Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

💥BREAKING - THIS IS BIG: Catherine Austin Fitts provides bombshell testimony to a court in the Netherlands, who have agreed to hear what may be one of the largest and most important landmark legal cases in recent history. The lawsuit alleges crimes perpetrated worldwide by prominent global figures. *As...

ShaunRickard67's profile picture

Shaun Rickard

48,981 subscribers

378,933 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Новости и политика
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

🚨COURT OF APPEAL AMSTERDAM LIVE UPDATE🚨 Stassen (Dutch Lawyer) has not held back in Amsterdam Court of Appeal this morning, in the preliminary evidence appeal hearing in the case against Bill Gates, Albert Bourla and the Dutch state et al. (explainer video linked below). Peter Stassen told the High Court Justices (of which there are 4) that "Bill gates (a defendant in this case) is part of an elite network who share a 'satanic ideology'." He has directly accused the Dutch state of lying, and stated that the Judiciary is being misled, and while "no one is being prosecuted for the Epstein files - as they 'stick to a mafia type silencing code' - they continue to blame the victims (plaintiffs/claimants) in this case (the covid 'vaccine' injured and bereaved) as the dangerous ones, the liars." Lawyer for the Plaintiffs Peter Stassen states "give me the facts and I will give you the law." He states to the court: "it is important that you take into account alternative facts or you will never get the truth; we are experiencing the greatest crime against humanity and the defendants in this case are the perpetrators of that crime." More to follow. Links below for info. I promise I will follow and report on this case and share everything you need to know! Fiona Rose Diamond #COVIDJustice #Netherlands
4:39

🚨COURT OF APPEAL AMSTERDAM LIVE UPDATE🚨 Stassen (Dutch Lawyer) has not held back in Amsterdam Court of Appeal this morning, in the preliminary evidence appeal hearing in the case against Bill Gates, Albert Bourla and the Dutch state et al. (explainer video linked below). Peter Stassen told the High Court Justices (of which there are 4) that "Bill gates (a defendant in this case) is part of an elite network who share a 'satanic ideology'." He has directly accused the Dutch state of lying, and stated that the Judiciary is being misled, and while "no one is being prosecuted for the Epstein files - as they 'stick to a mafia type silencing code' - they continue to blame the victims (plaintiffs/claimants) in this case (the covid 'vaccine' injured and bereaved) as the dangerous ones, the liars." Lawyer for the Plaintiffs Peter Stassen states "give me the facts and I will give you the law." He states to the court: "it is important that you take into account alternative facts or you will never get the truth; we are experiencing the greatest crime against humanity and the defendants in this case are the perpetrators of that crime." More to follow. Links below for info. I promise I will follow and report on this case and share everything you need to know! Fiona Rose Diamond #COVIDJustice #Netherlands

Paul White Gold Eagle

28,077 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Alberta-based class-action lawsuit seeks justice for those harmed by COVID-19 vaccines Law firm Rath & Company has filed a class-action lawsuit against the federal and Alberta provincial governments on behalf of Albertans who have suffered debilitating injuries from the COVID-19 vaccines. The lawsuit claims that the governments engaged in “unlawful, negligent, inadequate, improper, unfair, and deceptive practices” related to the warning, promotion, and distribution of these novel pharmaceutical products. At the heart of the claim is Carrie Sakamoto, a young mother from Lethbridge whose personal vaccine injury 10.5 million-dollar lawsuit pivoted into a class action, representing potentially thousands of Albertans facing debilitating, long-term effects from the widely promoted but highly controversial COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Sakamoto’s legal team, led by lawyers Jeffrey Rath and Eva Chipiuk (Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM), argues that the government intentionally withheld crucial information about the vaccines before mandating them. Rath emphasizes that their case challenges the blanket assumption that the vaccines are safe and effective, and the goal of a trial would be to enter into public record evidence proving otherwise. The lawsuit is scheduled for a case management hearing tomorrow, a crucial step where the key issues in dispute will be identified. However, Rath criticizes this as a “delay tactic” and an “abuse of process.” Chipiuk points to the government's failure to adequately address the severity of vaccine injuries, which have been largely ignored by programs like the Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP). This lawsuit is more than just a legal battle — it’s an urgent call for accountability and a potential precedent for future public health responses. As legal action unfolds, will this be Canadians' only hope for the government to take responsibility for the widespread harm caused by its vaccine rollout? REPORT by Tamara Ugolini 🇨🇦:
10:32

Alberta-based class-action lawsuit seeks justice for those harmed by COVID-19 vaccines Law firm Rath & Company has filed a class-action lawsuit against the federal and Alberta provincial governments on behalf of Albertans who have suffered debilitating injuries from the COVID-19 vaccines. The lawsuit claims that the governments engaged in “unlawful, negligent, inadequate, improper, unfair, and deceptive practices” related to the warning, promotion, and distribution of these novel pharmaceutical products. At the heart of the claim is Carrie Sakamoto, a young mother from Lethbridge whose personal vaccine injury 10.5 million-dollar lawsuit pivoted into a class action, representing potentially thousands of Albertans facing debilitating, long-term effects from the widely promoted but highly controversial COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Sakamoto’s legal team, led by lawyers Jeffrey Rath and Eva Chipiuk (Eva Chipiuk, BSc, LLB, LLM), argues that the government intentionally withheld crucial information about the vaccines before mandating them. Rath emphasizes that their case challenges the blanket assumption that the vaccines are safe and effective, and the goal of a trial would be to enter into public record evidence proving otherwise. The lawsuit is scheduled for a case management hearing tomorrow, a crucial step where the key issues in dispute will be identified. However, Rath criticizes this as a “delay tactic” and an “abuse of process.” Chipiuk points to the government's failure to adequately address the severity of vaccine injuries, which have been largely ignored by programs like the Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP). This lawsuit is more than just a legal battle — it’s an urgent call for accountability and a potential precedent for future public health responses. As legal action unfolds, will this be Canadians' only hope for the government to take responsibility for the widespread harm caused by its vaccine rollout? REPORT by Tamara Ugolini 🇨🇦:

Rebel News

96,114 просмотров • 1 год назад

10 Shocking Stories the Media Buried Today #10 - Dutch court orders Bill Gates to stand trial over COVID-19 vaccines. Seven vaccine-injured plaintiffs allege that Bill Gates and others “misled people into taking Covid-19 injections, while they knew or should have known that these injections were not safe and effective.” The lawsuit also targets former Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, and key members of the Dutch government’s COVID response team. The bombshell came when Gates tried to evade the case by arguing that, as a U.S. citizen, he should not be subject to Dutch legal proceedings. However, the court ruled that due to Gates’ close connection with other defendants under Dutch jurisdiction, he IS subject to trial in the Netherlands. Now, Gates and his legal team must confront these serious allegations in court, with a new hearing set for November 27th of this year. (See 9 More Revealing Stories Below)
2:24

10 Shocking Stories the Media Buried Today #10 - Dutch court orders Bill Gates to stand trial over COVID-19 vaccines. Seven vaccine-injured plaintiffs allege that Bill Gates and others “misled people into taking Covid-19 injections, while they knew or should have known that these injections were not safe and effective.” The lawsuit also targets former Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, and key members of the Dutch government’s COVID response team. The bombshell came when Gates tried to evade the case by arguing that, as a U.S. citizen, he should not be subject to Dutch legal proceedings. However, the court ruled that due to Gates’ close connection with other defendants under Dutch jurisdiction, he IS subject to trial in the Netherlands. Now, Gates and his legal team must confront these serious allegations in court, with a new hearing set for November 27th of this year. (See 9 More Revealing Stories Below)

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

5,321,185 просмотров • 1 год назад

🚨 RFK JR DROPS BOMBSHELL CLAIM Robert F. Kennedy Jr just told a crowd that Bill Gates has been indicted in the Netherlands over alleged statements related to COVID vaccines — and that he may have to face trial. The audience erupted. If accurate, this would be a significant legal development involving one of the most powerful figures in global health and technology. However — and this is critical — claims of indictments involving high-profile individuals often require careful verification because: • Civil cases ≠ criminal indictments • Legal complaints ≠ charges filed by prosecutors • Jurisdiction and legal standards vary by country In recent years, Gates has faced multiple lawsuits and complaints in different jurisdictions related to pandemic policies and vaccine programs, but the legal status of each case depends on court filings and prosecutorial decisions. The key question now: Is this a formal criminal indictment by Dutch authorities — or a legal complaint filed by private parties? Those are very different things legally. Either way, the political significance is obvious. For years, critics have accused global health institutions and pharmaceutical partners of misleading the public. Supporters argue pandemic decisions were made under emergency conditions with evolving science. If any courtroom proceedings move forward, they could become a major flashpoint in the ongoing global debate over pandemic accountability. The next step is simple: Watch the courts. Because rhetoric can move crowds. But only legal evidence moves verdicts.
0:47

🚨 RFK JR DROPS BOMBSHELL CLAIM Robert F. Kennedy Jr just told a crowd that Bill Gates has been indicted in the Netherlands over alleged statements related to COVID vaccines — and that he may have to face trial. The audience erupted. If accurate, this would be a significant legal development involving one of the most powerful figures in global health and technology. However — and this is critical — claims of indictments involving high-profile individuals often require careful verification because: • Civil cases ≠ criminal indictments • Legal complaints ≠ charges filed by prosecutors • Jurisdiction and legal standards vary by country In recent years, Gates has faced multiple lawsuits and complaints in different jurisdictions related to pandemic policies and vaccine programs, but the legal status of each case depends on court filings and prosecutorial decisions. The key question now: Is this a formal criminal indictment by Dutch authorities — or a legal complaint filed by private parties? Those are very different things legally. Either way, the political significance is obvious. For years, critics have accused global health institutions and pharmaceutical partners of misleading the public. Supporters argue pandemic decisions were made under emergency conditions with evolving science. If any courtroom proceedings move forward, they could become a major flashpoint in the ongoing global debate over pandemic accountability. The next step is simple: Watch the courts. Because rhetoric can move crowds. But only legal evidence moves verdicts.

Jim Ferguson

32,883 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

PFIZER IS IN BIG TROUBLE. NEW interview with Kris Kobach, Attorney General for the State of Kansas, who is suing Pfizer, along with 5 x other American States. He mentions they knew 10% of women had miscarriages: "Pfizer was well aware of the many risks to pregnant women and they had information in their possession not only of of causing you know grave problems for pregnant rats but they also had information as early as February 2021 on 458 pregnant women and they knew that there were complications including miscarriages in over 10% of the cases" TRANSCRIPT FOR CLIP: NEWSMAX "You're suing Pfizer for misleading claims on the covid vaccine sir round of applause for you on this what's this about and what's your case" KRIS KOBACK "Well the case is that Pfizer violated the Kansas Consumer Protection Act and by the way all 50 states have some version of a consumer Protection act and while the federal government gave all the vaccine manufacturers immunity from normal tort suits, where someone who's injured would sue the company seeking damages for their injury, the federal government did not give the vaccine manufacturers license to misrepresent or state things that they knew to be false when trying to push their product, and that's what this lawsuit is about" "[Pfizer] made multiple misrepresentations, including saying it was safe for pregnant women, when Pfizer was well aware of the many risks to pregnant women. And they had information in their possession not only of of causing, you know grave problems for pregnant rats, but they also had information as early as February 2021 on 458 pregnant women and they knew that there were complications, including miscarriages in over 10% of the cases..... just think about that a person dies in every miscarriage and yet they proceeded to advertise it as safe for pregnant women". This lawsuit also highlights the amount of ignorance within other government departments, that are still pushing the "safe and effective" narrative on a Global scale. Add on top of the that the more recent accumulating evidence of DNA contamination in Pfizer and Moderna vials, and you have a ticking time bomb for the Pharmaceutical industry
1:25

