. So stop nothing. Yeah, like, the best analogy I saw was, is wearing a mask to stop a coronavirus would be like using a chain link fence to stop mosquitoes. It would be just as effective. But it would, but the thing is, is we know now that even they knew it was a lie, right?

And same with social distancing. Didn't they just make that up? Yes. Like, so, you know, we still in some places have plexiglass and all of that, and you still see, you know, the footprints on the floor. That was all just theater, wasn't it? Yes, they lied. They lied about the shot saying your arm. They lied about the messenger RNA degrading. They lied about it was safe and effective because they knew it wasn't. I've got proof they knew it wasn't. And they lied.

Well, even the effective. I mean, you, Janine Small, you were kind of referring to her. She was the Pfizer BP that testified in front of the European Parliament. So I think people in Canada believe, that the vaccine, because vaccine were trained to think it was the old Miriam Webster definition that would confer immunity. But with this one, they knew it wouldn't confer immunity, but at least I think we thought, well, it would stop you from transmitting the virus, which is why you'd give it to kids to protect grandma, which is backwards. But can you tell us what Janine's small test fight about? Because I think it will shock people.

the main vaccine that was administered in Canada was Pfizer, and I think it would shock people that they weren't even testing to see if it would stop you spreading it to other people, which kind of begs the question, then why did we take it at all? So in October of 2020, Janine Small, who was Pfizer's president of international developed markets, admitted to the EU Parliament, Pfizer had not tested whether the vaccine prevented transmission.

Didn't test it. A month later, the former head of FISA's Research Development Department, Kath and Jansen, in a November 2020 interview with Nature, said, we flew the plane while we were still building it, but claimed it's safe and effective. By the way, the studies that were not conducted, this I got from testimony from one of our hearings, it might have been from Toby Roth. This is a list of omitted studies that should shock everyone. They never tested drug-drug interactions.

They never tested for cardiovascular toxicity. They never tested for central nervous system toxicity, other organ toxicity, blood toxicity, genotoxicity, carcinogenic. I don't think they've tested to this day because that's the whole game. But it's a childhood vaccine or whether it's this experimental gene therapy, get it approved. and because it's a vaccine in America, you have no liability. You're completely protected. And so there's no incentive for either the drug manufacturer, the vaccine manufacturer,

or the government officials that approved it to do the long-term safety studies to disprove that they shouldn't have approved it. So there's no, there's every incentive to hide it. there's every incentive to not be honest with the regulators when you go for the approval, which is why, again, I don't know the exact dates, but the deaths that were in the placebo arm were reported very rapidly. But the deaths in the vaccine arm of the study, they delayed reporting those things to the point where some of them weren't even reported by the time it got the emergency use authorization. So again, again, as I said in the hall, in my investigation, we are finding pieces of the puzzle. But it's like a thousand piece puzzle, we maybe got 30 of the pieces.

We got a long way to go. In Canada, we did it a little differently. We didn't have emergency use. So the administrator felt issued an interim order exempting all COVID drugs. So that would include REM desivir as well. as the COVID-19 vaccines. So all COVID-19 drugs were exempted from the regular drug process where you have to prove safety and efficacy.

Now, the interesting thing is, is the intermortar exempted them from having to go through the regular process, but they could have still chosen to go through the regular process. But no, they go through the suburgency process. Do you know, Senator Johnson, under our process, you didn't even have to submit the safety data prior to approval. And then, even then, it was only the known safety data.

You just have to say, well, to get approval, well, we'll get it to you, you know, by this time. Because our test didn't even include the word safety or the word efficacy. Our test was something like the Minister of Health has sufficient evidence to support the conclusion. So now we're in a subjective test, that the benefits of the drug outweigh the risks

having regard to the uncertainties concerning the benefits and risks, and the urgent public health emergency presented by COVID-19. We've permanently, to this day, exempted the COVID-19 drugs from having to go through the regular process of proving safety and efficacy. Is that similar to the United States? Is that what you're saying is they haven't had to really go through the regular process even to this day, even though COVID isn't an emergency? Yeah, that's what Operation Warp Speed made possible.

they're able to circumvent all these studies that, you know, normally. Anthony Fauci, I think of that Milken Institute that we've talked about in the past, and he's saying it's going to take, you know, 10 years to really develop and prove these things, we did in a number of months. So, you know, unfortunately, can to other countries, they believed, and they relied on the FDA and CDC and NIH in America, just like doctors, just like hospitals, that kind of stuff. They listened to and followed the directions of people that they shouldn't have done.

But you mentioned remdesivir, Let me just quick point out the hypocrisy of Fauci when it comes from ramesdicevier. This is an email sent on March 18th, 2020. This is 18 days after Peter Marks already found out that, you know, we got safety, you know, we've got a problem with the algorithm. But on a different issue, he's writing to Robert Redfield, then the director of the CDC. He's comparing randesphere to hydroxychloricor, when he says, we need to link Remdesivir to a much more strict protocol as opposed to hydroxychloroquine,

which is an approved drug, and although it does have some adverse events, we have tons of experience with it. They have the Surgesphere study, which was completely fraudulent, which, you know, they published here, it tanked hydroxychloroquine, together with what Rick Bright did for it. But here, Fauci is, you know, saying, you know, we've got a lot of, experienced hydroxychloroquine. But we really need to be a little more careful with ramesivir. All of a sudden, randesivir, we just became the drug to use, right? Manufactured by Gilead. Made a lot of money for Gilead. In an interview, Cheryl Atkinson, full measure, she's talking to Dr. Jane Orient and also Stephen Hatfield. And Cheryl says,

it turns out one author of the report, so they did a study on Remdesivir. And in the middle of the study, they changed the endpoint from death because it had no impact on death to days to recovery, which apparently for whatever reason, whether the data is true or not, Remedesvesteris showed less days to recovery. Turns out one of the authors of the report issued by HHS received research funding from Gilead, the maker of Remedestri, including a $247,000 grant. She goes on, we check financial ties among experts on the government panel devising coronavirus treatment guidelines. We found 11 members reporting links to a drug company, nine of them named relationships to Ramdesphere as maker Gilead.

Seven more, including two of the committee's leaders, have ties to Gilead beyond the 11 months they chose to disclose. You think there's a conflict of interest in all of a sudden rushing Remdesphere to get emergency use authorization, even though who recommend against, the use of it. They stopped using it an Ebola trial because it killed the subjects faster than the protocol without ramesivir. I'll close up on my randesivir rant. One of the witnesses for hospital protocols, he's a staff surgeon at Providence Regional Medical Center in Everett, Washington, and he, one of the courageous doctors that came to help out during COVID. And he said, after our hospital was given her amdesivir by CDC, we were provided misleading inaccurate information about the drug by medical leadership.

When I had a young trauma patient who was a perfect candidate, according to their protocols, for ramesivir, the infectious disease, doctor on call, told me to not give it to her because, quote, she seems like a nice girl. He concludes it was known early their amdesivir kills. That was the standard of care. How do you think the doctors are dealing with this because they have to know? I mean, I hope and pray that they're searching their consciences. Again, when you saw the doctors that they made an example of,

I have just sympathy for doctors who didn't want to give up all their training, all their career that want to continue to be doctors, so I get that. But I hope in light of what's being revealed right now, I hope there's an awful lot of soul searching occurring within the medical establishment, not only doctors and nurses, but hospital administrators within these federal health agencies. Again, that's why I'm not stopping. We need to expose the truth, and it's going to be difficult. Again, we're not going to get the thousand pieces of that puzzle.

Maybe we get 100. But even with the 30 pieces we've got, we have some pretty incriminating and revealing evidence of what happened. You don't have to be a soothsayer to kind of connect the dots and go, okay, I see what was happening here. But you have to be open to it. You have to open up your eyes.

And then once you see it, don't close them. What's the saying? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice. Three, four, five, six, seven, eight, you know, lie to me. I mean, they lied to us. Plain simple, they lied to us, bald face, repeatedly, scandalously.

And of course, if there is one of the, I mean, in addition of the injection injured and the deaths, if there's one casualty of COVID and what we did is, it's just the, we don't trust doctors and nurses, we don't trust the medical establishment anymore. I mean, there's a growing percentage, certainly of Americans, will not go to the hospital. I think one of the things we talked about last night was the Raspicent poll. The initial poll was 24, I got it here. Well, off the top of my head, so many 25% of Americans believe they personally knew somebody who died from the COVID injection.

And under 50% thought it probably led to the security. number of deaths. The most recent poll, 24% of Americans still believe they know, personally know some of who died from the COVID injection, and 53% believe it probably caused a significant number of deaths. Now, again, that's not a study. It's not a random country. You know, this isn't, this is just people's experience. This is what they saw. They, they know people that went in the hospital who begged for, I mean, just give it a shot. I'm dying. Just, would you give these safe, cheap, just give it a shot? No, not going to do that. Can you imagine how gut-wrenching and frustrating that was for family members who say,

oh, dad's on vaccine? He's going to die. Would you at least give an Ivermectin? Nope, won't do that either. I mean, one of their testimonies is they would not give their father or their loved one last rights unless they agreed that that loved one to get a dose of a vansivir first. Now, that's craven. That's craven to the point of evil.

Okay? It's a testimony. I can't, you know, I can't verify it, but that's what people, and enough Americans, I think enough people worldwide saw that, and they believed it. And they're not going to believe these experts anymore. And that's, you know, we, we actually, it would be nice to have federal health agencies. It would be nice to have a world health agency. So you could trust, but these people had integrity. They were putting the, the interest of the public first, not the interest of the, of the,

drug companies that have captured them, that influenced them, or the Bill Gates of the world that sprinkle his foundation money around and then cash in as the stock price of vaccine manufacturers goes up. Again, it's, this, this is just, there's no winners here. Well, there were winners. The billionaire. I mean, there were winners, okay? But for the vast majority of us, it was just a loss loss. It was a tragic one at that. I can just ask a question very quickly. Just to build off what you were saying there, Senator, I'm just going to go back to the doctors and the nurses for a moment because you brought something to my attention that I had forgotten. Shame on me.

I don't believe that sentiment is the same in Canada. I personally don't believe that we don't trust our health care system. Could it be a heck of a lot better with the service side of things? believe, truthfully believe, that we trust our doctors and our nurses. But that leads me to my question for you, because I know during COVID, I know it because I met with a lot of amazing nurses that refused to get the shot, that had an ultimatum. You get the shot or you lose your job. Now, ironically, two years later, they said, would you please come back? You don't need to get the shot. Please, please, please come back because we are screaming for nurses.

they were screaming for nurses during COVID as well. But so many of those amazing individuals that literally gave their whole life to serving everyone else were thrown out with the trash, thrown out with the baby water and thrown to the wolves, which was disgusting. And it wasn't just nurses. It was surgeons as well right in my own backyard. My question is, did the same thing happen in the United States in that, or was it state to state? Oh, no, no, the exact same thing happened. Yeah, there was a huge nursing shortage, you know, partly because they literally terminated nurses who wouldn't get the shot.

There was one testimony I saw. This is quite a few years ago, so this is a paraphrase, but there were, this is a nurse reporting nursing professors. And they're sitting around because they required all their nursing students to get vaccinated. And some of them didn't. and they were literally laughing. You know, those, yeah, through three years of nursing school out the window, they're laughing at them.

They're finding pleasure in the fact that those young women or young men who wanted to be nurses and, again, be the primary caregivers. They're the same thing, in military, I think 8,500 members of the U.S. military were discharged. Some of them were coming back. By the way, that continues to be a huge cover-up in the U.S. military. We had testimony of the D-Med system showing dramatic increases in all these diagnoses.

And when we wrote to the Foreign Department, they go, oh, we had a glitch in our data. We said, preserve that data. They didn't. Took the system down, brought it back up. Oh, nothing to see here anymore. We've had Dr. Teresa Long testify. You know, she's now on the case trying to get the information. But again, I have to emphasize so much of the evidence has already been destroyed,

was never created because they're, you know, smart enough not to put incrementing things in writing. So it's good. But what's actually pretty amazing is how much we have uncovered. I think how much is probably luck to be uncovered. Now, if we get these devices, it's kind of hard to be operating every day. of the, you know, looking over your shoulder and making sure you don't put this thing in writing, right? We're not all angels, so. But no, that is tragically the exact same thing happened. I just, I just have nothing but respect for those doctors and nurses who just refused it.

And they paid an enormous price that was not fair. Yeah. When you were talking earlier about how the flu vaccine is now approved an MRI flu vaccine. and I think you said it was like 2.7% risk of a serious adverse event, including, you know, death or, you know, imminent death and serious disablement. You know, parents, even hearing that might not think that that's a big risk, even though it's a huge risk. And I thought, you know, if you had 100 parents and their kids in a room and they all had to get vaccinated together, and they were truthful and said, okay, only 97 kids are going to come out of this room. you're going to lose three to protect the 100 from the flu. And the parents know their kid's not going to die of the flu. It would probably stop that type of thing.

Why do you think it is that, and I do appreciate because of COVID, the vaccination rate has dropped. But why do you think parents are so trusting of public health? Because I think public health officials mislead them. You know, for one of our hearings, I've had my staff print out the effectiveness. So this is reported by CDC, the effectiveness of the flu shot over many, many years. One year is the low as 10%.

Now, I think to get approval of a vaccine, it has to be shown at least 50% effective. Again, that's, that's taking it from point one down to 0.95. And yet you're subjecting yourself to potentially almost 3% risk. of a serious adverse event? It just doesn't compute. But that's what I said, you know, didn't answer one of the questions. I mean, familiarize yourself

with absolute versus relative risk, you know, what that means, and know what the published risk of these things are versus what your risk is of gain that disease. I mean, nobody wants to get the flu or a cold. But we've never developed a vaccine for the cold or really even a cure. You keep your immune system firing on all cylinders.

By the way, one of my knocks on Fauci, he started taking megadosis of vitamin D. And like the Grinch who solved hunger told no one, he told no one. And Fauci knew enough, you know, do something to boost your immune system. Well, that's things like vitamin D. It seems you made a comment earlier that some of, there was a difference between Democrat-run states and Republicans. run states. And in Canada, too, there seems to be some polarization on this issue between parties. How do you think we can get through this? Because it seems to me that anything health, or the issue of vaccine hesitancy or lack of confidence in public health, that's a problem

that needs to be solved. Like surely it's good for a nation if the populace has confidence in their public health authorities. How do you think we can move through that and get through, you know, differences and make this about what's best for the citizen again? So as much as I ran because we're a mortgage-argetary kid's future for the last few years, and we've had Admiral Mike Mullin saying the greatest threat to America is our debt and deficit. I mean, for a number of years now I've saying, no, I think the greatest threat to America and our democracy is our horribly divided country. It's just unsustainable.

And the only cure I can see for that is, Kind of what you're doing the business road. You don't get very far in business arguing all the time. Business, you try and find areas of agreement. I got a product you want to buy it. Okay, now we'll hang over the price. So I think it's about focusing on areas of agreement. But one of the problems we have today is what's true?

I mean, I certainly have a bias. I'll see something posted on social media and go, unbelievable. Generally, I try and vet all of it. I've got a pretty good staff. don't believe that, it seems entirely true. Not everybody's got a staff to vet the latest outrage on both sides. So I hate to say this, I have a trust in news initiative.

I understand the desire to have some referee out there saying this is true, this isn't. It's just not going to be possible. So, you know, I think it was Louis Brandeis to some impact, you know, when talking about misinformation and, you know, particularly misinformation that could be harmful to public health. So the solution isn't less speech. The solution is more speech. I was a paraphrase and probably a pretty bad one with that.

But, I mean, the solution literally is more speech. And as consumers of speech, as consumers of information, we need to be very discerning. I've become far more wary of allowing my biases to automatically agree with something that I think is kind of a blockbuster revelation that reinforces where I believe. And to vet that out, I think as consumers of information, we just need to be more wary of that. I mean, now with AI, these deep fakes. I mean, I can't tell you how many videos I sent my siblings, which is great videos of, you know, a lion saving a lambs. It's fake, you know.

I've been very disappointed sometimes of the ones I've said, ah, rats and other AI fake. So again, that's just a problem. But focus on areas of agreement. That's what I said, you know, I opened up. You know, I love Canada. I love Canadians. I mean, I understand that shared heritage.

Focus on that. Yeah, okay, I know we got disagreements. Okay. Those are real, okay? They're not going away. But I think what binds us together is human beings. And we see it all the time. We're coming up on the 25th anniversary of 9-11,

which I'm sure was everybody's impactful in Canada as it was in America. We see it moments of tragedy like that. The absolute best come out of people's human beings. The firefighters walking in a danger lost their lives. So, I mean, focus on good. I know I'm here doom and gloom, and I've got a lot of criticism, that kind of stuff, but you've got to believe good is going to overcome it. You've got to believe truth will prevail, which is why this, again, this inquiry is so important

is, and again, everything said here may not be true. You know, some of the witnesses, we might get something wrong. We don't slaughter us over it. Don't vilify. I mean, we're trying to tell the truth. prove me wrong, I'll apologize and correct it right off the bat. Again, bring that level of humility and modesty

to these discussions. Doctors. You can't expect doctors to know all these things. It's impossible. They specialize in an area. That's why doctors consult. I don't know much about kidneys. I mean, take a look at these.

So you know, you have people some slack. but at the same time doctors need to be. One thing I've seen is there's a God complex to doctors, and by the way, it's necessary. If you're making life-and-depth decisions, you better have that level of confidence and be willing to forgive yourself when you make the wrong decision.