PFIZER IS IN BIG TROUBLE. NEW interview with Kris Kobach, Attorney General for the State of Kansas, who is suing Pfizer, along with 5 x other American States. He mentions they knew 10% of women had miscarriages: "Pfizer was well aware of the many risks to pregnant women and they had information in their possession not only of of causing you know grave problems for pregnant rats but they also had information as early as February 2021 on 458 pregnant women and they knew that there were complications including miscarriages in over 10% of the cases" TRANSCRIPT FOR CLIP: NEWSMAX "You're suing Pfizer for misleading claims on the covid vaccine sir round of applause for you on this what's this about and what's your case" KRIS KOBACK "Well the case is that Pfizer violated the Kansas Consumer Protection Act and by the way all 50 states have some version of a consumer Protection act and while the federal government gave all the vaccine manufacturers immunity from normal tort suits, where someone who's injured would sue the company seeking damages for their injury, the federal government did not give the vaccine manufacturers license to misrepresent or state things that they knew to be false when trying to push their product, and that's what this lawsuit is about" "[Pfizer] made multiple misrepresentations, including saying it was safe for pregnant women, when Pfizer was well aware of the many risks to pregnant women. And they had information in their possession not only of of causing, you know grave problems for pregnant rats, but they also had information as early as February 2021 on 458 pregnant women and they knew that there were complications, including miscarriages in over 10% of the cases..... just think about that a person dies in every miscarriage and yet they proceeded to advertise it as safe for pregnant women". This lawsuit also highlights the amount of ignorance within other government departments, that are still pushing the "safe and effective" narrative on a Global scale. Add on top of the that the more recent accumulating evidence of DNA contamination in Pfizer and Moderna vials, and you have a ticking time bomb for the Pharmaceutical industry

Humanspective

549,102 просмотров • 1 год назад

New Filings in Sean "Diddy" Combs Lawsuit Name Jay-Z as Co-Defendant in Alleged Assault of Minor By Project Constitution In an explosive turn in the legal proceedings against Sean "Diddy" Combs, attorney Tony Buzbee has introduced an amended complaint that now includes Shawn "Jay-Z" Carter as a co-defendant. This amendment alleges a harrowing incident where both Combs and Carter are accused of drugging and raping a then 13-year-old girl at a 2000 MTV Video Music Awards (VMA) after-party. The complaint further states that an unnamed female celebrity was present during the assault, witnessing the events without intervention. The plaintiff, identified only as Jane Doe in legal documents, describes in the complaint how she was taken to the after-party after attempting to gain entry to the VMAs without a ticket. According to the allegations, she was given a drink that made her feel disoriented, leading to the assault by Combs and Carter. Adding to the severity of the allegations, the complaint accuses Jay-Z of orchestrating a campaign of harassment, intimidation, and threats against the plaintiff to prevent her from naming him in the lawsuit. This campaign supposedly extended to Buzbee, his family, employees, clients, and former clients, in an attempt to discredit the attorney and undermine the case. Jay-Z responded to these accusations with a vehement denial on X, branding the lawsuit as a blackmail attempt. His response was not only a defense of his own character but also included personal attacks on Buzbee, challenging the validity of his military service and suggesting that the allegations were part of a larger conspiracy for financial gain. Jay-Z's statement was laden with threats of aggressive defense, referencing his upbringing in Brooklyn's "projects" as a testament to his tenacity. He dared the accusers to file criminal charges, rather than a civil lawsuit, if they believed in their claims. In response, Buzbee issued a statement defending his military career and denouncing Jay-Z's tactics as bullying. He interpreted Jay-Z's response as a direct threat but affirmed his commitment to represent his client, stating he would not be intimidated and was prepared to see the case through to the end. The legal landscape got even more intriguing when another media outlet sought comments from the Southern District of New York State Attorney's Office regarding the potential for criminal charges against Jay-Z. The office, which is currently prosecuting Diddy on federal charges including sex trafficking and racketeering, declined to comment, which has been interpreted by some as potentially significant. This case has sparked intense debate about celebrity accountability, the protection of minors, and the ethics of intimidation in legal battles. With Diddy already detained pending his criminal trial, the addition of Jay-Z to this civil lawsuit could have profound implications for both defendants' careers, reputations, and legal standing. Note to Readers: This article is based on the information available as of December 8, 2024. Legal cases can evolve, and we will continue to monitor this one for further developments. #DiddyLawsuit #JayZAccused #TonyBuzbee #VMA2000Scandal #JusticeForJaneDoe #CelebrityAccountability #HarassmentClaims #LegalBattle #IntimidationTactics #SexualAssaultAllegations #EntertainmentIndustry #ProtectMinors #HighProfileCase #NewYorkCourt #CivilLawsuit #CriminalAllegations
20:26

New Filings in Sean "Diddy" Combs Lawsuit Name Jay-Z as Co-Defendant in Alleged Assault of Minor By Project Constitution In an explosive turn in the legal proceedings against Sean "Diddy" Combs, attorney Tony Buzbee has introduced an amended complaint that now includes Shawn "Jay-Z" Carter as a co-defendant. This amendment alleges a harrowing incident where both Combs and Carter are accused of drugging and raping a then 13-year-old girl at a 2000 MTV Video Music Awards (VMA) after-party. The complaint further states that an unnamed female celebrity was present during the assault, witnessing the events without intervention. The plaintiff, identified only as Jane Doe in legal documents, describes in the complaint how she was taken to the after-party after attempting to gain entry to the VMAs without a ticket. According to the allegations, she was given a drink that made her feel disoriented, leading to the assault by Combs and Carter. Adding to the severity of the allegations, the complaint accuses Jay-Z of orchestrating a campaign of harassment, intimidation, and threats against the plaintiff to prevent her from naming him in the lawsuit. This campaign supposedly extended to Buzbee, his family, employees, clients, and former clients, in an attempt to discredit the attorney and undermine the case. Jay-Z responded to these accusations with a vehement denial on X, branding the lawsuit as a blackmail attempt. His response was not only a defense of his own character but also included personal attacks on Buzbee, challenging the validity of his military service and suggesting that the allegations were part of a larger conspiracy for financial gain. Jay-Z's statement was laden with threats of aggressive defense, referencing his upbringing in Brooklyn's "projects" as a testament to his tenacity. He dared the accusers to file criminal charges, rather than a civil lawsuit, if they believed in their claims. In response, Buzbee issued a statement defending his military career and denouncing Jay-Z's tactics as bullying. He interpreted Jay-Z's response as a direct threat but affirmed his commitment to represent his client, stating he would not be intimidated and was prepared to see the case through to the end. The legal landscape got even more intriguing when another media outlet sought comments from the Southern District of New York State Attorney's Office regarding the potential for criminal charges against Jay-Z. The office, which is currently prosecuting Diddy on federal charges including sex trafficking and racketeering, declined to comment, which has been interpreted by some as potentially significant. This case has sparked intense debate about celebrity accountability, the protection of minors, and the ethics of intimidation in legal battles. With Diddy already detained pending his criminal trial, the addition of Jay-Z to this civil lawsuit could have profound implications for both defendants' careers, reputations, and legal standing. Note to Readers: This article is based on the information available as of December 8, 2024. Legal cases can evolve, and we will continue to monitor this one for further developments. #DiddyLawsuit #JayZAccused #TonyBuzbee #VMA2000Scandal #JusticeForJaneDoe #CelebrityAccountability #HarassmentClaims #LegalBattle #IntimidationTactics #SexualAssaultAllegations #EntertainmentIndustry #ProtectMinors #HighProfileCase #NewYorkCourt #CivilLawsuit #CriminalAllegations

Project Constitution

638,864 просмотров • 1 год назад

Critical testimony from Sasha Latypova for Dutch attorney Peter Stassen's lawsuit against "the architects of The Great Reset," like Bill Gates, Albert Bourla, et al. Note that while Sasha sticks her neck out for a case like this, she's attacked by anon clowns like Jikkyleaks. Jikkyleaks (mouse piss) claims that Latypova (sashalatypova.substack.com "Due Diligence and Art") "has a reputation for derailing and making non-credible legal cases to which she attaches herself," even though she's been celebrated by both Pfizer whistleblower Brook Jackson and physician-hero Kirk Moore as "instrumental" and a source of critical information—see attached tweets. Meanwhile, mouse piss (Jikkyleaks 🐭) celebrates guys like Blob Malone. Makes you wonder what the deal is with the anon mouse piss? 🤔 ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "In my expert opinion, the Covid-19 injections as deployed are indistinguishable from weapons. They are deployed under international legal frameworks for military medical countermeasures, all of which bypass normal regulatory norms, practices, and laws and remove all manufacturers' liability. "The mechanisms of harm were fully foreseeable and documented in numerous regulatory guidances all over the world. The mechanisms include synthetic RNA and DNA mediated cellular dysregulation, inflammatory immune effects and distributed injury to all organs. "The mass deployment of known harmful countermeasures using deceptive advertisement as pharmaceutical vaccines and drugs meets elements of democide, depraved indifference and criminal negligence leading to mass death and injury. Whether it meets the definition of genocide is legal determination for the court. "Dual-use mechanisms make weaponization of these Injections possible. For example, LNP and mRNA platforms have been recognized as dual-use technologies in biodefense literature. Dual use means that they can be used both for military and civilian purposes. Synthetic RNA can cause major damage without necessarily coding for any specific proteins. "Vaccine platforms also recognized in biodefense literature as a mechanism to deliver this deleterious cargo into human body. As previously mentioned, absence of meaningful enforceable pharmaceutical regulations or manufacturer liability makes it completely open. Makes this platform completely open for weaponization and adulteration by design."
1:56

Critical testimony from Sasha Latypova for Dutch attorney Peter Stassen's lawsuit against "the architects of The Great Reset," like Bill Gates, Albert Bourla, et al. Note that while Sasha sticks her neck out for a case like this, she's attacked by anon clowns like Jikkyleaks. Jikkyleaks (mouse piss) claims that Latypova (sashalatypova.substack.com "Due Diligence and Art") "has a reputation for derailing and making non-credible legal cases to which she attaches herself," even though she's been celebrated by both Pfizer whistleblower Brook Jackson and physician-hero Kirk Moore as "instrumental" and a source of critical information—see attached tweets. Meanwhile, mouse piss (Jikkyleaks 🐭) celebrates guys like Blob Malone. Makes you wonder what the deal is with the anon mouse piss? 🤔 ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "In my expert opinion, the Covid-19 injections as deployed are indistinguishable from weapons. They are deployed under international legal frameworks for military medical countermeasures, all of which bypass normal regulatory norms, practices, and laws and remove all manufacturers' liability. "The mechanisms of harm were fully foreseeable and documented in numerous regulatory guidances all over the world. The mechanisms include synthetic RNA and DNA mediated cellular dysregulation, inflammatory immune effects and distributed injury to all organs. "The mass deployment of known harmful countermeasures using deceptive advertisement as pharmaceutical vaccines and drugs meets elements of democide, depraved indifference and criminal negligence leading to mass death and injury. Whether it meets the definition of genocide is legal determination for the court. "Dual-use mechanisms make weaponization of these Injections possible. For example, LNP and mRNA platforms have been recognized as dual-use technologies in biodefense literature. Dual use means that they can be used both for military and civilian purposes. Synthetic RNA can cause major damage without necessarily coding for any specific proteins. "Vaccine platforms also recognized in biodefense literature as a mechanism to deliver this deleterious cargo into human body. As previously mentioned, absence of meaningful enforceable pharmaceutical regulations or manufacturer liability makes it completely open. Makes this platform completely open for weaponization and adulteration by design."