It's going to happen. It's called medical practice. But within that reality, have a little more modesty, a little more humility. You know, when you get somebody that, you know, somebody's calling a crackpot because they're using this horse paste, open up your mind to it. I mean, this, you know, it's Pierre Corey, this Paul Ameri. These guys are smart people.

You know, one testimony in, I think this is my COVID-19, a second opinion, it came from Paul America. It was just an amnally qualified, world-renowned critical care specialist. And because of hospital protocols, they literally took away the tools he was using. He's using high-dose vitamin C, which, by the way, he's kind of shown cure sepsis and still not being readily accepted, but Ivermectin. They took away all of his tools. And he had like seven, and he had seven patients in critical care in the ICU that he believes he could treat successfully. He said, but they took away my tools. They tied my hands behind my back.

And all I could do is sit by and watch my patients die. Again, that's powerful testimony, and hospital administrators and other doctors need to look at that and search their souls. Yeah, you have to be confident, but you also have to be modest and humble. As you approach life and death decisions, as you approach the complexity of the human body, I mean, our immune system is a marvel. How could they kick it to the curb and say, ah, can't rely on that. our experimental gene therapy. Again, it's absurd, isn't it?

It's absurd. But we live that absurdity. And to a certain extent, we still are. But again, the solution, focused on the area's agreement, aggressively pursue the truth. And when you're wrong, admit it. We're getting close to the end of the time

that we have slaughtered for you. And when COVID was running, you know, my wife and I, we were glued to the TV, the news. And there's all these cases, cases, cases. Like, you'd think that they were, you know, they imported a bunch of people for all these cases. Can you tell us why that was a problem? Why the use of these PCR tests and cases were a problem and were misleading to the of it. So the inventor of the PCR test didn't live to the pandemic. I think he died in 2019. His name was Dr. Kerry Mullis. And his famous quote is about the PCR said it doesn't

tell you that you're sick, that the thing you've ended up with was really going to hurt you. But that's exactly what the scaremongers and fearmongers use it for. So the PCR test, again, I'm, you have better people equipped to tell you this, but I mean, it, it goes through cycles, and it's identifying molecular material. And the more times you cycle it, the more chances you're going to find a piece of that coronavirus, a molecule that matches that and, oh, you got, you got COVID when you don't. It's just, you know, it was just misused. And, you know, I remember, actually, you know, I told that story about Francis Collins and I was pointing out Vayers. it was a group of Republican senators in April of 2021,

and they're all paying themselves in the back about, yeah, we got that testing. The testing was one of their mixups, okay? Because we just didn't have, you know, tests, rapid tests, so we could scare the crap by the American public or the global public about how many people were catching this thing. But they finally had it perfected by April of 2021. I was the skunk in the room after they're paying themselves in the back about,

we got that test. I'm the one that asked, what about, what about Veyers? What are you looking at there? So, no, I mean, I think we completely misused testing. But again, we misused it to, we knew from Johnny Anitas.

We knew from Oxford's Center for Evidence-based Medicine. We knew from Anthony Fauci's diary. Not to dismiss COVID, but, you know, a bad flu season. We knew it. they knew it and they did this to us maybe again that's what I say of all the revelations

of Fauci's diary is that he was confiding his diary that he confirmed basically with Johnny Edanidis and what Oxford's Center for Evidence-based Medicine basically confirming what I said lose 39,000 people

we don't shut down the highway can't shut down the economy not for a bad flu season we'll get through it No, help doctors, help hospitals. A bad flu season overwhelms hospitals. You know, I don't know about Canada, but, you know, I really never talked to a hospital in Wisconsin that was overwhelmed. I talked to doctors, and they're going to. Now, there were hospitals in New York.

I think Louisiana, Italy, China. I mean, there were. But I think this was way overhyped. I just do. So if you can talk about COVID deaths and whether you think the numbers were inflated. And I'll just share a personal story is my mother-in-law was in a care home, but really healthy, not sick of anything. She had done wheelchair bowling the day before. Nobody's saying that she's got COVID or sick or needs to be isolated.

And we don't know what happened in the night. suspect a really severe stroke. But in the morning, she was basically brain dead and dying. So we were just told, go to the hospital. She's taken to the hospital and the hospital says, we're not doing anything. Like, we can't save her. She's dying today. So we're just waiting for, it wasn't until 10 at night that she died. So they're not going to treat her for anything. But I bet you we turn them away at least 25 times they wanted to test her for COVID. And I knew, at least I suspected, that the reason they wanted to test her for COVID is because if she tested positive for COVID, they would treat her as a COVID death because they were treating in Canada. And my question is, the same thing happened in the U.S.

They're treating any death where you died with COVID as a death of COVID. And, you know, I'm at the age where, you know, my age and up, almost every man has prostrate cancer. But we never know and it never kills us. But if they recorded every death of my age and up male as prostrate cancer, then we'd have this big epidemic. But that would be meaningless fear because it didn't kill us and it wasn't going to kill us. We just had it. So is that the type of thing that happened in the States? Because both my wife and I were severely troubled by this relentless request to test her for COVID

when everyone knows she's not dying of COVID. And you're not even treating her. So why even test? There's not going to be any intervention. We're waiting for her to die. So there's all kinds of anecdotal evidence of people that, you know, basically feel a car crash and, well, test positive of COVID. who died of COVID. So I think that was rampant. I think that happened, but we don't know. They don't want to know. They got the result they wanted. They were able to juice the numbers,

create the fear, so they could get the result they wanted, which was the MRNA injection. And I've tried it. It's kind of hard, as I've looked into kind of the finances of this, what research has been done in America primarily, because we just opened up the spigot and just threw money at the problem, right? literally trillions of dollars. And the studies have been done on this is that the, you know, large profitable hospitals profited even more. And rural hospitals kind of took a beating during COVID. I think just in general, hospitals did really well.

They made oodles and oodles of money. States did well, too. Sent all kinds of COVID relief to states to still haven't spent the money. Because there actually were some strengths that had to be done for COVID. They couldn't figure out how to do it. So, no, I think the overstatement of COVID deaths was real. Just you can't prove it, you know, other than anecdotally, but I think everybody kind of recognizes that's true.

All right. Is there any more questions for colleagues at all? Yeah, go ahead, Chris. I just wanted to say thank you once again. One final time, Senator, we really, really appreciate you being here. As I mentioned to you in the hallway as well, your opening remarks about loving Canada and understanding that we're not the enemy,

and equally, the United States isn't the enemy either. Yes, there's a lot of politics being played, but the very fact that you said that in open into the public, that helps resolve the problems. And the only other thing I'd ask, Senator, is can you please tell those Vikings that stay away from my Lions? Because we need a win in Detroit.

Well, your alliance, my condolences, I had a neighbor those a Lions fan. It's like, that's a tough road to hoe. And Teresa walked up to me and said, ask him, what's next? What's next? What's next? So as I said, we've only now gotten documents.

This was after, you know, six years of investigation, now we're finally getting documents. So we have evidence, which is what you need before you call people in for transcribed interviews. Otherwise, they run circles around you. I mean, even with evidence, as I was saying, we've interviewed some of the people in CDC. They're completely unrepentant. You can't phase them. there's nothing you can show them that said, yeah,

you probably ought to consider this one as a safety signal. They just, we weren't seeing safety signals. What can I say? So we'll continue to gather that evidence. Again, we've got more devices that they are supposed to have in their possession, but again,

it drives you nuts. They can't answer simple questions. Okay, you say you possess this, but it's been decommissioned and not have inventory. What does that mean? We can't tell you what it means. So again, I cannot tell you.

I always say nobody can out frustrate me. But we will continue. I will be dogged as long as particularly as I'm chairman. I'll need to remain chairman in order to have the subpoena authority to at least threaten subpoenas to compel these agencies, even under Bobby Kennedy. I mean, we need that authority. But certainly over the, if we maintain the majority of the next two years, get more documentation, we're starting to call people in for interviews. And one of the reasons we don't just do a document dump. You know, like, here's the stuff, here's what we found out,

is you need, in order to do an investigate's integrity, when you call witnesses in, they can't know what you have. Okay? They have to suspect that you know everything they wrote. So that when you ask them a question, they better answer it honestly because in some cases we know the answer to the question. Some cases we don't. But we want them to be under as much pressure.

to answer truthfully. So again, the interview phase of my investigation has only begun. I hope it'll be quite revealing. We're getting more whistleblowers coming up saying, well, you should have this document. We don't. We do know, for example, I'll name him, Tom Schoenbeckuro, who was the Chief Safety Surveillance Official in CDC. He was touting Vayers in October, room, all that type of thing. With the permission of the Office of General Counsel of HHS, he deleted emails. Now, I think HHS was tried by a court that he can't do it. I mean, that's the violation of Federal Records Act.

But again, he's covered by the fact that he's based on an Office of General Counsel opinion that, yeah, you're not high enough to the food chain. You can delete what you want to delete. What we've also found out, though, is that not only were they delete on the device, but they appear to be have been deleted on the server. I know how to delete an email. I have no idea how I delete those. Because again, electronic communications, it doesn't disappear.

Those things are pretty much forever. Unless somebody who knows what they're doing, deletes them. So we'll see where this goes. I can see my investigation expanding into, because we already have Dr. David Morins, right? he wrote the famous email. We got this FOIA lady. Show me how to make emails disappear.

You know, other emails, my staff is uncovered. He's now, again, he confessed to a conspiracy to violate the Federal Records Act. So I'm hoping he turned state evidence on fellow conspirators, but we've seen that time and time and time again, those type of emails. Like, well, let's talk about this, not good for email or send this to my Gmail. We see that time and time again. So I can see my investigation expanding into just rampant violations of the Federal Records Act within these agencies. Well, Senator, we want to wish you all the best, as I said we led off this point. There's been nothing of this type or kind in Canada.

And you have led the charge in, I would say, most of the world for looking into this. We really appreciate your insight, what you've heard, what you've experienced. What witnesses have told you is you try and sift through what is right or what is correct and what isn't. And I think we had a conversation, previous conversation, you said, you know, someone that shares these committees, it's very important that we tell the truth, right? We have to understand the truth, especially as you're looking through this stuff. So if we don't know the answer, we can say that. And we can say we can look for more information.

So we just appreciate your diligence to try and seek the truth. I think that nothing can be more important in a day and age where people like to obscure the truth, where people don't value the truth. We want to just encourage you to keep going. We'll be keeping an eye on it. And we know how busy you are. And so thank you for taking time out of your very busy schedule, flying all the way across the country to hang out with us.

And I know you're going back to Washington soon, back to work. And so we do appreciate your time and spending the whole warning here with us because of how pressure your time is. So there's really no need to thank me because I just truly appreciate the opportunity. I mean, we talked about this what I consider as a bombshell report. April 29, Peter Marks was warned the algorithm of high safety signals. He was shown safety signals. They're still lying about it. Now, I've been interviewed on some of the news programs, but not one major network, including Fox News.

Not CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, not one, not one major newspaper. Not the Wall Street Journal, not New York Times, not Washington Post, have covered this bombshell. The greatest government scandal in my lifetime of the hiding these safety signals as news, not one. So I appreciate the opportunity to come here. I've pretty well gone through my stack of stuff. I'm sure when I assembled, I'll go, oh, I didn't make that point. It'll drive me nuts, okay? but you don't do not thank me i'm thanking you for doing this to to open up as many eyes as possible and

and maybe just maybe Canadian broadcasters who actually it's not that hard report to read both of my reports you'll learn something you ought to be outraged by what you learn but again this is just a great opportunity and i'm thanking you for doing this and god bless all of you and again god bless the injection injured sitting behind us and the people are going to testify over next few days. I wish you all the luck. In Godspeed. Okay, welcome back to this afternoon. We're going to continue along and we are so privileged to be able to hear from some of our injured people and I'm going to just turn it over to Sean as he sets up what we're going to look at next. Thank you. Our next witness is Carrie Lynn

Sakamoto. Carrey, welcome to the Allison Inquiry. You were a very first vaccine injured witness. We're very pleased to have you. Can you take the Bible in the right hand? And Carrie, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? So help you God. Please be seated. So I wanted, before we begin, I'm going to go through somewhat of your hearing. history. But I wanted to ask you why it was important to come here and testify. It's a space for us to talk about what's happened. We're censored online for saying words like COVID vaccine, COVID vaccine injury. So being able to put this on public record and to be able to talk here today where there's live streaming is really important to me.

Now I'm going to lead you a little bit. You have been clearly diagnosed as vaccine injured, and even the vaccine injury support program agrees that your vaccine injured, and you did not have COVID before you were vaccine injured. Is that all of that right? Yes, that's correct. Can you share with us kind of what your life was like and what your health was like before you took the vaccines?

Yeah, I was living. on an acreage. We owned an acreage just outside of Lethbridge. And I have three children that I was raising at home. My husband was working out of the home. And we were also starting, we had just started a seed business. So we had 28 acres. And we were just working away. We had that farm for 15 years when I got injured. Right. So, you know, you're a vibrant young mother. You've got an acreage and a seed farm. You're pretty busy. Yes. Very. Any health concerns before? No. So I'm just going to, we're just going to pull up two photos. I want everyone to have, you know, a look at a view before vaccine injuries. So, David, can we pull that up? So can you tell us about this first photo?

Yeah, that's what I used to look like. And it feels like. forever ago since I was that person. It completely changed me, not just the way I look. And it's changed how people react to you also, right? Yes, and it's changed my way of thinking. Can you share a little bit about that? I feel abandoned from the government that said they were going to be here for us. we were told that if we did this, things could go back to normal.

We were told that we wouldn't be able to do things if we didn't get it. And I'm sorry, I have short-term memory loss and I forget what you asked. No trouble at all. So can we go to the next photo, please? And this is just another photo of when you were healthy. and these are your three boys and your husband. And is this photo on your acreage? Yes.

Okay. So can you tell us then what happened? My understanding is on April 1st, 2024, you had your first shot, which was AstraZeneca. And that was, can you tell us about that one? So I had my, yes, I had my first vaccine in April of 2021. I chose Aspenica. I had received the flu shot probably a few years before that, and I also had all my childhood vaccines. So I chose to get that one, in particular, just because it was closest to the flu vaccine from what I was told. And that's how I chose AstraZeneca.

Okay. And then on June 18th, 2021, you got a second shot, which was Pfizer. Can you tell us, did anything happen that day? I got sick right away, and it was flu symptoms, and it was a lot of the same symptoms that my husband was having, who had the vaccine at the same time and the same one. So I wasn't too concerned at first. From what I had been hearing on the news, There were side effects such as rash, fever.

There wasn't many. I went back and looked at my list on the sheet that I signed, and it was just flu symptoms, basically, and rashes. I didn't really think much of it until about the 7th or 8th day of having it, and my husband was getting better. He was feeling much better, and I got worse, progressively worse. What was happening? My lymph nodes on the right side of my neck swelled up, and I had a really high fever.

I wanted to go to the doctor, but because of COVID restrictions, and I had a fever, they wouldn't see me in person, so I had to do a telephone call with my GP at the time. she prescribed me some antibiotics because over the phone she diagnosed me with tonsle stones. She said it was likely from the fever that I had been having. She said if it didn't change after taking the medication to call her back, and they would do something else. Now the next morning, there was something new that was happening. Can you share that with us?

Yes, I started getting pain in my brain, and it was extreme pain, and it was so bad that, I call it fire in my brain. I have it to this day. It was so bad at first. I was vomiting a lot, and that was the main reason I went to the hospital at the time. When I got to the hospital in emergency, they thought I... Can I just slow you down? So you're talking about this burning in your brain, and there's a couple of things. So you actually still have pain in your brain?

Yes. To this day, I take medication for it, which is causing my memory loss. Okay. So how strong was this pain? Is there any other way you can describe it for us? Fire. It just feels like my brain is on fire. Most people, you think about your brain.

It's in your head, but when it's hurting, You can feel where it is. And I could feel my brain. And the pain is, it's just a really strong burning sensation. And it's all over my head. Okay. And your vomiting also is... Yes.

Yeah, I was very sick. I couldn't handle the pain. When I went back to the hospital, or when I went to the hospital, they thought I was having migraines. and so they gave me some medication for migraines and IV fluids and something to calm my stomach and sent me home. Okay, but you didn't end up staying at home for long. Did you, can you share what happened?

As soon as the medications wore off, I was in the vaccine position I had been in. At this point, I'd lost a lot of weight because I hadn't been eating and then I was getting sick all the time. So we went, I'm sorry, I forget what I was doing. Oh, no, it's perfectly okay. So I was just talking, you were telling us that you had gone to the hospital and they thought it was a migraine. And so they gave you, you know, a migraine medication

and I think a painkiller I'm extrapolating. And then you went home and I was asking really what happened after that. Yes, the medications were off. was sick again right back where I was. And so we went back to the hospital. And it was on that trip back to the hospital that my face felt like it was swelling up. And so I was looking in the side mirror of our car and I could see that my face had dropped this whole side of my face. I thought I was having a stroke. Right. But at the hospital, they tell you it's bell's pulse. Yes. And what happens next? They sent me home again. They said that the hospital was

full of COVID patients and because of restrictions they were only taking emergencies and so they said that this would probably correct itself. They gave me some steroids and sent me home, they said if anything changed to come back again. And it changed really quickly, didn't it? Yes. Again, as soon as the medications that they were giving me wore off, I was throwing up the burning in my brain and now I had half of my face was paralyzed, my eye was paralyzed open, so I had to patch it. I was experiencing some hearing loss and balance issues.