Sense Receptor

24,375 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

ESSENTIAL VIEWING FOR THE ENTIRE WORLD! What happened must never happen again. The perpetrators must be held accountable New Australian Film - WITNESS STATEMENT The Greatest Crimes in Australia’s History – The Story is Confronting Witness Statement 1 January 2025, has been released, telling the story of the most serious crimes ever committed in Australian history. The documentary addresses all Australian Police, State and Federal, and calls on them to identify and investigate alleged crimes and pursue prosecution of the offenders, without fear or favour. The film outlines numerous facts supported by indisputable data and evidence, of alleged criminal actions perpetrated on the people of Australia through the approval, promotion, mandating and injection of Covid-19 vaccines. It presents data, information, expert testimony and referenced evidence, in relation to the victims, the alleged crimes, the alleged offenders, the weapons used, possible motives, and the intent and means of the offenders. Numerous facts predominantly from Australian sources support the argument, including from our own Prof Ian Brighthope, Dr Phillip Altman, and Dr Jeyanthi Kunadhasan. Other foreign experts contribute including the famous English cancer specialist Professor Angus Dalgleish, the UK cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra, plus Dr Paul Marik and Dr Peter McCullough from the United States, and many more. You will also hear from many of the brave Australian politicians who tried to expose the truth about the Covid-19 pandemic and vaccines, including Senator Malcolm Roberts and Senator Gerard Rennick, as well as current and former members of parliament, Russell Broadbent, Craig Kelly and George Christensen. The facts presented clearly show that there were many serious departures from reasonable standards of conduct and care and unlawful actions, which caused significant harm to Australian men, women and children. But the film is also a beacon of light for those who have not yet been exposed to truthful media reports about the true risks and harms of the Covid-19 injections. These are not conventional vaccines. They are according to global experts, not vaccines, but gene therapy bioweapons. The truth is already in the public domain, but sourcing the information can be challenging for those who don’t know where to look. This documentary strings the publicly available data together in a way that is easy to access and understand. After watching this documentary, the misleading slogan ‘Safe and Effective’, will ring untrue - loud and clear - as the lies are exposed. The documentary is lengthy at 2.5 hours, but it is presented in 9 parts, so that you can pause after, or during, each section to reflect and consider the information carefully. Once you press play, you will want to watch to the end. The documentary has been mailed to the Federal Attorney General, Mark Dreyfus, and all State and Territory Police Commissioners, with a call to action to watch the documentary and take action to investigate the alleged crimes and prosecute the offenders. A link to the film will also be emailed to our elected representatives at Council, State and Federal level, to ensure that they too can be informed of the facts and take action to protect the people from further harm. The film can be viewed now at : Click here for film trailer. For media inquiries contact Debra Leigh Email: program.justice@proton.me credit to Debra Leigh /GlobalTruthNetwork / CMNnews /
2:34:05

ESSENTIAL VIEWING FOR THE ENTIRE WORLD! What happened must never happen again. The perpetrators must be held accountable New Australian Film - WITNESS STATEMENT The Greatest Crimes in Australia’s History – The Story is Confronting Witness Statement 1 January 2025, has been released, telling the story of the most serious crimes ever committed in Australian history. The documentary addresses all Australian Police, State and Federal, and calls on them to identify and investigate alleged crimes and pursue prosecution of the offenders, without fear or favour. The film outlines numerous facts supported by indisputable data and evidence, of alleged criminal actions perpetrated on the people of Australia through the approval, promotion, mandating and injection of Covid-19 vaccines. It presents data, information, expert testimony and referenced evidence, in relation to the victims, the alleged crimes, the alleged offenders, the weapons used, possible motives, and the intent and means of the offenders. Numerous facts predominantly from Australian sources support the argument, including from our own Prof Ian Brighthope, Dr Phillip Altman, and Dr Jeyanthi Kunadhasan. Other foreign experts contribute including the famous English cancer specialist Professor Angus Dalgleish, the UK cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra, plus Dr Paul Marik and Dr Peter McCullough from the United States, and many more. You will also hear from many of the brave Australian politicians who tried to expose the truth about the Covid-19 pandemic and vaccines, including Senator Malcolm Roberts and Senator Gerard Rennick, as well as current and former members of parliament, Russell Broadbent, Craig Kelly and George Christensen. The facts presented clearly show that there were many serious departures from reasonable standards of conduct and care and unlawful actions, which caused significant harm to Australian men, women and children. But the film is also a beacon of light for those who have not yet been exposed to truthful media reports about the true risks and harms of the Covid-19 injections. These are not conventional vaccines. They are according to global experts, not vaccines, but gene therapy bioweapons. The truth is already in the public domain, but sourcing the information can be challenging for those who don’t know where to look. This documentary strings the publicly available data together in a way that is easy to access and understand. After watching this documentary, the misleading slogan ‘Safe and Effective’, will ring untrue - loud and clear - as the lies are exposed. The documentary is lengthy at 2.5 hours, but it is presented in 9 parts, so that you can pause after, or during, each section to reflect and consider the information carefully. Once you press play, you will want to watch to the end. The documentary has been mailed to the Federal Attorney General, Mark Dreyfus, and all State and Territory Police Commissioners, with a call to action to watch the documentary and take action to investigate the alleged crimes and prosecute the offenders. A link to the film will also be emailed to our elected representatives at Council, State and Federal level, to ensure that they too can be informed of the facts and take action to protect the people from further harm. The film can be viewed now at : Click here for film trailer. For media inquiries contact Debra Leigh Email: [email protected] credit to Debra Leigh /GlobalTruthNetwork / CMNnews /

Max Freedom

16,033 просмотров • 1 год назад

🚨 Pfizer gave $11M to Canadian officials during COVID, who got the money and why? Whistleblower lawsuit alleges foreign corruption violations that call into question Pfizer’s influence on Canada’s pandemic decisions. While Canadians were being urged to “trust the science” and line up for COVID-19 vaccines, a 2023 whistleblower lawsuit in California suggests something very concerning was happening behind the scenes. Frank Han, Pfizer’s former director of global compliance analytics, alleges in a civil lawsuit that the pharmaceutical giant funnelled millions to what the company labelled “Potentially Influential Government Officials,” or PIGOs. According to the suit, this activity violated foreign corruption laws. Han claims he raised red flags about potential fraudulent interactions between Pfizer and officials in China, only to be fired for doing so. Now, his lawsuit has brought attention to an unprecedented level of corporate spending on government contracts during a global health crisis. Between the second quarter of 2019 and the third quarter of 2021 — spanning the pre-pandemic period through the global rollout of mRNA vaccines — Pfizer allegedly spent $168 million targeting officials in China, $12 million in the United States, and $11 million in Canada. Canadian virologist and immunologist Dr. Byram Bridle points out that the scale is extraordinary. Canada’s pharmaceutical market is roughly one-eighteenth the size of the U.S., yet it received nearly as much money as American officials. Why would Pfizer invest so heavily in Canadian contacts when public health agencies here typically follow U.S. guidance anyway? What positions did these officials hold, and what decisions were influenced, from vaccine procurement to lockdown policies to public messaging? As it stands now, under Canada’s conflict of interest rules, public officials must disclose certain financial relationships, but there’s no easily searchable public record showing where Pfizer’s $11 million went. At Rebel News, we’re filing Access to Information requests to uncover this paper trail. Canadians deserve clarity on whether those shaping public health policy had undisclosed financial ties to a company profiting from the crisis. If Pfizer’s payments to Canadian PIGOs were legitimate, disclosure should be straightforward, but if money influenced decisions during one of the most consequential public health crises in modern history, Canadians have a right to know and to demand accountability. The questions are clear, but the answers remain in the hands of those who received the money.
5:10

🚨 Pfizer gave $11M to Canadian officials during COVID, who got the money and why? Whistleblower lawsuit alleges foreign corruption violations that call into question Pfizer’s influence on Canada’s pandemic decisions. While Canadians were being urged to “trust the science” and line up for COVID-19 vaccines, a 2023 whistleblower lawsuit in California suggests something very concerning was happening behind the scenes. Frank Han, Pfizer’s former director of global compliance analytics, alleges in a civil lawsuit that the pharmaceutical giant funnelled millions to what the company labelled “Potentially Influential Government Officials,” or PIGOs. According to the suit, this activity violated foreign corruption laws. Han claims he raised red flags about potential fraudulent interactions between Pfizer and officials in China, only to be fired for doing so. Now, his lawsuit has brought attention to an unprecedented level of corporate spending on government contracts during a global health crisis. Between the second quarter of 2019 and the third quarter of 2021 — spanning the pre-pandemic period through the global rollout of mRNA vaccines — Pfizer allegedly spent $168 million targeting officials in China, $12 million in the United States, and $11 million in Canada. Canadian virologist and immunologist Dr. Byram Bridle points out that the scale is extraordinary. Canada’s pharmaceutical market is roughly one-eighteenth the size of the U.S., yet it received nearly as much money as American officials. Why would Pfizer invest so heavily in Canadian contacts when public health agencies here typically follow U.S. guidance anyway? What positions did these officials hold, and what decisions were influenced, from vaccine procurement to lockdown policies to public messaging? As it stands now, under Canada’s conflict of interest rules, public officials must disclose certain financial relationships, but there’s no easily searchable public record showing where Pfizer’s $11 million went. At Rebel News, we’re filing Access to Information requests to uncover this paper trail. Canadians deserve clarity on whether those shaping public health policy had undisclosed financial ties to a company profiting from the crisis. If Pfizer’s payments to Canadian PIGOs were legitimate, disclosure should be straightforward, but if money influenced decisions during one of the most consequential public health crises in modern history, Canadians have a right to know and to demand accountability. The questions are clear, but the answers remain in the hands of those who received the money.

Rebel News

59,999 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

A teen who was assaulted and slammed by a Warren police officer during booking has filed a $50 million lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed this week by Fieger Law. Matthew Rodriguez, 48, an officer with 14 years on the force, was charged Friday with assault and battery charges. Warren police announced Monday that he had been fired According to the lawsuit, the teen suffered physical and mental damage due to excessive force, and the city of Warren failed to properly train the officer. "Officer Matthew, with the specific intent to intimidate and/or harass Plaintiff, as a result of his race and/or ethnicity, caused physical contact with Plaintiff by striking him in the head and/or face with a fist and pulling him off the ground by his hair," the lawsuit reads. The lawsuit also says that the two other officers in the video failed to intervene and help the teen. “This is one of the most flagrant cases of police misconduct I’ve seen in my entire career as a trial attorney. The sheer violence and disregard for human life that these three officers showed is despicable and cannot be tolerated," said James Harrington of Fieger Law. The incident happened early this week at the Warren police department. The video shows the officer punching and grabbing the 19-year-old by his locs before slamming & launching him into his cell. Warren Police Commissioner Bill Dwyer says an investigation was launched after the two officers in the video stepped up and told a supervisor about the incident. One officer was telling Rodriguez "That's enough" multiple times in an attempt to make the officer stop, Dwyer said. At first, they did not know why the officer was attacking him. Within a week, the officer was arrested, charged, and put on unpaid administrative leave, said Dwyer. The officer in the video also was out of policy and was not wearing bodycam. The officer has a lengthy history of alleged accessive force. He currently has two pending lawsuits.
1:05

A teen who was assaulted and slammed by a Warren police officer during booking has filed a $50 million lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed this week by Fieger Law. Matthew Rodriguez, 48, an officer with 14 years on the force, was charged Friday with assault and battery charges. Warren police announced Monday that he had been fired According to the lawsuit, the teen suffered physical and mental damage due to excessive force, and the city of Warren failed to properly train the officer. "Officer Matthew, with the specific intent to intimidate and/or harass Plaintiff, as a result of his race and/or ethnicity, caused physical contact with Plaintiff by striking him in the head and/or face with a fist and pulling him off the ground by his hair," the lawsuit reads. The lawsuit also says that the two other officers in the video failed to intervene and help the teen. “This is one of the most flagrant cases of police misconduct I’ve seen in my entire career as a trial attorney. The sheer violence and disregard for human life that these three officers showed is despicable and cannot be tolerated," said James Harrington of Fieger Law. The incident happened early this week at the Warren police department. The video shows the officer punching and grabbing the 19-year-old by his locs before slamming & launching him into his cell. Warren Police Commissioner Bill Dwyer says an investigation was launched after the two officers in the video stepped up and told a supervisor about the incident. One officer was telling Rodriguez "That's enough" multiple times in an attempt to make the officer stop, Dwyer said. At first, they did not know why the officer was attacking him. Within a week, the officer was arrested, charged, and put on unpaid administrative leave, said Dwyer. The officer in the video also was out of policy and was not wearing bodycam. The officer has a lengthy history of alleged accessive force. He currently has two pending lawsuits.