Right. So basically you were losing your ability to walk for a while? I didn't know. It was more strength. I had no strength. So we went back to the hospital. I was experiencing numbness on the left side of my face and I was worried that it was going to spread to my eye and I wouldn't be able to see. Okay. And then also my understanding is you lost the ability to swallow. You had learned to chew your food again and how to swallow again. Yeah. I had lost a lot of weight and they were really concerned because this paralyization comes down my throat and actually to about here in my shoulder and my back. I'm sorry. Oh no, you're doing really good. I'm just going to ask. David, if he can pull up the next photo? I was going to say, I'm sorry, that I was put on feeding tubes because, yes, I couldn't

shoe my food and swallow. I had to learn how to do that again. Right, and you were in the hospital, I think, for 17 days. Yes. Now, David's pulled up a photo here. Can you tell us what that photo shows? That photo shows when my eye was still paralyzed open, and that's an infection that I get. quite often. That one was particularly bad. You can see the bubble underneath. And you can see all the redness around my eye where I had to put the patch on and off several times a day, which is like a band-aid, so you're ripping the skin around your eye because I had to constantly be putting

gel in my eye, so it wouldn't dry out and lose my eye. She basically couldn't close her eyelids? I couldn't close my eye, correct. And that's still an ongoing problem, right? So now I have a condition called synchinesis. It's healed back wrong. All the nerves are connected wrong. So I have pulling in my face and my eye droops and it just kind of does what it wants. I can't, I have blurry and double vision out of that eye. I do wear glasses that help with light sensitivity, but for today I'm not going to wear them. And my understanding is as part of that synchronicus, you also, your face feels like it's getting pulled, right? Yes, it's constant pulling and cramping. It's very painful. And the more I talk,

the worse it gets. Yeah, well, we certainly appreciate you sharing with us. David, can you go to the next picture, please? So can you share with us what this is a picture of? That was, I think that was the first day. My mom was able to come up and see me, and she had brought some things, some pajamas and stuff for me from her friends, actually. that were well-wishing me. And is the tube in your nose then a feeding tube because you can't swallow? Yes. And your eye is patched because you can't close your eye.

Correct. Okay. David, can you go to the next photo? And this is you being on the day you're discharged from the hospital or not. No, that was actually the first time I was able to leave my room. My husband put me in a wheelchair and we were able to go outside, which was also the first time I was able to see my children. They were not allowed in the hospital because of COVID restrictions. Okay.

So you've shared with us, like for today, you still have that burning in your brain. You also shared that you have some memory loss. Can you share with us kind of how that affects you day to day? The memory loss is really bad. It seems to be getting worse. my doctors have said that it is medication related, they believe, but I haven't been able to go off of the medication to be able to tell. They did some tests on me because I noticed that I was leaving things on.

I couldn't remember certain things, really important events in my life that I should know. So I went to my GP and they did some testing and I tested as early onset Alzheimer's. They told me that it is medication related. Right. So this is medication that you're taking because of the burning in your brain and it keeps the pain down. Yes. And you've been told you can't go off that medication or you'll die. Am I right about that?

die, but I end up right back where I am. Very sick. Very sick. Right. But at the same time, the medication that you rely on is affecting your memory. I'm having a side effect from the side effects of the medications. And then you also have vertical. Yes, I have two types of vertical. What's been the worst, most difficult part of this? For me, it's different than a lot of people because my doctors were the ones who told me this was a vaccine injury. So I've had doctors on my side the whole time encouraging me. At the same time, they don't know how to treat me because it's new and it's hard to talk about.

They say this is a Bels palsy-like because it's caused from this particular vaccine. and I'm sorry, I forget the question. Oh, you did good, I know. Thank you. I'm going to ask a question. My colleague Mike asked one first. I just want to thank you again, Gary, for coming and sharing with us your story.

I mean, you know, I understand as vaccine injured people need to relive and re-traumatized, but we appreciate you sharing something that the rest of the world can understand. And I'll ask a question after Mike goes. Thanks, Dean. Thanks for being here telling your story. I can kind of relate a little to the, when you first started telling your story about you got the vaccine. You started, your lymph nodes started swelling up.

I got three vaccines. If I could go back, I wouldn't have got any. But when I got the second one, I got a lump under my arm, the size of a softball. when I went to the pharmacist that gave me the vaccine, they told me that there was nothing wrong. It'd go away. And luckily it did. It did go away in two or three days.

And I had no other symptoms. I did have a high temperature. And but that was it. How has your health been, has it been steadily the same or has it been since you would get out of the hospital? Has it gone up or down or does it periodically change? I've gotten stronger, but the symptoms are the same as day one. The memory loss is the hardest one right now for me.

Are the doctors saying that there's anything they can do? No, and the vertigo, they've also tried everything. There's no more medications for me to try. Have you gotten any access from the support program? at all? Yes. I'm one of the 0.01% people, but not because I got a vaccine injury, but because I received a partial payout from the vaccine injury program. There's not many of us. Are there any restrictions with the payout from? So I'm still in appeals. They approved my vaccine injury, but they denied all my medications, all my therapies, my hearing aid, my glasses.

So that's all been out of pocket. I also see, I have to see a psychologist, and that's also out of pocket. I started a gives and go, and that has been a real blessing. The kindness of strangers, I've been able to at least keep my medicine going. Therapies have stopped. How long is the appeal process going to go? Pardon? How long has the appeal process been ongoing? So now I've had nine case managers from 2001 to 2023

when I received a partial payout. because they didn't approve my medications and therapies, and they also didn't evaluate my brain, they put me in appeals, and now it's under a new program. I've been told that there's nothing else I need to do, that they're at the end of it. I don't have a lot of faith,

in them. They denied my therapies saying that I had Botox done with great success. I sent in letters to the contrary. I was advised not to get Botox. The program has been awful. For people who are injured, they can't get the help they need. And we're just looking for medical help. We just want help with our health How would the doctors been in the whole process? My doctors have been excellent. Multi-supportive? Yes. But that's because I was diagnosed in the hospital.

I didn't realize how important that would be that my doctor reported my injury as a vaccine injury to Ottawa. But even with that, I sit here five years later and I'm still in the program for no reason. They've wasted millions of dollars when they could have been helping people. people like me. What does your doctor say about those? My doctors are very disappointed in the program. My pharmacists are very disappointed in the program.

They see me coming in and getting the medications every week. It's been the same medications for five years that I wasn't taking before I was in the hospital. They see how frustrated I am, and they're equally as frustrated. I think everybody sitting here is frustrated. And I personally think it's a travesty that you're not getting. Thank you for being here and listening. No problem. Thanks, Mary.

I got a couple of questions. You have a young family. So you've talked about your personal injuries. How has it affected your family? It's been devastating. Not only did we have to sell everything, uproot my family in a home that we always called our forever home, and had to explain to the kids that we'd

just can't stay here anymore was really difficult. We had to uproot them and move them into town. My youngest never went back to school. We still do homeschool. He's in grade 11 now. He suffers with severe migraines. He also had Pfizer. My mother got a booster.

She developed turbo cancer and died a year into my injury. She was diagnosed with cancer shortly after she got shingles from her booster, and she died before she saw her first oncologist. You talked about additional costs, and we understand we have O'Hip in Ontario, and you've got BC, but I'm not going to guess that there's a lot of costs in medicine that just are not covered by the province, which I'm here to share, you know, what you're out of pocket or what you've got to deal with or what you've got to try and figure out in terms of additional drugs that may not be covered? You know, we just kind of hope and pray every month that it's going to happen,

that it will have enough to cover everything. And so far it's happened. Again, the gifts and goes have been amazing. I did go to social media to tell my story. In the beginning, I went to social media because I wanted the doctors. to know what was happening. I wanted them to be able to diagnose people when they walked into the hospital

instead of being sent home three times like I was. I wanted better care for people because I understood how scary and life-changing that these injuries can be. I did a little bit of research. I hear people talking all the time about us being antivax when it couldn't be further than the truth from the truth.

not only did we take a vaccine, but we're relying on science to help us heal. So is it fair to say then that the cost of healing or trying to get help are not covered solely by the province? There's a financial burden on your failing. None of the therapies are covered. It would be if the program would do what they say they're going to do and take care of the injured. That's why it was created in 2021, but they failed. And the Global News Report that I was able to be a part of exposed to them,

it brought up a lot of concerning things. These are people now that have read our medical files that have said that they are not qualified to be doing that. And now when you call, they've told us they've misplaced over 300,000 documents and that they're trying to get them into the files where they belong. So for people that have been in this program for the last five years, a lot of people are having to start again. So I'll just, I'll finish with this question, is that so your experience,

even though he did receive a small stipend or a small payment, has done nothing to cover your ongoing cost of medicine. There's nothing, nothing to cover your ongoing. your ongoing costs for replacing any type of income you may have had that you can't do. And not only that, the program has really had you run around. I mean, you've had to run around. The program has other people run around in terms of loss of documentation, changing, changing, you know, what they're thinking or what they're asking for.

So you may be lucky to receive a small amount, but really the reality is you would say that the program doesn't even come close to trying to help compensate for what you've you've had to give up. Correct. There's more I wanted to say that I can't remember. I'm sorry. Thank you, I just say it again. Thank you for sharing your story. Thank you for giving this place, Mr. Allison and Mr. Buckley.

When you told me this is going to happen, I kind of didn't believe it. And then as I saw it coming together and I saw the reaction from the public, which has been mixed. But what I'm taking from this is the people that I've met online for five years that we've had to meet in back rooms online and talk secretively just to try and get health care, sharing doctor names so that people can try and get help. I'm sorry, I don't remember what I was saying. It's gone.

Sorry. Sure. Go ahead. It's obviously been incredibly difficult family. And when my wife was in the hospital, they sent her home three days, and I took her in the fort. 2.30 at night, that's on my knees. And I prayed to the Lord, I said, take everything we have.

my sons lead their mother. I should have said take the vote. But in the end, I can live. And we've, I can't do what I used to do. I have to be home every day for my wife. Life has kept going on. We've had to refinance. We've sold, we've sold, we've sold, we refit.

Banking institution wouldn't touch us. Nowhere in the world did they mix vaccinations, and every single manufacturer that we've talked to said they are implicitly told, do not mix. We were told you'd get a better reaction if you mixed. We were told no one would get left behind. We've been run over, backed up, run over again, backed up, run over again.

We've lost our farm, four businesses. my son, this migraines, they're all from these vaccines. I had blood clots. I had to go get ultrasound for. And I couldn't report it to work or a doctor or go. We had less than one income. We lost the farm.

We couldn't get a bank to sign a loan or give us. I had to go buy a house cash. I don't know if anyone understands how hard that is. when you have to leave one house and you have nowhere to go until you can get banks to get the money to enough. What our family has gone through while she's suffering and can't get help. I don't believe that you're given more than you can handle,

but I'll tell you, it's tried us, and she's so tough, and we come from tough stock. But she had 14 caseworkers. She's on and they still can't help her. And the first one, they lost all the tapes on. He was so awful to her. She was crying. He was accused it.

Like, this whole thing has just been a nightmare. And I hope that this inquiry or what you're doing here today is a step in the right direction because we're the lucky ones. There are so many people and doctors that we know. There was a doctor in Lytton. He's here today. He had a lady who had exactly the same thing as my wife. Six weeks ahead, she got the shots because she's First Nations. So we were able to contact him and find out. I could find out if my wife was going to be alive in six weeks. Every week I'd call to see if that lady had gone downhill more. And my wife's getting worse, not better. Her memory, as you can see, try letting the dogs out in one that's minus one.

40 or leaving the stove on and almost having your house burned down a couple dozen times. And then see how your wife cries because she's almost burned the house down a couple hundred times. Our lives have turned into survival. We're still trying to survive or make it through this. It's never ended for us. It's been five years since the day I woke up like this. And we're here, and we've gone broke and sold and retooled. And just when you think you're above it, something else happens. So, you know, we're here. There's nothing left to take.

We're here on Visa. That's who's sponsoring us. Well, listen, we want to thank you. I'll say it once again, we appreciate you opening up your hearts and sharing your stories with us. I just also wanted to share that I've been able to start. a class action for the vaccine injured in offer. So, Kerry, we're going to have to tell other witnesses not to testify unless we cut you off because we've got a tight schedule.

So can we? And we really don't want to do that. That's fine. So. Thank you so much, everybody. And we apologize to all the witnesses. You know, we could have you on for hours and your story deserves that. And we just made a decision early on.

We want to have more people have a chance to speak even if they have less time. There's so much to stay when someone's been injured. for five years or, you know, there's a lot. I need to end. Thank you so much. Witnesses. Thank you. Thank you.

So our next, I'll say witness, but we're going to have two witnesses sharing space. And you'll understand why that is very quickly. So we're going to have Catherine Christensen and Michael McNair. And I'm going to swear Catherine in and say it a little bit. And then swear Mike in and then go back to Catherine. There's a Canadian Armed Forces member in the audience that we cannot call as a witness. And we cannot call because active members, unless they've been discharged for a period of time,

can be court-martialed, to use the civilian terms, or actually sharing about being injured in the forces. And we spoke to other Canadian Armed Forces members. who couldn't testify for the same reason. And then we've spoken to discharged Canadian Armed Forces members who could testify without being court-martialed, but they couldn't testify because they wouldn't. The experience would be too traumatizing for them.

The most fragile group that we've run into in interviewing has been the Canadian Armed Forces members. And I know Michael that this is difficult for you to be sitting here, and we're very grateful to have you. So, Catherine, can I get you to grab that Bible in the right hand? Catherine Christensen, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? So help you God?

I do. So just to introduce Catherine Christensen, She is a barrister and solicitor and the principle of valor law in St. Albert, Alberta. Her practice is devoted almost exclusively to the representation of Canadian Armed Forces members and veterans, before the Veterans Review and Appeal Board, before a federal court for judicial reviews, and before the Military Police Complaints Commission. So she is here to testify about the experiences of Canadian Armed Forces, members and veterans who have suffered injuries following the COVID-19 vaccination

and systemic issues that have arisen in handling of those cases. And then Michael, can I get you to take the Bible in your right hand? Michael McNair, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth so help you God. Absolutely. I will go into more detail after, you know, Catherine, Catherine speaks, and then have you speak and then have both of you answer questions. But you were in the Canadian Armed Forces for 11 years,

and you were medically released in January of 2025. And that's the reason you're able to speak today freely. Yes. Yeah, okay. So, Catherine, I'm just going to cut you loose because I know you've already decided what you want to say and even have a few slides if necessary. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Begley. Thank you, Mr. Alvesant, for holding this inquiry.

I saw the first announcement, and at that point I signed up because I know that I can be a voice for Canadian Forces members and veterans when they can't be a voice for themselves. The reason that they cannot testify if they are still serving is they are still under the Queen's regulations and orders, and they are also under the National Defense Act. Any public statements made by a Canadian Armed Forces member that can be seen as a criticism of the government or military policy, including vaccination requirements and consequences, risk being characterized as conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. That can mean administrative action, career damage, and disciplinary proceedings, including court martial. Add in chain of command pressure and the fear of medical employment limitations, and the result is quite simple. Most serving members cannot safely describe what happened to them, and I'm here because they cannot be. As you have said, my practice is mainly devoted to Canadian Armed Forces members and veterans. The cases I will describe are drawn from that work, but I will not be naming any clients.

It's important for people to know the Canadian Armed Forces members are treated within a closed federal system, the Canadian Forces Health Services. A complete medical record is opened on enrollment and kept throughout their service. That Canadian Forces Health Information System is centralized and it can detect force-wide, trends, injury rates, cardiac events, and medical category and changes from enrollment to release. And that file is usable across clinics, ships, and deployments. Civilian Medicare cannot do that cleanly. If post-vaccination injury clustered in the Canadian Armed Forces, the record should show it,

but only if they were coded and analyzed. This is a young, screened, generally healthy population. The healthy soldier effect is real. Members supported high-risk civilian settings in Operation Laser. You were recalled that they went into the nursing homes. There were thousands of confirmed COVID-19 cases, yet the serving force mortality remained low. To date, I am not aware of a single death if from COVID-19, within a member of the Canadian Armed Forces during the pandemic.

Now, hold that baseline in mind when you hear what followed the mass vaccination campaign and the mandate. MNRNA vaccines carry a documented risk of myocarditis and pericarditis, highest in young males after the second dose. Nordic data from Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and Norway showed a higher excess rate, risk, sorry, with Moderna, then with Pfizer, in males age 16 to 24. In October of 2021, when General Wayne Eyre brought in a mandate in the Canadian Armed Forces, Denmark had already paused Moderna under 18, Sweden for those under 30, and Finland limited it for younger males. Those were precautionary decisions based on emerging safety signals, not on a theory.

The calf is predominantly young adults. Large numbers of doses were given, but almost exclusively, Moderna. This is the same demographic that Nordic regulators were already treating with caution while the calf mandate was being in force. Department of National Defense figures

released in 2023 state that state that approximately 241,270 doses were administered. 346 adverse events were reported to CAF providers and 27 were classified as serious. Most we are told were minor and self-resolving. D&D has stated it has no record

of members releasing specifically because of a vaccine. injury. That's not what I see. Clients report serious, persistent, cardiac injury, clotting, neurological symptoms, reproductive disruption, digestive tract illness, autoimmune presentations, and fatigue syndromes they attribute to vaccination. Many described that clinicians would not record a vaccine association. They had difficulty obtaining a vaccine. a CF-98, which is the form that should be filled out for any type of injury in the calf, that attributes that condition to a vaccine and release processes framed as mental health or a generic medical unfitness rather than a vaccine injured.

Official counts depend on reporting to a calf provider and on how that report is later classified. under reporting is a recognized pattern when symptoms are novel or delayed or when a member reasonably fears speaking and will end a career. I'm going to give you three short patterns. They're not isolated and I've seen them in non-commission members, non-commission officers, and in officers. First, an officer previously well and in fact was above the requirement for fitness. and the armed forces, developed myocarditis symptoms after the first Pfizer injection. The MRIR or medical unit downplayed them. The second injection was mandatory.

His symptoms worsened. A cluster of other conditions that did not exist before the vaccine followed. It took two and a half years to obtain a proper diagnosis the injury was caused by an MRNA COVID-19 vaccine. The medical paperwork required years of fighting the CAF system so that he would even have a chance at a Veterans Affairs claim. He is now being medically released for mental health, not for vaccine injury. Second, a fully healthy non-commissioned officer developed a severe headache immediately after his first Moderna dose and spent 14 days in a dark room. he pleaded not to take the second injection. He was ordered to take it or be released under a less than honorable category.

After the second dose, the headache returned. He tried to work, collapsed in the snow when he went to start his car unconscious, woke up and managed to crawl back into his house and call 911. His lungs were so full of blood clots that his oxygen saturation was under 30% and the emergency physicians treating him could not explain how he managed to survive it. He's now being released because he's on permanent blood thinners and the headaches are unmanageable. His release condition on his medical record is mental health. Third, a top Canadian Armed Forces athlete with years of service left, had two Moderna injections

and that has left him with an incapacitating cardiac injury. He underwent open heart surgery at a major cardiac hospital, and he barely survived it. He was released on a medical category with no recognition of the cause. While he was in ICU, his chain of command, he was still serving, his chain of command did not acknowledge that he was even in the hospital. The moral injury, the belief that the institution was, would take care of him if he was badly hurt in service and then the experience of being left has been as destructive as a physical injury. He wanted to sit where I am sitting. The psychological

injury made that impossible. A soldier who would have had no difficulty facing anything on the battlefield has been made into a crippled old man before his time. Across other files, I see new onset neurological symptoms, severe fatigue, reproductive health disruption, and persistent digestive tract illnesses after vaccination, all with the same documentation fight. Hordes of inquiry were requested after sudden cardiac events or death, which would have been the normal course of action by the Canadian Armed Forces

under those circumstances, have been limited, delayed, or medically contested. Injuries are being absorbed into medical. medical category changes and quiet releases rather than named. The pattern doesn't stop at the living. In multiple cases involving Canadian Armed Forces members who died between 2021 and 2024, the forces and the department have refused or obstructed release of the deceased members' complete medical file to the executor. Even where the executor is the legal personal representative and the needs, needs that record for cause of death, to make a vaccine impact assistance program claim,

Veterans Affairs benefits, or to support a board of inquiry. The Privacy Act permits that disclosure to a lawful representative. It says it is still being refused. One file makes that cost to refusal concrete. A healthy soldier in his mid-30s, deadlifted 600 pounds at the gym. Two days later, his wife woke up to him cold beside her. The autopsy showed cardiac death. Before the cause of death was known, the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service treated the widow as a murder suspect.

When the medical cause was established, that accusation fell away. What did not fall away was the institution's refusal to release his medical file to the widow or counsel, despite the Privacy Act allowance. it. She was first made a suspect in her husband's death. She was then denied the one record that would let her understand what his heart was doing in the days and weeks before he died, including any temporal relationship to vaccination. An executor in civilian life can ordinarily obtain a deceased

medical file. These families cannot. The primary evidence sits with the Canadian forces health information service and it's being kept away from the people that the law says can have it. The vaccine injury support program, now the vaccine impact assistance program, is in the no-fault scheme with a three-year window for vaccination, injury, or death. Many members were not even told it existed until the window was closing or closed. Veterans Affairs claims for vaccine-related conditions are frequently denied, or recoded as unrelated to service, even though the shot was mandated in the course of duty.

So there's two closed doors to any type of compensation. The calf will not attribute the injury, and back and the VIAP then treat the silence as proof that nothing service-related occurred. These members complied. They trusted the chain of command. They accepted a mandated medical intervention, on the understanding that if they were injured,

the institution that ordered it would recognize the injury and the care for them and their families. That promise was not kept. The physical injury is one wound. The moral injury is another. The experience of being discarded by the system they served. Hierarchy and a culture of obedience make it costly to report a problem that might look like a challenge to their policy.

medical employment limitations and medical release can swallow that injury without ever having to name the cause. The same centralized record system that should have produced a transparent force-wide analysis of post-vaccination cardiac events, clotting neurological presentations, reproductive and gastro-intestinal illness, and category changes has not, in the experience of my clients, produced that accounting. serving members who have been injured cannot safely speak for themselves. I ask this committee to examine four things. First, the gap between the official adverse event accounts and the member experience. Second, whether the electronic health record has been used or not used to detect safety signals. Third, handling of boards of inquiry and obstruction of a state access to complete medical records.

And fourth, access to the vaccine impact assistance program and to Veterans Affairs benefits for those injured while serving under a mandate. That is the examinations these members cannot demand in their own name. Thank you. Thank you, Catherine. Before I open up the questions, I also want to, Michael, to testify and share his story.

Michael, I'll just lead you through your experience, but you're 41 now and you were a Canadian Armed Forces member for 11 years. You were in the Army. You were a communications specialist for the 77 mine regiment, and you guys basically did the telecommunications for the Department of National Defense. From a health perspective, you were in extremely good health. You had to be deployable on the field, which requires a very high level. You had yearly physicals that you passed with flying colors.

You had to be at a standard of physical ability requiring deployment. Your unit would train together doing kettlebell workouts, gym training, track lunches, and your work required you to climb towers, 100 to 400 meter towers, basically daily because you're up there in telecommunications towers. So you were an extremely fit Canadian Armed Forces. Forces Army member, can you tell us what happened? Where's all the ice? Is it so hot in here that there's no ice? Thank you. Sorry. I apologize. It helps.

Please don't ask me any questions until after. Oh, I'm sorry. Did I not swear you in already? Thank you. You did. You did. Good afternoon. Chair, Mr. Dean Allison and Mr. Sean Buckley. I would like to thank everyone for your time. This is hard. I can lead you if you want. No, no, it's okay.

We are all in this together. And we are all just doing our part, are two phrases that are no longer echoed in these halls or across this country. Everyone remembers this rhetoric. I remember because I will never forget these emotionally charged phrases. Look at me. We all had to hear this every day on every channel promoting fear and confusion. Let me be clear that this fear and confusion has led all of us down a very dark road.

of a modern Holdermore, look it up, and only one of many injured Canadian armed forces. Michael, can I lead you a little bit through what happened, just so we can get the details? I'm almost there. Oh, okay. Okay. You gotta get there. It's a process, is what they tell me. I've been selected to provide my testimony.

on my experiences leading up to and after my injuries from these experimental MRI inoculations. My name is Michael James McNair. And I am a Scottish Ojibway Canadian. I served 11 years in the Canadian Armed Forces for the Royal Canadian Corps of Signals. And I had the privilege to wear the 77-line regimental epaplet on my chest.

77-line regiment is considered a high readiness unit. And we are deployed multiple times throughout the year on domestic, infrastructure maintenance and repair operations. We were deployed hundreds of days per year. When the world was shutting down and the countries were closing their borders, we were on operation enhanced Ford presence. 2019 to 2020. I have a combined isolation and quarantine time of 84 days.

And I have experienced and have witnessed inhumane treatment of people who have had their dignity stripped away. This was allowed because of fear and confusion. April 23rd, 2001, my crew came off of a project. We were ordered to get in line at the base arena, whether we wanted these initial inoculations or not. I said yes. In fear of not, of not, I said, in fear of not, being deployable and losing my position with 77 line regiment. I and we were not provided any information on if this was a serious causing injury inoculation. We were only told that it would be localized, discomfort with headaches and possibly body chills. I was then transferred to CFB Gage Town,

Frederickton, New Brunswick, or Machto, where I was in a position that was supposed to be a slower tempo and closer to my family. I tried to delay my second inoculation for as long as I could until General Wayne Air mandated an effective end state of November 15th, 2021. Again, out of fear and confusion and not wanting to put my family into unnecessary. financial distress, I said yes. Still remember watching this unknown substance be put into my arm.

My body was shaking and my mind was breaking. This is what I now know as a moral injury. two to three weeks later in the upper left side of my abdomen, I felt a sensation. But I didn't think much of it because we were extremely busy at work. Six weeks after this second Moderna inoculation, the week of November 29th, 2001, the pain that I was experiencing became unmanageable in the upper left side of my abdomen. So I went to the base MIR, and I was misdiagnosed and sent home with gastronitis. I'm not a doctor, and I don't know what this is. Never had it.

Later that afternoon and night, I was throwing up yellow stomach bile every 15 to 20 minutes, which later turned to a blackish gray color. My wife found me in our washroom. She took me to the emergency room. at the Dr. Everett Chalmers Hospital, where an MRI found that I had a blood clot forming, or formed, in my superior mesenteric vein, which extended into my splenic vein and my portal vein. I'm not a doctor, but I figured it out. I was discharged. Seven days later, and I was told to take blood thinners twice daily. This, because of the condition and medication, triggered my medical file to be flagged,

breaching my universality terms of service with the military, I became a medical release. I was provided with a period of retention until my medical release. And this allowed me time to find out that my condition was not reported to the AEFI,

which is an internal reporting system. AEFI is the adverse effects following immunization. This was three years later, and they only submitted it on my request. VAC acknowledges that I have PTSD. from all of these experiences deny my thrombosis claims, saying that these are not service-related. What I have come to realize is that the only things necessary for evil to triumph and confusion

because then good people will do nothing. I do not request the Governor General. I demand the Governor General to be here because I know where my King is. Thank you very much. So, Michael, first of all, I'd like to thank you, because I know in having discussions with you beforehand, that it's a lot for you to come here and actually you shared your story in a fantastic way.

And if I can just share something that you taught me, I didn't understand that when you're in the forces, you'll give your life for your fellow soldiers. you guys trained together and you do things together and you're deployed together and there's this trust and you were trying to explain it to me and i came to understand that one of the hardest parts for you was that system just you became non-existent your commanders didn't acknowledge that you were injured the system just basically didn't take care of you they broke this trust that soldiers have so thank you for helping me to understand Catherine, did you have any additional final comments?

My only comment would be is for the Canadian public to understand that the members of the Canadian Armed Forces swear an oath to the king to serve. And in that covenant is that they will always be taken care of when something goes wrong. And in the COVID era and listening to Senator Johnson this morning,

my theory that the chief of defense staff knew how dangerous Moderna was, and he knew the risks that his troops were going to face for an infection that they were not at risk for, was true. He knew months before he brought in that mandate of the destruction. that he had leashed upon the Canadian Armed Forces. And unfortunately, with the way that our Canadian system works, he will never face accountability for that. He is now retired.

He's coming up to a year after his retirement. After a year of retirement, he is untouchable by the laws of the Canadian Armed Forces. And I don't believe that I could ever convince a Crown prosecutor to ever bring criminal charges. But the blood of many Canadian Armed Forces members and their families rests on his hands and they rest on the current Chief of Defense staff because she was a senior commanding officer.

Even the Surgeon General told him not to do this, don't do this to the troops and was ignored, his own chief medical officer. I don't know if we can ever possibly fix this. I can tell you that the federal court, when this was brought before them, treated it as a joke. It was funny to them. And I mean, I'm here because I can tell these stories.

And I would like to tell you that Mike's story isn't unusual when isolated, but it's not. I've talked to thousands of members and veterans that are vaccine injured. I know the stats, the official stats, don't show the true number. I have medical doctors who served in the system who know, who are vaccine injured themselves, who are told, do not report this, report it as something else. It's been a massive cover up. So I want to thank you for this inquiry, because the more that it's talked about, the better

off we are because how do we fix the mistakes if we never talk about them and I'm just going to add on behalf of Michael that he was blood loss he's put on blood thinners for years he can no longer afford the blood thinners and I just want to publicly state that I'm ashamed in Canada we allow veterans that need blood thinners but we don't pay from. I think something needs to be done. And I'll make one final comment. Catherine, thank you for what you do. I'm representing our armed forces. And Michael, thank you for your service and to all the other community forces that may be in the room. We appreciate the ultimate sacrifice that you've

made. And it is a complete and total slap in the face the way you've been treated and other veterans have been treated and completely unacceptable. And I guarantee, I wonder how many people watching today would have any clue that this is the way our veterans are being treated. And we hear stories time and time again of people showing up and not offering help, but offering made or whatever it is. And this is completely and totally unacceptable. And we have got to break that cycle of silence that we can't have this conversation. If no one knows what's going on, How do we deal with this issue? And so thank you for coming.

Thank you for sharing. And I know how difficult it is. And I understand based on what you said, what Sean said, how you've been betrayed by the very country that you swore an oath to protect with your life. So thank you for coming to me. Thank you. So our next witness is Mr. Kevin Street. Kevin, can you take the Bible in your right hand?

Kevin Street, do you swear to him? tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Yes, I do. And before I begin, I just want to confirm you'd advise me that you're going to speak about injuries. You did not have COVID before these injuries happen. No, no, I didn't have COVID. I just did it.

And is that true, why Fandria have besides you? It's my rock. Yes. It's interesting. I ask people to describe themselves. And your focus was that you're the father of seven. And Andrea, he didn't put me up to this. And he says, and I have my lovely wife, Andrew.

So you're 54. And prior to being vaccinated, you were managing a wireless wave store. And you're basically a mentor and all of that. Can you describe that and also describe first how your store was ranked out of 400 in Canada? Yeah. So I was, I've been a salesman all my life and, and finally got to a place in my, in my, you know, in my career where I could start mentoring others and really kind of bringing it to the next level of how to win being successful in business in today's game. And obviously with the cell phone business, it's an ever-changing everyday challenge for everyone, let alone the people, that are trying to come up with the programs to entice people to purchase.

And, you know, that was very, very labor intense. I often work 14 hour days and often looked forward to when that 14th hour ended and I got home to my family. And, you know, I was finally, we were at a place in our life where both myself and my wife where, you know, in roles where we kind of work towards our whole careers to become. And I had the opportunity to live it for, you know, three or four years of being a successful store. My store was ranked number two in Canada out of over 400 stores. And I come from an extremely small town of a population of about 13,000 people.

And we were taking on big stores like the East Edmonton Mall. and those types of, and of course, the big ones around Ottawa as well. And, you know, I was always a very positive person and always tried to find a way to make it happen. And 151 days ago, I started my life over. Took a shot, and I've never been back to work since. Before you go on, can you describe first what your help was like before you took the shot?

Yeah, I was a crazy guy. I enjoyed life. I liked to play a lot of sports, like to fish, like to, you know, get out in the wilderness. And, of course, carry my kids around wherever they needed to go. So, I mean, my health was great. I broke my neck a few years back before this accident happened. But, I mean, it was done just through malicious games of playing hockey throughout my life. And my neck wore out.

So, you know, it let go. But after I got that fixed, I went back to work. and really dug in. And that was when we really kind of kicked it up a level and realized that it was time to start making a future for our family and in a position where we could. Can you describe for us your vaccination experience? Yeah.

So it's kind of my wife. She was, we'll say, suggested to get the shot. and what she does I do. And we try to do that together. Unfortunately, this time I just literally walked out of my business and went down the hallway, took the shot, went back, and right after I received the shot, I remember looking at the pharmacist and telling him

that it was a real whopper. And I could feel it and I knew it. And it went in my arm and I still have a lump on my arm right there. I know when he hit me with that, I felt it. And I had no fear. I just, you know, I've been through a lot and things like a needle has never really been anything to get me excited, you know, or anything. And I knew right away, I felt it go through my body and he just played it out as nothing. So I went back to work and that night I started getting the shakes.

And if I'm not mistaken, I think I missed the next three days of work with a nasty flu. and then return to work working a maximum of maybe two to three hours a day in full sweats as I am today. Again, I have an overactive immune system now. They say it's in flight mode and it's never settled down. So when you're talking about this sweats, the understanding is this just went on for weeks where you're literally getting soaked. Like it's not just when you say sweats, we might just think of, you know, when we get too hot and start sweating,

but you're describing something different. Can you just kind of share with us what that was like? I was soaked. I would go home and I would have to get out of my clothes right away because they were soaking wet. And I remember my employees of them feeling for me because, you know, I was always kind of there for them. And then it kind of turned a little bit

where they were like, Kevin, you got to go home. And, you know, I got work to do. I went home, but I was back the next. day and just trying. And then it, two weeks later, it was about after two weeks of that misery, I went home from work and I said to my wife, I go, I just, I can't do it. And I don't feel right. Things aren't right. And I went out to the back deck and I was standing there and having the conversation, just a normal conversation had my dog and my arm or petting my dog. And I felt a little strange. I felt this sensation earlier in the day when I was at work.

And I woke up and my wife was standing on top of me thinking I was falling around. I remember it was just like that. It was just like somebody flicked a light switch. Everything went out. And I dropped. And when I woke up, I didn't know what happened. I thought she was, you know, I thought she was kidding. I thought I was waking up in the morning on the back deck of the house.

And then it just started. everything from there was just, it's never been the same. You know, my brain is messed up. I've got multiple brain lesions. I had blood clots. My leg swalled up. I had a great big black bruise come out of my leg. They checked me for deep vein thrombosis.

That's what they were thinking because I had the AstraZeneca shot. And from that day forward, I've just, I've been living in a hornet's nest. Can I just slow you down? Yeah. My understanding is you also started getting seizures that day that you blacked out and collapsed. Can you share about those? Because of my understanding, they went on for about two and a half years. Yeah, so it started out with the seizure and moving forward from the seizure from that time,

it went into full tremors. And my tremors were what was lasting for about two and a half. Well, I still have them today. I just don't have what I had before, where my whole body was in full tremors. And obviously the neurologists and everything were there to witness. And I still remember the first neurologist that saw me. He just looked at me and he was conversing with his other neurologist because he brought three others in with them.

And they were saying that it was fascinating. I'll never forget it. So how much of your body would be experiencing these tremors? All of it. So that had to be quite painful and exhausting. I would go sometimes for an hour and a half, two hours of shaking on the gurney so bad that even the people around me were getting annoyed because, you know, like the wheelchair waiting in the emergency room department, even after recessing me, they'd put. me back in there and make me shake in front of everyone and it was bad it was it was violent and you're you're aware when this is happening it's not like a grand mal seizure or something no you're 100% there

and you you have no ability to stop it once it goes it goes and then it's just a matter of letting it ride out until your brain just gets tired and just doesn't do it I guess anymore and then I just I got to go to bed and I'm a wreck for you know two three days it'll it'll mess me up for. For some reason, I don't know if it's through protocols that I've done. I've relieved a lot of my bad tremors, but, you know, nerves and things like that often play mess with your brain. And when my brain swells, nothing works anymore.

And you're still today, you spoke about brain lesions, my understanding. as you had 13 of them. Yeah, the last MRI result, they didn't do a signature on it, which generally I've found, I'm not a doctor, but I can tell you that I've learned a lot about this stuff, unfortunately. And they said that there's no new lesions, but there are multiples that they have found. And I believe they said it was due to increase permeability of the blood brain barriers is what was shown. Okay. And can describe for us how you walk today?

Yeah, I walk like I'm drunk all the time. And, you know, I literally have to tell my body what to do and how to do it every time I do something. I can't run. I can't jog or anything. like that because I know better not even to attempt to make my brain do that, but I literally have to tell my feet when to move, what direction to move in, whether I should bend my knee or not, because I don't have any strength in any of my joints anymore, my elbows, my knees, my ankles, all that stuff. They all, if I don't pay attention, I'll hurt myself. I was told not to stay in a wheelchair

and that if I continued in the wheelchair, then I would never walk again. So I've been trying to stay on my feet and keep my brain connected as much as it possibly can and try to be as human as possible. Thanks for your story, Kevin. You had said you've tried a few protocols that seem to help. What have you found is helping? So we tried every protocol, I think. that's been crossed over the table obviously everything is expensive to do and try

I did do the Peter McCullough protocol for about a year and I used that simply because my blood is in bad shape so I did that and we've also found that a lot of frequency believe it or not seems to help a lot especially with inflammation and inflammation on my brain. Obviously your brain is one of those places that you can't massage and you can't get at. And for whatever reason, this technology that we've found, which is PEMF or pulsed electromagnetic frequency, in the dose that we're taking it in, has been helping substantially. And it removes a lot of the inflammation within my body, especially in my brain. And when I do that, I can function a lot better.

And so you're obviously getting medical attention and medical practitioners are paying attention to you. Are you satisfied with the help that you're getting? Well, that's a difficult question. So the first four weeks of my visits to the emergency room, they kept testing me for methamphetamines and opioids and all kinds of. of nasty drugs because I was presenting as obviously an overdose. It's just it went on and on. So the initial period where they could have potentially treated me from my condition was literally just being,

it was slipping away and my wife knew it. And she was witnessing it. And I remember we were at the hospital and I went in to see my family physician after I had seen her in the emergency room and found out that she was testing me for these things, knowing that I'm not that person. And that was when my wife said to me,

we need to go. We need to go to a different hospital. We need to go to a major hospital and find somebody who knows or has at least seen something like this. So we came to Ottawa, and we went to the Ottawa Civic and I was put into a ward with like at least 20, 25 people that were all ill.

And these weren't COVID patients, guys. These were people that were making presentations like myself. And that was when I met my first neurologist. And now I have, I've just finally been accepted to a program called Kite, which is supposedly the best in the world for my disability. They cannot fix my disability. I'm permanently disabled. They don't know what or how to do, but all they can offer me are things to try and make me live a little bit easier. So the unfortunate part about that is these treatments, again, as everyone knows, they're not covered.

So we need to figure that out. And we need to figure out why these things are this way. I have to come up with different, what's the word I'm looking for? I need to be diagnosed with other things in order to get certain types of attention. Hence, I now have sugar diabetes. And with my diabetes, I now have access to some types of therapies because that particular condition will allow you to get access to therapy. A problem is, guys, is I've been waiting for a phone call from that therapy that they promised me for over two years now.

And I just found out on less than a week ago, my memory is horrible, but it was one of the days last week, where I received a phone call from Toronto again to tell me that once again, they're not able to fulfill my appointment, and we need to rebook again. So I'm now, well, like I said, what was it, 1951 days, and I haven't received any type of treatment that is directed at my disability. They did attempt a nine-week therapy session that was supposed to be 12, but they removed me from it because I wasn't showing any progress. And they weren't treating me for the proper condition either. They were treating me as a stroke patient. Yeah, but so can I just go to jump in?

Can I ask you, have you applied for the vaccine injury support program? Yes. What has been your experience? So I've applied twice now. We're on our second term with them the first time they lost my file. Not uncommon. So we've spoken to quite a few different caseworkers along the way, and I'm still part of their program, still waiting.

I'm still another six to 12 months away from getting a decision. they can predict these things, I guess. And the reason why is they're still waiting for paperwork to come in from the hospitals that I've visited. When did you originally fill out the original form to get in when you first apply? So we were extremely proactive right away, and we went online to apply. And when we went online, it said that they're no longer taking applications and that it was closed. and we thought that was kind of odd, and then a few weeks later it reopened and we applied right away.

So I've been in their system for at least four years. Four years? At least. Four years? Yeah, maybe more. Four years and they'd lost your file once, twice? Yeah, twice. Okay.

That's completely unacceptable. I really appreciate you sharing that. Yeah, no, it's been, that's been a, when you have a brain injury like me, guys, I can't remember a lot of stuff very well. And fortunately, when they mistreat me, I kind of forget about it. But the end result is, how are we going to, I don't even, you know, I'm so afraid to even call them and ask them the question of where are we at. You know, because I don't want them to take it and go like that.

This guy's a headache. And then I reached out to my member of parliament. and I explained and expressed my concerns about this program and how I've been waiting for so long and that I just can't get any answers. And then about two days later I got a response telling me that if I if my case goes forward and they bring my case to the forefront to question my issues, someone else is going to have to wait longer. So I'm really just stepping in front of somebody and Maybe they know how my heart works and I don't like doing that. But the fact of the matter is, is we're left here and we're afraid.

And I'm afraid, like, I don't, I'm worried about even being here today. And somebody that's working, my case, looks at it and says, let's just push it off. We'll make him reapply again. Kevin, I'm going to have to actually cut you off just so that the other witnesses get a chance to testify. But what an honor to have you come and share your story with you. us today. It's, you know, I made sure I was here. And if this comes around again, and we need more results, then call me up and let's figure it out. It's just been a pleasure, and Andrea, thank you for coming and supporting your husband.

So Miriam Bohemia is going to introduce her next witness. Thank you. Hello, Professor Provo. Hello. So you're married, a father of four children between 20 and 26 years old.

You have an undergraduate degree in biochemical sciences. Do you solely swear that you'll say the truth and nothing but the truth? I swear okay.

from the top. So Professor Povot, you are the father of four children, aged 20 to 26 years old. You have an undergraduate degree in biochemical sciences. You have another degree in cellular biopathology and a doctorate in medical science. Is that right? Yes, that is right. And you have a postdoc degree, a five-year degree. Could you remind me what that is? on in molecular biology from a Swedish Institute. And you were under the, under Professor Bank Samuelson, a Nobel Prize winner in medicine and physiology. Yes, that's exact. You were also a professor at the University of LaValle at the medical faculty for 22 years, and you are an expert in the MRNA technology and in nanoparticles. Yes. So your domains of expertise are the two main components in the MRNA vaccines. Is that correct?

Yes, I am a specialist in MRNA. vaccines and the nanoparticles that were two of the main components in the COVID-19 vaccine injections. You also penned numerous scientific articles and have been cited in medical journals and scientific articles. You have about 10 discoveries under your belt. So I published hundreds of articles in medical journals or scientific journals that were peer reviewed. At three different occasions, I was deemed to having done the discovery of the year. My works have been quoted 18,000 times. 52 of my articles were cited at least 52 times.

And so my record speaks for itself. I had... I had... well qualified to talk about COVID vaccines today. Our expert testimonies will focus on the 42-day window that is used by public health to consider unwanted effects from vaccines, including COVID-19 vaccines. can you tell us about this process within public health and what impact it has on notifying issues? So that's part of my personal experience. I've received my first COVID vaccine in July 2021, and I've noticed different symptoms that I'd never had before.

So it started with pain in my eyes one week after the vaccine. And then I wondered if there was a link with the vaccine. Then I felt a rash on my arm. I had a dry cough for weeks. And I felt vibrations internally that I couldn't explain. And then my diabetes was dysregulated in a way that I hadn't seen in 15 years. So I was concerned. It was a red flag for me.

I contacted my hormone specialist, and rather than help me, he recommended a second dose. So I talked to my family doctor, who was much more empathetic. I asked if I could be helped. doctors didn't know how to notify impacts of vaccines. So I'm the one that completed the form and then I sent it to public health. Then a nurse contacted me a few weeks later to confirm what was in this form. the nurse said that they would only consider one impact, which was the ophthalmic migraines, because that's what happened within 42 days after the vaccine.

Thanks to my expertise and experience, I tried to explain that 42 days does not apply to these vaccines because this 42-day window is only for traditional vaccines and not MRNA. And these products can stay in the body for weeks, months, or years. When you say that this product can persist in the body, so there's a mRNA that is and also there's the nanolipid particles

these two components have a long-term impact on the body and on biodistribution the authorities could have done a better job in explaining what those gene injections were we call them COVID-19 vaccines. They're mainly composed of nanoparticles that have

MRNA that's modified. So they've talked about MRNA, but to me, this, something that is in the body and will disintegrate, but the one that is modified, which is the one that's in vaccines, it was modified by a process where one of the four nucleotides is modified,

and it's almost indestructible as a result. This modified MRNA is in human bodies for a long time after vaccines. And I don't agree with the authorities. When they say that the injection stays in the shoulder and that the MRNA disintegrates in a few days, it's wrong. because of the lipid component, it will distribute throughout the body. That's why we have over 1,200 side effects from vaccinations. Pfizer itself has noticed those different effects that are due to the modified MRNA.

I'd like to continue my answer. This can enter in any of our cells and cause the production of spike proteins for a long-term period. Our cells become spike protein producers, which is concerning when we know that this can lead to side effects. So if I understand well, the MRNA is in a container that's a nanolipid particles that are injected in the body, and this vessel can cross the blood-brain barrier in different parts of the body, and to go throughout the body and create that spike protein over and over again.

Is that what you're saying? Exactly. The technology was created for genetic therapy or gene therapy. They were looking for a gene that would not degrade and be distributed as widely as possible in the body. These characteristics are not what we're looking for in a traditional vaccine. I need to mention to Canadians that COVID injections are not traditional vaccines. Traditional vaccines are stimulating an immune response. COVID injections are genetic, so they contain a gene that.

put in the body. The only thing that is in common between those two types of vaccines is the fact that they're injected in a shoulder. So you realize that public health

does not consider side effects beyond 42 days. You wrote on that topic, you wrote scientific journal articles and you've talked about general side effect declaration or notification and that's because before that was before COVID. Can you tell us what the fact that we're only looking at side effects within 42 days and

the under-notification of side effects beyond 42 days. So because the VAR's under notification, a study was looking at, was done by people in pharmacies that, and they were noticing from, those formations were looking at changes in their pharmacy files. So only a quarter of those changes were within the 42 days. Three quarters of the side effects happened after that 42 days,

and they're not taking into consideration by public health. This study that should be better done at a larger scale, Well, it showed that side effects should be multiplied by three or four. You talked about the Lazarus study that was cited by Senator Johnson previously. So the unwanted side effects are under declared by both in the U.S. and in Canada. well, the official public data should be multiplied by 3 or 400 so that we have the real, we have a better look at what's happening. So we need to look into that and take into consideration side effects that occur while the product is still in our bodies.

he was also sent a study from Dr. McCullough and other scientists that shows that what's in the vaccine can stay in the body up to three years. It's very concerning. That study was just published. It still needs to be peer-reviewed. There's a patient that was subjected to different tests, And they noticed that the vaccine, the spike protein and the vaccine, more than three years after the last injections was still in the body, public health only looks at the first 42 days. So they can't have a true picture of what's happening.

It raises questions on the use of that technology of the MRNA, modified MRNA that the industry tries to push forward. It has several risks associated and those risks are not considered in the right way. So I'd like now to talk about your personal experience that is similar with under notification. On July 7, 2025, almost four years. after you're receiving the vaccine was Pfizer in your case, you have now a stage four colon cancer. Do you think that there's a link between this diagnosis and the Pfizer vaccine?

We don't know. My surgeon that removed this cancer from my colon, well, I asked him to check for the spike protein because I suspected that it could be linked to the vaccine, but he refused to do so. So I contacted American scientists that analyzed biological samples that I gave them, and they've concluded. that the cancer was likely caused by the COVID-19 vaccine. So if we look at how things went in Canada, I asked an analysis to my surgeon who refused to move forward despite my scientific points. And normally the surgeon should have looked into it deeper. and that wasn't the case.

Health professionals are not at ease with that. When we're asking questions with regards to the vaccine, well, they're not looking at it because those professionals are humans like us, and they've heard that these vaccines were really effective. So when what they believe is confront, they are not, they don't feel like doing this. So the American scientists that analyzed your tissues have concluded that there was a 40% of your genome

was dysfunctional, right? So they looked at my genes and 40% of my genes were not well regulated. Those that were over or under-regulated or under-regulated, they vandalized the gene expression from other victims of the vaccine that had developed a cancer, and there's a correlation with what's been observed in those other patients. So there's a correlation that was established.

So the cause needs to be investigated. It's important to look for the truth, and we're all here for that. We want to seek the truth. We need to be open-minded and we need to be free to do so. And I believe that doctors and health professionals are not able to do so. With regards to freedom, you are well-known in Quebec. You have launched an alert on COVID vaccination for 5 to 11-year-old children when it was approved in November 2021. and you were targeted by LaValle University, your employer at the time.

Can you tell us about this? All this started when I spoke publicly on risks for COVID vaccines for children that were 5 to 11. Laval University disciplined me. It was eight weeks. suspension without income. So that was my first ever disciplinary action.

Then I continued to speak on the topic because I wanted to give information so that people could give informed consent and children should not receive that vaccine because of the risks. So I continue to speak on the topic

and Laval University wanted to shut me out and I believed that as a professor at University Laval, so I had the highest level of professorship and I had a permanent job, and these professors should be able to express themselves freely on different issues. LaValle University continued to sanction me. So for over six months, and in 2024, I was fired because I shared my expertise and my knowledge to Canadians, to inform. so that they had better information, so that they would have information through media, but also so they could see the other side.

In media, it was underestimated by authorities. The message was not balanced. I felt that this should be public. Thank you, Professor Provo. The MPs can now ask you questions if they have any. Sure, I'll ask a question. Do I address you as a professor or doctor? I'm currently retired.

So I'm a retired for professor. Listen, I just want to thank you for your testimony. I think it's so important for people to hear this. I don't think people understand in this country if you have a difference of opinion that you can be punished in a way that costs you your job. I mean, we deal with this in Parliament all the time. And the reality is, you know, we're trying to talk about free speech

or talk about ideas. You know, some topics you're allowed to talk about. Sometimes you're a great example of an expert in their field who has got lived experience, not only the academic, but the actual lived experience. And yet somehow your opinions don't cut the mustard. They're not valid. We don't want to hear them.

And I just want to say thank you. Thank you for sharing. I thank you for stepping out. And I think it's important that Canadians understand that. You know, in this country we call Canada, you know, how free are we if we are not allowed to debate, not allowed to have conversations, not allowed to talk about difficult subjects, right? And I feel that, you know, we continue to go down a pathway where we limit debate. And as the senator said, you know, we need more talk, right?

We need more talk. And I think that's, that's, so I love your comments on that. Effectively, I would like to continue on this vein and in French if you'd allow me, please. I did experience these attacks by LaValle University, and we have a charter of rights and freedoms that allows my freedom of expression. And in Quebec, in June 2022, the National Assembly of Quebec adopted a law that protects academic freedom. And that's even a broader subject, because it allows professors to express themselves publicly without the fear of reprisals.

And what happened to me was the exact opposite, as if there was no charter and no law that could protect me. And yet I spoke out with the best of intentions. I was looking for a dialogue and debate with people who may have a different opinion to mind. But LaValle University always denied me the possibility of meeting complainants. I was not allowed to meet with ordinary citizens to explain my point of view and why I had expressed the opinions I had expressed. So what I was saying went against what the government and the media was putting out there. And that can, of course, be shocking to ordinary Canadians.

But I was available and I sought to meet with them. But Laval University chose to weaponize science. and they brought me into a disciplinary process that was very heavy-handed. I was given five disciplinary measures that I appealed in front of a mediator. But this is a very long process with a lot of red tape. It took several years just to assess two of my appeals. And so I had reams of paper to support my position, and I couldn't defend myself in a process that was unfair. So I could go on about justice for quite some time.

I think I might leave it at that, because I don't want to move away from this particular subject. But this is a dark period that we all went through that we continue to go through now. And I want to thank you, Mr. Allison, for your carver. in convening this event. We heard Senator Johnson and experts such as myself, and we are there to shine a light where people don't want to look. And I think this process is important, and I'd like to salute your courage for striking this, for putting this commission together, because I think it's important for us to talk. If we want to live together, altogether, you can't take vaccine injuries and set them aside and pretend that they don't exist.

COVID injections have risks that are underestimated, that are true risks for population health for the coming years. So thank you. Thank you, Dr. Coles. Can I just ask you? First of all, I want to thank you for your voice. Thank you for your research. And thank you for being here today. I think your testimony is important. And for those of us that, that, that I'm also experienced persecution at different levels for being perhaps skeptical or hesitant. Your voice means a lot, so thank you and the sacrifice you made in your career. But you said that the MRNA was designed to last a long time and to spread throughout the body. Is there any way to eradicate it?

Well, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, actually I cannot answer you I don't know and there is no current research to understand exactly how mRNA works how it distributes how it is eliminated from the body and which means are available to us to get rid of mRNA there is no research on this topic So academic research is largely funded by governments. And so anything that would undermine government discourse is not encouraged in that research. So it is an area of research that I had interest in as a professor when I was an employee of Vival University. There were actually volunteers who gave me COVID vaccine vials, and I had the vials.

I was prepared to analyze them, and I asked the provincial government to give me other vials, and I also applied for $100,000 to research and to undertake these analyses, but I was never granted the funds. And a few weeks after I made this application to the health minister, I was fired. So there is research that is required to really know what's in the vaccine and how the human body responds, how you can explain adverse effects. Because the nanoparticles really spread the mRNA throughout your body and the product is very stable. so it is almost indestructible. And it really makes our body a spike protein producer.

And so I could go on about this for a very long time. But at any rate, I wanted to thank you for being here at the commission. Thank you, Professor Kovil. I realized that I forgot to properly introduce Miriam Bohemia, who is a lawyer volunteering with the inquiry and Miriam, we will be calling all of the French-speaking witnesses. And Miriam, we sure appreciate you. Our next witness is Professor Deney Rancourt.

And Deney, would you prefer to swear or affirm today? Okay, if you take the Bible in the right hand, please. Dini Rancourt, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So I do, absolutely. Now, I'm going to try and do some brief credit to your credentials and then ask you to explain part of them, but I will advise the inquiry that we've entered Mr. Dr. Professor Rancourt's CV is Exhibit 8 Rancourt A.

It's 93 pages long. Professor Rancourt has a Bachelor of Science degree, a Master of Science degree, and a PhD from the University of Toronto, their degrees in physics. He has been a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, international postdoctoral candidate in prestigious research laboratories in both France and the Netherlands. He became a National NSERC University Research Fellow in Canada. He was a professor of physics at the University of Ottawa for 23 years,

is attaining the highest academic rank of tenured full professor. As a researcher at the university, he was a researcher in interdisciplinary research. And that was my question for you, is can you explain for the inquiry what an interdisciplinary researcher is? Well, it can mean different things in different contexts, but in my case, it means that I'm able to switch fields completely and become a top expert in different fields, but also I'm able to to combine fields to analyze a complicated problem using different areas of science. So my interdisciplinary research includes and included, well, physics, obviously, condensed matter physics, nanoparticles in the environment, environmental science in general, biogeochemistry, and more recently medicine and public health.

And we've invited you here, and we're very glad to have you here to do a presentation. and so I'll just invite you to proceed. Okay. I just want to make sure that the slides do go up. Okay, good, because they don't, they didn't, in the past for some of the others. I think the receivers over there. Oh, when I'm clicking, you mean? Yeah, it'll work if you point it this way, but.

Okay, I'll try and do it right. Thank you for having me. Let me get through some of this. First, I want to say that Senator Johnson this morning said three, words in particular that really struck me. He said them authentically and vehemently. And those three words were, what is true? He said that loudly. What he meant was there's a great difficulty in knowing what is, if we can rely on our common sense. There's a great difficulty in parsing through all this expertise, mumbo-jumbo and all the different opinions and all the

different things that we see in the various sources of information. So he was really honestly saying what is true, how do you know? And he shared that he has a staff that helps him figure this out. And so I want to reassure everyone today that I'm going to be sharing some data that is the most unquestionable. The states, the modern states, they count births and they count deaths. And so mortality is one of the most reliable things.

There is an apparatus, a legal and administrative apparatus, that counts deaths, who died, how old were they, what sex were they, in which jurisdiction did they die, when did they die to the day. And this data is extremely valuable for figuring out what happened to a society during a major event. And that's the kind of data that I'm analyzing, that I've been analyzing for more than five years now, and that I will be showing you lots of graphs and lots of data, and I'll guide you through how to look at and how to understand these graphs, but it's mortality data. And in addition to knowing sex, age, and so on,

you can also know about the health status of the person who died. So it's possible to know that. In some jurisdictions, you'll even know the vaccination status, but mostly most jurisdictions will not record that regarding attaching it to the death, I mean. So that's what I'll be showing you. So it's stuff you can understand, it's numbers of deaths.

And so here we go. The background information, is on our website, which is correlation-canada.org. And a recent report that I wrote, an overview report, is entitled eight pivotal facts about COVID-period excess mortality, and you can find it on our website. And in that report, I lay out eight really central facts that are conclusively known from the data,

from this kind of hard data that I was describing. And today I will concentrate on fact number five from that report, which is that the demonstration that the COVID-19 vaccines harmed and killed many people without any reasonable doubt. So the presentation is divided into two major themes or parts. The first part is the localized damage to individuals. So it's vaccine, probably vaccine-associated harm directly to individuals. And the second part of the presentation is about widespread damage in the society from the various kinds of impositions and mandates and so on. And that causes death.

And so the overall plan is like this, but I will go through the plan as we march through the presentation. So you don't have to worry about reading it all now. But I'm going to be covering different aspects of these big themes, including pregnant women who died after the men. to vaccinate all pregnant women and their children who died nine months later, their infants. Toddlers, once we approved vaccines for toddlers, I will show that there was a large upscale of mortality rate to toddlers and such things as that. So I'm going to be going through each of these one by one. The sources of the data are national official data sources. So the CDC in the USA and Stat Can in Canada.

Now these are massive databases that have to be mined and have to be interpreted mathematically in the sense that they have to be put into a form that you can make graphs and so on. But that is the source, all of that kind of mortality data is from these sources. And so we'll start with part one, which is the localized harm to individuals. And this part one, the sections in part one are as follows. the first one is going to be a demonstration that COVID-19 vaccines injured and killed. And so that's the very first one. And so here is the type of evidence that I will use to demonstrate this. Detailed autopsy studies, not just autopsies that were done by someone, but detailed scientific studies,

peer-reviewed, there have been more than 50 of them that describe autopsies of one or more persons in the the group for the study. That's out there. These are not, these authors are academics, they're scientists, they're not working for, they're usually independent, and there are 50 of these serious studies where they try to identify the cause and they relate the cause to the vaccination event. So that's one kind of data. And you can go through, VARS was mentioned a lot, 39,000 deaths so far in VARs, which is adverse effect monitoring in the United States. Vaccine-injured pathologies are being described in the scientific literature. Skin and organ biopsies are done, so you don't have to actually have a dead body.

You can actually take a biopsy and analyze it. There are universal curated collections of scientific articles about adverse effects. People don't generally hear this fact that there's over 4,000, almost 5,000 peer-reviewed, scientific studies that describe the adverse effects from vaccines in different circumstances, jurisdictions, different kinds of COVID-19 vaccines. I'm talking about just those vaccines. Okay? And then there's people who reanalyze the data that is provided to the government by industry independently. And finally, there's all, it was mentioned this morning, there are the vaccine injury compensation programs in many different countries that have all admitted to

vaccine caused deaths and injury. So this is just a small list of the beginning of these 50 autopsy studies. These are the titles of some of the articles. So there have been more than 50 of these. The VARS system for adverse effect counting, there is a legal obligation to report to VARS. It's often said that it is voluntary. That's not completely correct.

In fact, there is a legal document called the letter of authorization that requires that industry report all adverse effects that are reported to it. So that's the loophole. And that letter of authorization, which is a legal requirement for the vaccine to be approved, requires that all health workers who vaccinate must report events that follow the vaccine, whether they've established that it's directly related. to the vaccine or not. And the loophole there is that they become aware of. So if they vaccinate, run away, and close their eyes, then they may not become aware of it. But if they were doing follow-up, or if the patient contacted them with a concern, then they must report it to VARs. So, oh, yes, I can back up. So more than 200,000 hospitalizations are reported in VARs and so on, right? Now, this is a screenshot of the curated collections of scientific articles.

This one's called Coverse. So it's a nonprofit organization that has a system for searching and seeing these scientific articles. And they work in collaboration with another nonprofit organization that's called React 19. And these are just some of the few more than 4,000 of these articles in the scientific literature. So that ends that first section in which I have demonstrated that there can be no doubt scientifically that the vaccines do kill and injure people. You've got autopsies, you've got adverse effects, and you've got thousands of scientific papers on these adverse effects. The next topic is pregnant women and their infants. Pregnant women and their infants died, and early on several dedicated researchers pointed out that there would be.

a problem of this type. This is one of the very first early scientific articles about it. And recently a book was written by Thorpe and Farber called Sacrifice. That is just a provocative book, but a very powerful book about how the establishment and the medical people knew that this would be dangerous and could see in their clinics and everywhere how dangerous this was to pregnant women. And so the types of evidence I will present. And so the proofs which I will present, the proofs which are

related to campaign of vaccination and a excess of dissent. So, the women are sentenced on cussed at home of their accouchement, and the new-n-n-n-n-be-bebebe

are deceded car-ne-de-de-mer who had been vaccinated. Here's one of the graphic the most important that I will show you today. Here's the total of mortality of the women who are dead in the United who are deced after the campaign of vaccination.

We don't know if these women have been vaccinated, but we know that the women-in-saint have received an enormous pressure for being vaccinated when the CDC has given this directive 11th or 2021, a directive that indicated that the Femmensent would be vaccinated for them and protect their baby.

Here, you see, you see the toll of dissuettes of women who are deced after the campaign of vaccination, two-smen-on-seman. And the women-encentes are the group of person who resists the most to vaccine in the society, and you see, there's a strong augmentation of the dissays at

the screen. Be a coincidence. So you vaccinate and you have immediate deaths, a two or three-fold increase in deaths. And so there are these two peaks of death. The first peak is also coincident with

what's something that happened in the US, which is called the vaccine equity rollouts or campaigns, where you specifically went out to all the people who are most vulnerable in the poor states in the poor areas that had not been vaccinated yet, and you make sure they get vaccinated as quickly as possible. That was a massive well-funded campaign in the U.S.

It has been very well-funded in the U.S. Then, the second augmentation marked coincide with the second dose to know who had these comorbidities or who were more vulnerable. So these people had received a first dose and they've received a second. and the dose

supplementary of vaccine had been to the first and the first and second dose. So, here you see the

percentage of the population who live in the poverty of the state-en-et in blue-fonse there are the states the state the more

rich. The CDC has made an analysis that you see at the screen. So the the

deaths of the that they're a mere who differs a bit of the deaths of the women-encent. And they count them, and they do what's called a 12-month ending sum, so kind of a rolling average, if you like. And so the idea there is if you have a plateau, everything is normal and continuing normally, and then if you have a rise, an elbow and a rise, that means something has happened.

So that's your signal. And you can see that the very first month where there is a rise The first month we're an augmentation, it's the month

when they have obliged the women to have to be the they're in their

grossess. Different articles have been written on these data on the

authors of these articles, they're not doing with the vaccines. Here, we

we've the deaths of mace of in their first trimester, a lot of them it'll be in their first trimester. You can expect that nine months later, maybe the infants being born will be fragile or will have defects from that vaccination and then will die more frequently.

And that is indeed what we see precisely nine months later. So this is a graph that shows male and female infants, death rates as a function of time by month, and you see the plus nine month date line there, and you can see that the plateau is at a certain level, whether it's male or females, and then steps up to a higher level after you start rolling into the infants that are born after pregnant women were being vaccinated.

So that's very strong evidence of this link. And now if you look at it by year, on a bi-yearly basis, now we're going to look at, again, deaths of infants. So less than one year old, and these deaths mostly occurred very near the pregnancy, and there's two ways to show them here. One is all-caused death within one year as a zero-aged person, and the other is very specific coded deaths that are deaths of the infant about pregnancy. So they call it certain conditions originating in the perinatal period,

so near the time of birth. And what you see, I want you to appreciate this data because what you see is a general trend downwards, but it's a continuous trend without any steps in it. And then as you get to the bottom of it after 2020, when the pandemic was announced, that's when you see this rise, this potato. And you're going to see that in a lot of data that I'm going to show.

You see this rise in the number of infant deaths, the death rate for infants. And that rise does not occur in 2020 when the pandemic is declared and when supposedly there's COVID going around. It does not occur in 2021, as you can see there, when you start vaccinating the general population. It occurs in the year, nine months after pregnant women were required to be vaccinated. That's the rise. And it corresponds to 4,000 excess infant deaths in the U.S. between 2022 and 2024. And if I remember correctly for women, there were 500 excess pregnancy deaths in the U.S.

So keep those numbers in mind because as we move to Canada, because of the population difference, you'd expect maybe 10 times less. Okay, so that's the infant deaths that we just saw. And now we're going to move to Canada for infant and pregnant women deaths. And the first slide here is to show that in Canada, in the end of the end of the end of the end of the child, In the age-bearing age group between 15 and 44, which is nominally the age-bearing age group, there was a lot of excess deaths as a function of time in Canada for women in those ages. So you can see on the left there a graph, a light blue curve that starts to move up in 2015

when fentanyl became a problem. Distribution of fentanyl in the country became a problem. And then immediately when the pandemic is announced in 2020, there's an upshot of deaths again. And there's a massive deaths there. So in this age group for females, there's 4,000 extra deaths in this period between 2021 and 2024 for women in Canada. And that is far more than the COVID-assigned debts, formerly officially assigned by the government, more like 300 for that entire age group and women. So this is just to show that women were being subjected

to conditions that could cause death or subjected themselves, but there were a lot of deaths happening so we can expect problems with pregnancies. And so what happened in Canada was the date, unlike in the US, the date at which women were strongly encouraged to be vaccinated was the 28th of May 2021. And you can see the evolution of the government assigned directives, if you like. You started by pregnant women should not be vaccinated all the way up to should be offered the vaccine.

So it's not as aggressive as it was with the CDC. But this progression, it's important to point out, happened in the absence of any clinical trial on pregnant women. So this is all just politics. It's what you think you should be doing. kind of thing. But keep that date in mind because I'm putting it on the graphs here. So now we've got mortality, pregnancy-related mortality of women who are basically giving birth. So we know that because the mortality of everyone, there's a diagnostic that's given and there's a code for that. And when you pick out that code, you find that in Canada, there were, after the vaccines were

strongly recommended to women, there were approximately 10 excess over the norm pregnancy-related deaths between 2022 and 2024. So even proportionally less than what was happening in the U.S. So the Canadians in terms of causing deaths of women giving birth was not as severe as what happened in the U.S. But if you look at now the infants nine months later, what is their death rate in Canada You see that classic bump that I showed you before in the United States, nothing in 2020, nothing in 2021. Then in the year of the nine months after the date of recommended vaccination, you have an upshot of infant deaths near the pregnancy time,

and it corresponds in Canada to 200 excess infant deaths. And so in Ottawa, that would correspond to six or seven excess deaths, not normally explained deaths that would have happened in Ottawa in that period, and 200 overall of Canada. In Canada, again, if you now look at abortions, these are induced abortions, there were 27,000 excess induced abortions in Canada in the three-year period 2022 to 2024. A massive amount of excess abortions above what the recent trend line or average, if you like, was. Now, why is that? Is it because defects were detected or felt in the fetuses? Who knows? But there was a lot, a lot more induced abortions. Okay, I'm going to get to the next section now, which is very heart-wrenching. This is about toddlers and preschoolers.

And it was mentioned this morning that they vaccinated six-month-year-old children and beyond. And this had a huge impact that is clearly seen in the mortality. I'll show you that right now. This is the data for the USA, so you can see the usual, uneventful trend, historic trend there. And then you see that rise at the end after 20. 2020, you've got more than 2,000 excess deaths of toddler plus ages 1 to 4 in the USA. And it's a clear signal. And it starts to go up in 2021, which is the year of the major financial support cuts in the

U.S. So you have to know that all Western societies gave massive amounts of financial support to workers and families. And then they started cutting them. But in the U.S., they cut them very suddenly, and 26 of the states just terminated their participation in federal support programs, and that has a devastating effect. You can actually see it to the week near

how much it increases deaths in the general population. Well, that's the increase, that first increase, the green line there, is related, we believe, to the world. we believe to those financial cuts for one to four-year-olds. And then when you approve the vaccines for one-to-four-year-olds, that date of approval by the FDA was the 17th of June 2022. That's when you get the highest amount of these excess deaths.

So we're looking at over 2,000 excess deaths of one-to-four-year-olds in the U.S. And now I want to move to Canada to see the same kind of data. and unfortunately the same thing happened just as horribly in Canada. So this is the data for vaccine rollouts. This is what it looks like when you look at the data. This is for the province of Quebec that provides very good data. On the left there, you can see the data at which the vaccines were approved in Quebec for six months to four-year-olds. It's the 14th of July 2022.

And then you can see the immediate rapid rollout of dose one, followed, by dose two right after, and then somewhat later, you've got the boosters coming in, and at the same time that they were, you know, these rollouts are like military style. You approve the vaccine and you immediately have these bursts. They just go out and vaccinate everyone. You can see it here in the data. And at the same time that they were putting out the boosters, they were catching everyone that they hadn't had the dose one yet. You can see it in the data there. So this is what these rollouts look like. They're very sudden. There's sudden events that you can tie, that you can correlate to see if they associate in time with mortality. And they do, in fact. Here's the data for

Canada. So what we see here is on the left there, we have three curves. And those three curves are for three different age groups, one to four-year-olds, five to nine-year-olds, and ten to to fourteen-year-old. And each one of them has a sharp rise in mortality, and therefore it's an excess mortality, in the year at which the vaccine was approved for that age group. Okay, not before. So in Canada, the financial support cuts were done more progressively from late 2020 to early 2022. So that's the big broad green line there.

That did not affect mortality very significantly. But as soon as you vaccinated these age groups, and not before, not when there was COVID, not in the first two years of the pandemic, but when you started vaccinating them, that is the signature that you see in the mortality. It's absolutely stunning. And beside it, I show that the COVID deaths are nil for these age groups. Very small. So it's not about COVID.

So we're looking at a total, for the one to 14-year-olds, we're looking at a total of 410 excess deaths in Canada. And the final section of part one is the question of cancer mortality, anomalously increasing. So the term turbo cancer has been used earlier. And I want to show you some very definitive evidence from hard mortality data, that that is indeed the case. So this is unprecedented data. And I want to first say before I show the data that the scientific phenomenon of a rapid turbo-like cancer has been well known since 2015. It is in the scientific

literature. There's more than, there's approximately 300 articles about this in the scientific literature. It's termed hyper progressive disease and they mean cancer, HPD. And it came into being in 2015 when novel immune therapy drugs were introduced and used on people who had been subjected to particular surgeries and things like that. So as soon as they started using these novel immune therapy drugs that have just been patented and approved, they had this new phenomenon of very aggressive cancers spread throughout the body that could affect young people or whoever had received this therapy. So this is a well-known thing that if you mess with the immune system, you can induce rapidly progressive and very aggressive cancers. Okay. And in the COVID-19 vaccine

context, it has been termed curbo cancer, but it's the same kind of phenomenon. And there is now starting to be in the scientific literature a recognition of this. This is the title of the first journal article that I could find that has the term in the title. Clinicians, of course, have been seeing this in their practices for some time and have been reporting it. And so the type of evidence I'm going to show with regards to this cancer is temporal trends of exercise. cancer mortality that happened at the same time as COVID rollouts or after COVID rollouts. And so in the US, there's a lot, here are some of the numbers in red here. So we're looking at thousands of extra cancer deaths.

And I want to show you the statistical, the data signals that demonstrate this. So this is the first graph in which we're looking at the age group 5 to 44-year-olds. And we see the trend there. It's a monthly mortality, and we see the historic trend, and then you see a step up to a higher plateau. That step up to a higher plateau occurs precisely when the huge finance cuts of financial support to Americans were made,

and at the same time there was this vaccine equity surge and rollouts to the poor. Then you have, when that happens, you have this more than 4,000 excess cancer deaths, all cancer types included. If you look at the 5 to 24-year-olds in the United States, you see the characteristic bump that I've been showing you, and you can see it for males and females. This is a definitive signal. This is not ambiguous. So you're looking at 960 extra cancer deaths in that age group that would not normally have occurred in the United States.

And then you can look at very specific cancer types. This is a very rare cancer called long bone limb cancer, and it is affecting 5 to 24-year-olds. And look at that huge rise. You have a tripling of the deaths from that cancer in the United States after you have rolled out the vaccines in the year and after you have rolled out to the vaccines to those ages. you have this huge rise in that very specific kind of cancer.

And so that's definitely a safety signal. And then the last cancer type that I want to show you is a cancer type called primary multi-psych cancer. So these are deaths from a very special kind of cancer. This is a cancer where you have tumors on different organs that are all primary. In other words, it's not a cancer that progressed naturally, and spread where you have a spread from one organ to another or to different parts of the body.

No, this is the spontaneous, simultaneous occurrence of tumors of different primacy, of different origin on different organs. So that's a very specific diagnostic. The CDC regulates how you make that diagnostic and you have to have lab studies and so on. And there is an increase in those types of cancers that is very significant. This is the increase shown for the 25 to 44-year-olds in the U.S., male and female in different colors there, and you see that large increase. So you're looking at 240 excess primary multiple-site cancers in the U.S. in the age group 25 to 44.

You see the same kind of cancer shooting up a gap in the most elderly, 75-plus-year-olds. So you see male and female, I've circled it there, you have a sudden break, and you have an increase in this type of cancer, which is an unusual type of cancer. And you've got 1,500 excess deaths in this age group, 75 plus, in the U.S. So there's similar signals occurring in Canada, which we're still analyzing, and I didn't want to show them yet. So I want to move on to part two instead. And part two is general harm, other kinds of assaults than vaccination that definitely caused death to the general population. And so these are the sections that I will be covering in this part two. And the first section is Canada's mortality context.

Just to give kind of a mortality crash course here, this is what happens in Canada. If you're looking at the 15 to 44-year-olds, so age-bearing for women, you see that the highest specific cause of death is opioids and fentanyl-related accidental poisoning deaths from those substances. The next one is suicides. After that, it's car accidents. And then what has been assigned as COVID is far below for this age group. For the next age group, 45 to 74 year olds, all cancer types is definitely the leading cause of death. The second one is cardiovascular disease, is a particular group of them, and then COVID-19 is down here. In the 75-plus-year-olds, cardiac and cancer switch places. So the first killer is cardiovascular disease, then all cancers together. And then the third one is dementia, which is rising for this age group.

And then down at the bottom there, you've got various kinds of respiratory diseases that are all related and happen at the same time and so on. So you've got chronic respiratory diseases, pneumonia, flu-like infections, and COVID-19 all happening down there. And you have to know that respiratory diseases are the ones, are the diseases that are most obviously affected. by stress. And so you're going to get increases in those when you have stressful events. Okay, the next section of the second part here is that we looked at factors in Canada that correlate to excess mortality during the COVID period. This is years of work that I'm trying to condense into a short presentation here. You have to understand. So we looked at more than 80 province specific socioeconomic factors that might correlate to excess death in

Canada. So these factors include poverty, disability, the age structure, the population, obesity, and so on and so on. We looked at 80 of them, and we did detailed statistical analysis of them. We did cluster analysis and various things looking for correlations and so on. And then we can make graphs of the correlation coefficients by age group and by, as a function of time, and look for the factors that really correlate strongly with excess mortality in Canada. And one of the factors that really popped out that correlates very strongly is GDP per capita. The more wealth generation you have in the province, the more excess deaths you have. Very strong correlation. So you can see on the graph there, I'm listing British Columbia, I'm going west to east,

and you can see the relationship. So our understanding of this is that when you shut the economy down, down, in provinces that have a very vibrant economy, lots of people working, it has a devastating effect on the families of those workers, their elderly and so on, and you get a lot of excess deaths during this period. That's how we understand that very strong correlation with GDP. Another strong correlation that we found, we found many, many, but this is just a few examples. Opioid deaths on the y-axis there versus GDP. GDP real estate per capita. In other words, what we found generally throughout the world is where you have poor people living near very wealthy people

in the same urban environment, closely mixed, the poor people do very badly. Their death rates are much higher from all kinds of causes, including opioids, but also many other causes. And another interesting correlation that we found is this one. Look at this. Province to province, the excess mortality, corrected for the baseline health of the population, it's called P-score excess mortality. All ages or 85 plus, they're both shown there on the graph, and it's compared to the percent of the hospitals in the province that are considered

large hospitals. So where you have large hospitals, a lot of people died, where most of the hospitals are large, just as a percentage, a lot of people die. So this is very clear for Ontario and Quebec, and this is what it looks like for Quebec. So at the start of the pandemic, that vertical line indicates the date of the start of the pandemic. You had a huge peak in excess mortality in Quebec, but it was completely centered in the metropolitan area, right in LaValle, right in the center of Montreal, and there was virtually no excess mortality in the rest of the population in the entire province. So that gives you an idea of what was happening in Canada. Now, I want to show some graphs about the impact of COVID period measures, because this is devastating.

Here's an important graph. This is excess mortality by week for ages 85-plus-year-olds, and that's the blue line there. And then the red line is an index that was developed at August. that shows the severity with which you protect your elderly. So in other words, the intensity of the protection to the elderly, which means lockdowns, isolations, that kind of thing. So when that severity goes up, when that red line shoots up, like when the pandemic was announced, and then there were two other times there where I put grey lines, where that severity of lockdowns

and so-called protection of the elderly went up, then immediately following that rise, you have a large peak in excess deaths of the 85 plus-year-olds. And then following that large peak of excess deaths, you have a trough where you go subnormal. In other words, there's less deaths than you would normally have expected in normal period. And that's because you've killed so many people in that first peak that there's less people of that age to die in the weeks that follow. That's called the dry tinder effect.

And so this is a demonstration when you see that kind of an S-shaped. curve, it's a demonstration that you really actively were killing people in that peak. And then there was less of them to die than normal after that. So this is the result of the devastating measures that we imposed on the elderly in Canada. And this was done in many, many countries, most countries, most Western countries did this, and it had this kind of an impact. And this is to show the impact of cutting the financial aid in Canada. So there were major programs of financial aid. They're listed up there in the legend. And when you cut them, you immediately following that, you have increases in excess mortality. This is of all ages. So you can

see that even the plateau of mortality is higher after that last large cut in financial funding. So what we concluded by looking at many jurisdictions is that people, it's worse if you give money, if you give support and you cut it, it's worse than if you would never given it and you'd gotten people to adapt to the difficult circumstances. And this is to show how important that financial support was. Actual poverty level significantly decreased in Canada overall in 2020 and 2021 because of this massive support that was being given. In the U.S., it was more than a trillion dollars that was given. In Canada, it was a proportionate amount. So very generous because they knew they were

shutting down the economy, but there were consequences to when you turn it off after you've turned it on. And finally, I want to show a section that many would consider provocative, but it's the data that we see, and I'm going to report it, and it's to show that there was an absence of viral disease spread that caused mortality during the COVID period everywhere in the world where we have data. So we studied this in a very large detailed article by Hickey, myself, and Linnard, in which we looked at high spatial resolution mortality down to the county level in the U.S. And the same kind of size in all of Europe. And we tried to understand that.

And what we found is that there was no viral spread causing death, meaning that the spread in mortality was geostatic time evolution, not geotemporal, which means that it's inconsistent with the accepted theory of how a virus spreads through the respiratory exchange person to person. It proves that those models are not correct. So they're not correct because we saw impossible mortality patterns, like impenetrable borders despite the fact that there was constant exchange and things like that. So an example of that is comparing California to the New York area. The New York area had a large static peak.

So people died intensely here and then died less after they had died, but it didn't spread. There was no spreading. That happened in New York, and nothing happened in California. They have the same number of poor people. They have the same number of flights from Asia. They have the same number of everything. And you can do detailed theoretical models, including all the transport routes,

the subways, the buses, the cars, the airplanes. You can do everything you want. And this is a state-of-the-art report of those calculations by others. I give the reference there, and it shows that the West Coast, and the East Coast, New York and California, should have been affected equally, if anything, California should have been more affected,

and that was not the case. Same goes for Europe, especially the example of northern Italy, Milan, and Rome. Identical, identical systems, identical types of societies, just as many poor, high-density, urban areas, no deaths whatsoever at the beginning of the pandemic in Rome, despite the same number of flights coming in from around the world and so on,

big airports and everything, and Milan had that peak. So this is contrary to all the predictions of the accepted models regarding spread. So we concluded that there's an absence of viral disease spread. So that means that it's possible. It should open your mind to the idea that the whole idea that there was a viral pandemic may be completely wrong, maybe something else was happening. And what we have concluded in our work over many years of research is that, and I want to get to the conclusions now, is that what caused excess mortality is assaults, not a virus. So economic deprivation, closing down the economy, fear propaganda, mandates, measures, public health responses, medical assaults, all of these things. And the medical assaults include testing, diagnostic bias, imposed facial masking, confinement, isolation, denial of appropriate treatment, mechanical ventilation, all the things that we've talked about today were medical assaults. And these are the things that caused the excess mortality, as far as we can tell.

And you have to add vaccination. Now, vaccination is the only one of these assaults. COVID-19 MRNA vaccination is the only measure that involved repeatedly injecting into the bodies of everyone, whether you're healthy or not, and including the sick, the elderly infants, toddlers, preschoolers, pregnant women at any gestation period, repeatedly injecting directly into their bodies a known cytotoxic substance. because you have to know that those nanoparticles are made with cationic lipids, and cationic lipids are cytotoxic, and the scientific literature on that is absolutely established. And here is a review article from 2025. This is a review article of the state of the technology of these cationic lipid nanoparticles, and their conclusion in the review article is that the fundamental limitation,

to this technology is toxicity. And they point out, there are no permanently positively charged bilayers forming lipids in nature. That means that this thing you put in your body, there's no way that your body has mechanisms to combat it because it doesn't exist in nature. And so that's one of the reasons it's so difficult to get rid of these things. So it's the only measure where you were doing that.

You were injecting toxic substances into bodies. bodies. And so I'm going to read this last slide. This is the conclusion slide. Bear with me. I'm extending from all the research that I'm done and I would conclude in this way. History will record that the COVID period was in effect a massive and unnecessary multifaceted assault against people exploiting fear and causing harm, injury and death, especially in the most vulnerable. All governments under U.S. hegemony and media influence cooperated or imitated. Canada was no exception. The vaccines are toxic and caused many deaths and injuries in plain sight of robust national statistics.

Signs can never prove causality, but institutional capture and discipline can always minimize and invalidate screaming safety signals and personal. hardship. And these are, the signals I showed you today are screaming safety signals that needed to be acknowledged right away and used to change government and medical establishment behavior, and it was not. And that concludes my presentation. Professor Rancourt, during COVID, it seemed that almost anything could be caused a COVID death, but with mortality, you can't fake deaths. So what you're doing is counting the total number of people that die, regardless of the reason they die. Well, we're doing both. On the one hand, we are counting deaths in an all-caused mortality scenario, which means that we make ourselves

blind to what the medical system says was the cause of death. So we do that on the one side, and then we say, well, now, let's look at what they said, because they have rules. and they're guided by laws and procedures. So they established causes of death. Let's look at that. So they call it the underlying cause of death, the thing that eventually led to the death. And so we also analyzed that mortality.

So I showed some of both, and I compared the two as well. Is it the case that in some political jurisdiction, so let's say a province that's beside another province or a state in the U.S. that's beside another state or a country in Europe that's beside another country, that even though they're absolutely beside each other, they have completely different outcomes, which would suggest that the COVID-19 virus would respect political boundaries.

Yes. Well, I've been showing that since we did the data, because we've studied over 150 countries so far in detail, and by province and down to lower jurisdictions. And we found many fascinating barriers. to vaccines on geography maps. So, for example, East and Western Europe were divided, even though there was constant economic exchange and travel, they were completely divided.

So at a time when Western Europe was experiencing large peaks in London, Paris, in Italy, and so on, there was virtually no excess mortality in all of Eastern Europe. So you can actually draw on the map. You can draw a line, and we do this in our article, we draw a line and we say, there you go, that's impossible. If you believe the scenario of a spreading virus, that is impossible. And so... A spreading virus causing death.

Yeah, causing death, because we are measuring mortality. That's right. We're measuring the consequence of it. The ultimate consequence of the infection. That's right. But, you know, why would it cause death in Western Europe and not cause death in Europe and not cause death Eastern Europe, you know, it brings up all these questions. But yes, so we see these strict boundaries, that's right. We see them in many places. No. Oh, sorry. Do you see a correlation then

between governments, so let's say Eastern Europe might not have been as strict in lockdowns and government actions? Like, do you see correlations between government actions and excess mortality? Yes. Well, I've gone to speak to scientists and MDs. in Eastern Europe. And I can tell you that the culture is different and the mistrust of government is different. And the way of getting around what you're told to do is different. So there was a lot of things happening that are different.

There was a lot more of false vaccine passports, if you like, and certificates and so on that was happening in Eastern Europe, much, much more. There are many differences. But did you have a specific idea in mind? Well, I'm just wondering, like, because you were saying with the elderly, you were showing that chart, and the red line on that chart was basically showing government interventions.

And it almost seemed, paradoxically, that the more we protected the elderly, the more we killed them so that the message would be, don't isolate them. Absolutely. Don't lock them down. So if you can comment on that. Well, absolutely, that's the message. I mean, and it's not just in the hard data, but we also said, okay, Let's believe your scenario about how this thing spreads and how it operates.

Let me do the calculation as you would do it and examine if it actually protects the elderly to isolate them and to lock them in. And we wrote two peer-reviewed articles on this, where we take the actual theory of how these things spread, and we show by mathematical calculation that if we were to believe you, your own models predict that if you do this, you'll kill more people than if you don't. In other words, if you had done nothing,

according to your own models, which we don't believe, because we've got empirical data that disproves them. But even if we take your models, it shows that this is a worse thing to do. And the reason it's worse is because when you confine sick elderly people together, you make sure that they all can get infected and can infect the caregivers. and so on.

Whereas traditionally before COVID, you would always take them out of the institution and put them somewhere else. You would take them out right away. They were doing the opposite. So according to their own predictions, you're going to cause way more death that way. And so I think we showed that mathematically,

at least rigorously, that that was the case. So even their thinking was crooked. But yes, our empirical data tells us that if you had done nothing, if you had not responded to this announced pandemic, there would have been no excess mortality. If you had not tried to save the elderly by isolating them and locking them in,

you have to know that isolation kills. This is unambiguous. The scientific literature is full. It's the whole area of research. They take little mammals and they confine them to not be able to move in a tube for 15 minutes and they can see the physiological impact of that.

Stress is a killer. Stress is a major killer of animals because the stress response takes all your resources away from your other bodily functions in order to respond to what is stressing you. And so it's a real killer. And that is the fundamental reason why men die more than women.

You'll notice on all my graphs that when I have both sexes there, the mortality for men is always much higher. And that is a universal property, irrespective of the cause of death. There's only a few examples, which is diseases and cancers on female organs. Then, okay, women will die more of that, obviously. But generally speaking, mortality of men, mortality rates are much higher across the world, throughout history, and for every condition that you can name as a cause of death.

And the reason for that is that men have testosterone. men are hardwired to respond to stress. And so they respond to stress much more stronger than women. So their bodily resources are used in that response as opposed to fighting whatever ailments they have and the repairs that they would need in their bodies. And so there's strong scientific understanding that stress, physiological and biological stress,

is the major cause of death of animals. Okay? So you don't have to think in terms of circulating virus or anything. If you really want to understand overall mortality and the real cause of death in human societies, you have to think of how we oppress each other and the sources of stress. And I can tell you that the dominance hierarchy in our society, the fact that you have a boss and he has a boss and the underlings and how they're underpaid and everything, that structure and how it's maintained by constant aggression and oppression is what makes the underlings

unhealthy and die sooner. This is unambiguous. All the anthropologists know this. All the historians know this. For some reason, the medical people don't want to acknowledge it. So if you start doing this kind of process in a society where you completely transform the society, where you remove a person's raison d'est, their place in the world and how they interact with their family members and so. You remove all that and you cause all this massive stress for a prolonged period of time, there's going to be a lot of deaths. So if you want the deaths that we saw during COVID, you just have to do the same thing over again and you will get it again.

And every time you do it, you will get excess deaths in this way. We can think of time for one more interbredship, Ms. Carlson. Mine's not really a question as more of a statement. With pregnant women, it kind of hit close to home for me. My son and daughter-in-law were pregnant, and she ended up, they ended up forcing the vaccine on her through work, and she ended up having to have the baby. The baby died, and she ended up having to have the baby

through the whole process of naming the baby. The whole, they were 24 years old. I don't think we talk enough about the mental aspect of what it does to people when you have 22, 24-year-olds that lose a baby and have to go through the process of Barry and a baby. And that process alone, I think, has a lot of aspects to the mental side of what happens to people with gold. These doctors and medical professionals, we're pushing the vaccines on people, tell them, don't worry about your baby will be. fine. And the babies, there's a lot of babies out there that don't make it, or a lot of toddlers, but that don't make it, and we don't hear enough about those stories. So I just want to say thank you for coming and testifying today to tell us all the stories and the data behind it.

Thank you. So Professor Akkar, we really appreciate coming and sharing. And I personally know that it was a lot of work to put this presentation together and you have a whole team behind you and you verify everything and go over it. So, and what an honor to have you come and present this data. So we thank you for coming. My pleasure. Thank you for this. And our final witness of the day is John Grant,

who has come a long way to be here. And you're going to affirm to tell the truth. So John Grant, do you promise to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Now, just by way of your personal background, you're 74 years old. Yes. And as of August 30th, you have been married your wife, Sandra, for 51 years. Absolutely.

So that's pretty cool. You've got two boys and two girls and four grandchildren. Two girls and one boy, or two boys and one girl and four grandchildren. See, and I can be forgiven for being confused. Well, you know, I realize that I'm not. not the only one to get things mixed up here. Right. So, and you've done 40 years in construction.

And at the time of your vaccination, you were basically working full-time. You were fixing up houses to rent. You had a small sawmill. You also lived on a rural property. And that in itself requires a lot. You were very physically active. You also were involved in the Awama Club, basically managing 25 to 30 volunteers. who were responsible for working with around 125 to 30 kids.

So you had that responsibility. And this is interesting. So you got married in 1975. Yes. And since then, before the vaccination, how many times said you've been sick? I think it was two times where I really got sick than I was in bed. Right, like with a colder flu? A colder flu, yeah, two times.

Okay. So basically you'd experienced a lot of health. Tell us about your vaccine experience and what happened after that. It was a decision I made because I was involved with young people. I had spent my whole life from the time I was 17 involved with young people with camps and Sunday school and kids clubs. So I had spent a lot of time with young people. and at the time just

well before I got the vaccine when COVID broke out we were told in no uncertain terms we cannot continue on with the Oana program the Thursday we had our fun kind with racing cars down the track and then the next day

we're told we can't have it Oana It was a very critical time because that's when the kids finished the books and everything. And being a leader, I was thinking about this one day. And I said to myself, my heart is really troubled because of what I'm hearing out there. As soon as I said that, because I'm a Bible-believing guy and I love the Bible, I was reminded of what Jesus said to his disciples on the night that he was betrayed. let not your heart be troubled. You believe in God?

Believe also in me. And my father's house are many mansions. If I were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I'm going to come back again. So those words were kind of my marching orders to keep me going.

In spite of the blockages that we had to be able to function with our ministries and just everyday life. So that was one. One thing that really helped me along. The process of me making the decision to get the vaccine, and I never had a flu vaccine in my whole life, other than the ones that you get for childhood diseases.

I've got all those. But I never had a flu vaccine. And my wife, being a nurse, she reacted to a flu vaccine one year, so she didn't have to. By the way, the center of the first. the senator this morning, and I don't remember his name, he said something that really resonated with me.

He says, top-line caregivers and nurses are very important. I'm here today because of those that looked after me, but because my wife was a nurse, and she recognized things.

Well, I made the decision to get the vaccine, because I wanted to honor the government because the Bible says we should honor the government those who are in authority over us. So I decided to get it. And we did it together, my wife and I went down, we got the first shot.

Then a while earlier, I got the second shot. Within two weeks, it was the Monday that I did some sawing with my sawmill with my nephew and really enjoyed it. But anybody that's done anything with logs, you know what I. happens when you bear arms just fought out and you're going to scrape your arms and just nothing really spectacular the next day um my wife and i go and visit my daughter and the grandchildren

and i have one nostril bleeding it was off and on all day on our way home we stopped by to go for lunch and i needed to tie up my shoes and my wife took a look at my legs and he says you got pateiki on there it's broken vessels on your leg. She said, you can have to get that checked. I came home that night after we went out for supper. And in the course of the evening, I said, Sandra, look at my mouth. My mouth is bleeding.

She says, you better get to the hospital. So we were only 10 minutes away, so away I went. I get in there, and immediately they give me a blood test. the blood tests show that my blood platelets are sitting at poor what are they supposed to be

my my baseline is about 154 but it's anywhere from 150 to 400 depending on the person so I was basically bleeding to death

the doctor on call at the Westlock health care center contacted the top hematologist in the University of Calgary, University of Edmonton, Dr. Sawyer. And he says, get this guy on steroids. The next day I went and saw my home doctor, Dr. Cuoma, and he says, we've got to get you into that clinic.

And so. I ended up going to the clinic at 9 o'clock in the morning. He took one look at my blood work and said, we got to get you into the hospital here. Well, that was 9 o'clock in the morning, and he said, he tried from his clinic. Finally, he says, if I can't get you in from the clinic, you've got to go over the emergency.

It was until 9 o'clock that night that they found me at room. The next day, my daughter came in to see me. my platelets had gone down to zero I didn't know if I was going to live because I'd done enough research on it to say this is very important to have your blood to be able to clot something else happened the next couple of days

because I was really hanging on to that verse about Jesus coming back again maybe I was going to be going to see them sooner than I want because I love being a husband. I love being a dad and a grandpa. And I had a good friend. Kim saw me.

That's another other interesting thing. You find out who your real friends are when you're in hospital. Once they come and visit you or wants to give you a call or text you, boy, that's important. You dropped off a book. It's a book from an old theologian.

Spurgeon And he identified a verse in Hebrews that says Let us come boldly unto the throne of grace in prayer so that you may obtain

mercy and grace to help in time of need. And the verse before that it says, we have an advocate, we have a savior who knows what we are going through. So I remember speaking to the Lord.

I come into your presence. I don't have anything here. I'm empty-handed. You know, there's somebody else in the throne room. That's Jesus Christ. And Jesus Christ says to, hey, dad, John belongs to me. He put his faith in trust in me

when he was five years old. He belongs to me. And you know what happens? That great God, he gets up and he puts his arms around you and spiritually, I got a spiritual hugger for my father and him. Well, I was on a healing process. I was carried through many times, many times.

I returned to that chapter and that verse. I took me to October to get my plate that's back up to 150. It left me with. Can I slow you down? Because my understanding also is, you had what was described, you described to me as bloodless. Can you tell us about that? What was that again?

Blood blisters. Oh, blood blisters. Yeah, the blood blisters. Can you share about... Oh, well, I had it in my mouth. Oh, I would tell you about my arms being scraped. Show the picture of my arms. There.

That's what broke out onto my arms because any little broken skin was oozing blood and it would dry. And I had that over my whole body. Showed that one in my face. Not that everybody wants to see my face. It's just in my mouth. So what's happening here? We see spots all over.

That's blood oozing out of my every orifice and every broken piece of my skin. I had it all over my body. The amortologist, Dr. Sawyer, had three or four interns who were studying to be an ametologist. And one was Dr. Wong, who was kind of leading it. and she said we have never seen anything like that before so let's go back to the first one david the legs so you are describing what you call patiki right and that's this is this is what you're talking about so your legs don't normally look like this this is all basically blood vessels yeah and it was over my whole body okay so then david go to the one of his tongue

so we don't really see it that well in the picture but there's actually big blisters of blood in the back for your... Yeah, all my gums were bleeding my tongue and basically I was bleeding from in my urine, my blood, my nose. The only place I wasn't bleeding out was with my ears, thankfully. But it was very uncomfortable leaning in bed there because

if I moved too hard, these blood things would break off. You also had an experience in the hospital where you had to go to the bathroom. Can you share with this? What? You had to go the bathroom and something. Well, that was the next chapter. Okay. Because after I went through all this and I spent just about a year getting back to get.

Oh, it also put me into Type 2. diabetes. I was on insulin. I was war out with the medications that I was on. Oh, by the way, I had to go in for IV meds every week for four weeks after I was let out of the hospital for some more drugs. Well, I finally got not too bad and I was doing pretty good and got saw in lumber again and I built a shed and I was doing pretty good. Then in February, I started losing breath. You know, it was in church. I couldn't sing because I kept on running out of breath.

I phoned my doctor the next day. He took me right away. And he says, I don't know what's going on. He listened to my heart. But he says, I'm going to send you in for a blood test and an x-ray. And so I didn't make it in a Monday. It was late in the day.

So Tuesday, I'm sitting at home waiting kind of gathering up my strength to go to the appointment. And Sandra had gone in to go visit my grandkids, and she gets to about 20 minutes out. She says, no, I think I better go back and look after John. She came back in and she says, as soon as we get the blood test done, I'm taking you to emergency. So we got the blood test done and got the x-ray done.

And she walks over to the emergency. I said, my husband is out of breath and he's got chest beans. Those are two things that will trigger the emergency people right away. My doctor had already seen

that blood work and he saw that there was an enzyme given off from my heart because I got problems with my heart or my lungs and they ordered a scan of my lungs and it turns out that I got blood clots in my lungs.

So I had the complete opposite. Now, I think the reference shown to that peeing was actually from the other one. I was thinking it was this one here. When I was in the hospital the first time, by the way, I spent 12 days in the hospital that time, I had blood in my urine. One time I couldn't pee. I said, oh, no. That's the worst feeling you can have.

When your bladder is full and you can't pee. it let off. It had been blood clots and I spread pee and urine all over the bathroom. It was a gross sight. But it just told me just how devastating

my whole system was. And you actually meant blood and urine because it was bloody. What's that? It was bloody. Oh, it was red. It was very red. Yeah. So you were diagnosed

the first time with the low blood clot. I don't want to say the medical term because I will miss my now. It's ITP. Yeah. So, and then it's quite common for people that have that to then rebound the other way and get deep pain

thrombose. That's what Dr. Wong, my special now, Dr. Wong took me on as a patient after I got out of hospital because she had completed her internship and she asked, do you want me to keep you as a patient? I said, yeah, I like that. And she was very good at making sure she was following me up. And so

we went through that healing. process. And so she, when I came down with this, well, there's two things, deep vein trombosis and pulmonary ambula. I had a leg that was bothering me and it swelled up and I had blood clots in my leg that moved up to my lungs. And I'm just going to move us along. I'm getting short on time, but basically the blood clots in your lungs cause scarring and permanent damage. As far as we know, there's a certain amount of scar tissue there so that I don't have the same capacity that I had before. I sometimes run out of breath. And that's basically limited your lifestyle, including requiring you to sell your rural property in the town.

We had been talking about it because of our age, but when I got sick the second time, and I got behind on my maintenance of my rental properties, and I got really, of one of them and I says to Sandra, I think we've got to sell this last one, but we've got to get ready to sell the acreage. That acreage had a shop that was 32 by 30, two stories high. We had garden spots. I had sheep running just about every summer, keeping the grass down. I had a beautiful three-story playhouse for the kids that I built. I remember them telling him that we're going to sell the place and they came out and they spent their time playing on that playhouse.

So we ended up selling the place and buying a house in town but it took us the whole winter for me to move all my junk. When you're 40 years in construction and 27 years in the same grad, some of you guys know what I'm talking about. So I moved it over to a little acreage that we had still attached to our property with different title. And in the spring we moved in the fall

and in the spring we sold the acreage. And so now I've been dealing with, first of all, I could work for an hour. They don't have to lie down. And then I could do an hour and a half. And it's been a long, slow process getting up so I could, I used to work 10, 12 hours a day. And as I got older, I said, well, I don't need to really do that.

I can limit it to eight hours a day. Well, I haven't been able to work eight hours for a day. to know. I love working. I love building. I love hunting and fishing and canoeing and things like that. There's one

area of the Athabasca River that I haven't canoed. I've gone from the Athabasca Falls into Athabasca or into Jasper, but I haven't gone from Jasper to Hinton. I've done Hinton to all the way up to Vega ferry on different

canoe trips that I've had. I don't know. or how to do it. So, certain things have changed. Just going to ask you one last question. Why is it important to share your story? Why is it important for what? To share your story here.

Two things. I hope I've communicated to you what I've gone through. But also I wanted to make sure you understand of how I dealt with this onslaught of my body. I have found great strength. and great power in relying upon those two verses I shared with you. And I've heard fellow people who suffered. They don't have any hope.

And I believe the greatest hope that we can have is when we can go into the very presence of God, as he says, come and boldly into the throne of grace and prayer, so that you can obtain mercy and grace and time of need. What's mercy? It's not getting what you deserve, and grace is a great big gift. And I've had to adjust something in my thinking.

All the people who made the decisions to force us to have those vaccines, I had to come to a point where I have to say, I forgive them. Because when I stand in God's presence, I'm before God who is righteous and he knows right from wrong. And this is the warning of any of you,

people who listen to this, you're going to stand before God someday. Every single last one of us are going to stand before God. And if you don't have a lawyer, I mean, lawyer, as in Jesus Christ, all the bank accounts, your other cronies, your government protection, the bodies that you have around you, you're going to stand there as an individual, and dear friends if you were from the government or from the pharmaceutical companies and you've made those decisions knowing that you're lying if you don't have Jesus Christ

as an advocate you've got a you've got a hammer down there what do you call it lift it up when God takes the paddle and he brings that down if you don't have Jesus Christ on your side it's going to be guilty. The only hope that we have ultimately to see this COVID charade finished is that we start

believing in the Lord Jesus Christ who is going to be our advocate, who is going to give us the ability to carry on. And that's what I have to share. That's why I wanted to share it. John, we'll thank you very much. for sharing your story today. Thank you for coming. And we want to thank all the witnesses that came today to share their various experiences. And so thank you once again. Thank you, Mr.

Elson, for putting this on because it came as a last minute for me to get down here. And I was glad I was able to do it. Thank you very. Thank you for making the effort to come all that way. Thank you. So we're going to commence tomorrow at 830. We're not done yet. The chairperson will say some parting words. But this last its last witness really was last minute because we had some people drop out because for medical reasons they just simply could not travel and in the coming days we're going to be pretty heavy on vaccine injured people and many of them are suffering to get here we had one that had to leave today so we just ask I guess I'm just stating that because it's the fact and

to say that you know we really feel honored just the efforts they're taking and hear their stories. So come back tomorrow. You'll be changed again. Yeah, and I'll just end with, I want to thank my colleagues that showed up today to hear the stories. And to all those that testified, we're in the gallery to participate or show support. We appreciate everyone being here. And then, of course, to all our media friends that are here as well. So thank you for talking about people's stories that should be heard and should be told. So with that, we're going to end the meeting. And we'll see it to more at 8.30.