Music is Life

1,891,820 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

U.N. Took No Action Against Fired UNRWA Terrorists Involved in Oct. 7 Massacre: Q: “I’m wondering, in connection with UNRWA employees, I think there were nine of them fired because of their involvement in the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israeli civilians. Has the UN taken any further steps to hold those employees accountable, either criminally or civilly in court?” 🇺🇳 UN Spokesperson: “I believe the situation is that they did, in fact, dismiss those people in which there was credible evidence linking them to Hamas. As you know, the UN stands ready to waive immunity of staff or former staff as needed in the prosecution of criminal investigations by national authorities.” Q: “Well, what I’m talking about in this case is whether the UN itself—because it does have this legal capacity to itself bring the suit—whether the UN has been proactive in seeking legal accountability for what those fired employees did, and if not, why not?” 🇺🇳: “You seem to misunderstand. The UN does not have capacity to have its own criminal trials. Those are conducted by national jurisdictions. We cooperate with those national jurisdictions, including by waiving immunity as needed.” Q: “I think you’re misunderstanding my question. The UN has legal capacity to be a plaintiff, to bring a lawsuit in a court, international court. And I’m wondering whether it has exercised that authority proactively in the name of the United Nations against these fired employees who acted recklessly and outside the scope of their authority, and in some cases, created some damage to the reputation of the UN.” 🇺🇳: “What the UN has done, as I’ve stated, is that it took action in terms of firing the employees and then cooperating with national authorities in terms of investigation into them. Yes, Stefano, and then Abdelhamid…”
2:27

U.N. Took No Action Against Fired UNRWA Terrorists Involved in Oct. 7 Massacre: Q: “I’m wondering, in connection with UNRWA employees, I think there were nine of them fired because of their involvement in the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israeli civilians. Has the UN taken any further steps to hold those employees accountable, either criminally or civilly in court?” 🇺🇳 UN Spokesperson: “I believe the situation is that they did, in fact, dismiss those people in which there was credible evidence linking them to Hamas. As you know, the UN stands ready to waive immunity of staff or former staff as needed in the prosecution of criminal investigations by national authorities.” Q: “Well, what I’m talking about in this case is whether the UN itself—because it does have this legal capacity to itself bring the suit—whether the UN has been proactive in seeking legal accountability for what those fired employees did, and if not, why not?” 🇺🇳: “You seem to misunderstand. The UN does not have capacity to have its own criminal trials. Those are conducted by national jurisdictions. We cooperate with those national jurisdictions, including by waiving immunity as needed.” Q: “I think you’re misunderstanding my question. The UN has legal capacity to be a plaintiff, to bring a lawsuit in a court, international court. And I’m wondering whether it has exercised that authority proactively in the name of the United Nations against these fired employees who acted recklessly and outside the scope of their authority, and in some cases, created some damage to the reputation of the UN.” 🇺🇳: “What the UN has done, as I’ve stated, is that it took action in terms of firing the employees and then cooperating with national authorities in terms of investigation into them. Yes, Stefano, and then Abdelhamid…”

UN Watch

19,899 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

SANJIV BHATT: WHEN LAW, POWER, AND PUBLIC TRUST COLLIDE The accompanying material presents the second part of the story surrounding former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt, focusing on allegations linked to the 2002 Gujarat riots, the custodial death case from 1990, and the sharply contrasting narratives that continue to divide public opinion. According to the source, Bhatt claimed that he possessed information relating to the alleged killers of former Gujarat minister Haren Pandya and that he faced pressure to destroy evidence. He also alleged that he repeatedly warned authorities about the deteriorating situation during the 2002 Gujarat riots, including the danger faced by people at Gulberg Society. These allegations were later placed before investigative agencies and judicial forums. The video also notes that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) did not find sufficient evidence to support these allegations and gave a clean chit to the then Chief Minister, a conclusion later accepted by the Supreme Court. These findings remain an important part of the legal record, even as critics continue to question aspects of the investigation. The second major issue concerns the 1990 custodial death of Prabhudas Vaishnani. The source states that the case was initially closed after investigation but was reopened years later. In 2019, a trial court convicted Bhatt and sentenced him to life imprisonment, a conviction that was upheld by the Gujarat High Court in 2024, while the Supreme Court declined to grant relief. The courts relied on witness testimony and medical evidence in reaching their conclusions. The video also describes Bhatt's tenure as Superintendent of Sabarmati Central Jail, claiming that he introduced reforms that improved prison conditions and earned the respect of many inmates. The source presents this as evidence of the complexity of his public image. Ultimately, the story portrays two competing narratives. One views Sanjiv Bhatt as an honest police officer who suffered for challenging those in power. The other holds that the judicial process established his criminal liability in the custodial death case and that court verdicts must be respected. Whatever one's perspective, the case underscores the importance of independent investigations, judicial transparency, accountability of public officials, and public confidence in the rule of law. In a constitutional democracy, both the pursuit of truth and respect for due process are essential. Where questions remain, they should be addressed through credible evidence, transparent institutions, and impartial justice—not through political loyalty or public emotion alone. Source: Facebook Video:
5:55

SANJIV BHATT: WHEN LAW, POWER, AND PUBLIC TRUST COLLIDE The accompanying material presents the second part of the story surrounding former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt, focusing on allegations linked to the 2002 Gujarat riots, the custodial death case from 1990, and the sharply contrasting narratives that continue to divide public opinion. According to the source, Bhatt claimed that he possessed information relating to the alleged killers of former Gujarat minister Haren Pandya and that he faced pressure to destroy evidence. He also alleged that he repeatedly warned authorities about the deteriorating situation during the 2002 Gujarat riots, including the danger faced by people at Gulberg Society. These allegations were later placed before investigative agencies and judicial forums. The video also notes that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) did not find sufficient evidence to support these allegations and gave a clean chit to the then Chief Minister, a conclusion later accepted by the Supreme Court. These findings remain an important part of the legal record, even as critics continue to question aspects of the investigation. The second major issue concerns the 1990 custodial death of Prabhudas Vaishnani. The source states that the case was initially closed after investigation but was reopened years later. In 2019, a trial court convicted Bhatt and sentenced him to life imprisonment, a conviction that was upheld by the Gujarat High Court in 2024, while the Supreme Court declined to grant relief. The courts relied on witness testimony and medical evidence in reaching their conclusions. The video also describes Bhatt's tenure as Superintendent of Sabarmati Central Jail, claiming that he introduced reforms that improved prison conditions and earned the respect of many inmates. The source presents this as evidence of the complexity of his public image. Ultimately, the story portrays two competing narratives. One views Sanjiv Bhatt as an honest police officer who suffered for challenging those in power. The other holds that the judicial process established his criminal liability in the custodial death case and that court verdicts must be respected. Whatever one's perspective, the case underscores the importance of independent investigations, judicial transparency, accountability of public officials, and public confidence in the rule of law. In a constitutional democracy, both the pursuit of truth and respect for due process are essential. Where questions remain, they should be addressed through credible evidence, transparent institutions, and impartial justice—not through political loyalty or public emotion alone. Source: Facebook Video:

Ashok Dadhwal

32,687 просмотров • 13 дней назад

A landmark lawsuit filed by physicians against the CDC exposes a staggering admission: the entire childhood vaccine schedule—72 doses from birth to age 18—has NEVER been studied for its collective long-term effects. The CDC concedes this critical point. While individual vaccines are tested, the synergistic effect of administering them together as mandated remains a vast, uncharted scientific territory. The lawsuit reveals these individual trials often only track short-term outcomes. The plaintiffs' demand is clear: the CDC must either conduct a comprehensive study of the full schedule or reclassify vaccines. Currently, most childhood vaccines hold a Category A status, making them a requirement. The physicians argue they should be moved to Category B, which allows for personalized medical decisions between parents and doctors, acknowledging that a one-size-fits-all mandate is not evidence-based. The CDC's justification for this lack of safety data? They claim it would be difficult to find an unvaccinated control group and that such a long-term study would be too expensive. Critics find these excuses hollow, pointing to a large population of unvaccinated children and questioning the allocation of the agency's billion-dollar budget. This case forces a fundamental question: Why is the foundational public health policy for our children built on an unproven assumption? The outcome of this lawsuit could redefine informed consent and medical choice for a generation. Follow for updates as this critical legal battle unfolds.
2:54

A landmark lawsuit filed by physicians against the CDC exposes a staggering admission: the entire childhood vaccine schedule—72 doses from birth to age 18—has NEVER been studied for its collective long-term effects. The CDC concedes this critical point. While individual vaccines are tested, the synergistic effect of administering them together as mandated remains a vast, uncharted scientific territory. The lawsuit reveals these individual trials often only track short-term outcomes. The plaintiffs' demand is clear: the CDC must either conduct a comprehensive study of the full schedule or reclassify vaccines. Currently, most childhood vaccines hold a Category A status, making them a requirement. The physicians argue they should be moved to Category B, which allows for personalized medical decisions between parents and doctors, acknowledging that a one-size-fits-all mandate is not evidence-based. The CDC's justification for this lack of safety data? They claim it would be difficult to find an unvaccinated control group and that such a long-term study would be too expensive. Critics find these excuses hollow, pointing to a large population of unvaccinated children and questioning the allocation of the agency's billion-dollar budget. This case forces a fundamental question: Why is the foundational public health policy for our children built on an unproven assumption? The outcome of this lawsuit could redefine informed consent and medical choice for a generation. Follow for updates as this critical legal battle unfolds.

Camus

732,248 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

BREAKING - In an exclusive webinar presentation and slide show for the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms), Dr. Regina Watteel breaks down and clearly lays out the irrefutable damning evidence that she uncovered and exposes in her recently published preprint paper, which systematically dismantles every major piece of evidence used to justify Canada’s 2021–22 COVID vaccine mandates and travel restrictions. Dr. Watteel's paper is currently under international peer review. Jay Bhattacharya, we need to get as many eyes on this around the globe as soon as possible, so please share this presentation with, Secretary Kennedy, Dr Aseem Malhotra, Dr. Mehmet Oz, Robert W Malone, MD, Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH®, and all of your colleagues - Thank you. Download the full preprint paper here: For more startling evidence, read Dr. Watteel's best selling book, Fisman's Fraud - The Rise of Canadian Hate Science: Dr. Watteel's research is 100% independent & unfunded, so if you feel so inclined, please help support her work: Full webinar video can be found here on the JCCF's website: Natali Morris Trish Wood Noé Chartier Neil Oliver Conrad Black Dr Jordan B Peterson Tammy Peterson Joe Rogan Tucker Carlson CaitlinSinclairTV
45:16

BREAKING - In an exclusive webinar presentation and slide show for the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms), Dr. Regina Watteel breaks down and clearly lays out the irrefutable damning evidence that she uncovered and exposes in her recently published preprint paper, which systematically dismantles every major piece of evidence used to justify Canada’s 2021–22 COVID vaccine mandates and travel restrictions. Dr. Watteel's paper is currently under international peer review. Jay Bhattacharya, we need to get as many eyes on this around the globe as soon as possible, so please share this presentation with, Secretary Kennedy, Dr Aseem Malhotra, Dr. Mehmet Oz, Robert W Malone, MD, Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH®, and all of your colleagues - Thank you. Download the full preprint paper here: For more startling evidence, read Dr. Watteel's best selling book, Fisman's Fraud - The Rise of Canadian Hate Science: Dr. Watteel's research is 100% independent & unfunded, so if you feel so inclined, please help support her work: Full webinar video can be found here on the JCCF's website: Natali Morris Trish Wood Noé Chartier Neil Oliver Conrad Black Dr Jordan B Peterson Tammy Peterson Joe Rogan Tucker Carlson CaitlinSinclairTV

Shaun Rickard

28,557 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад