Dr. David Martin w/ Vaccine Choice Canada: On Canada’s Role in Producing the Weaponized “Covid” Injections Which Have Seriously Harmed and Killed Many — While Bought-And-Paid-For Public Officials Continue to Lie and Terrorize the Public

 

In the video below, Ted Kuntz, president of Vaccine Choice Canada, has a powerful conversation with Dr. David Martin regarding Canadian involvement in the development of the highly-toxic “covid vaccines”.  Dr. Martin adds to information he has previously shared in other interviews, revealing additional details about this global criminal conspiracy, treason and “willful act of crimes against humanity” by public officials.  Transcript highlights are provided below the video.

 

Dr. David E. Martin Drops Shocking Covid Info on Canadians! 

by Ted Kuntz, Vaccine Choice Canada
August 21, 2021



Video is available at Vaccine Choice Canada Rumble and BitChute channels.

 

Transcript Highlights prepared by Truth Comes to Light

David Martin

In 1998 we did the first ever audit of the patent systems of the United States. of Canada. of Australia, of the European Union and elsewhere. And what we found, quite tragically, is that an enormous number of crimes were being committed using the patent system to, in fact, stand in the way of progress — not to advance the innovation useful arts for which they were established.

And, specifically, in 1999 we uncovered what became the roots of our awareness of the current pandemic that we’ve been exposed to. In 1999 we uncovered the biological and chemical weapons patents that were proliferating around the country and around the world.

And in 1999, going into 2000, we first reported on the weaponization of biologic materials in violation of biological and chemical weapons treaties. And among those weaponizations was in our first published report, for a number of intelligence and law enforcement community, our identification of the chimeric alteration and recombinant technologies around coronavirus — which in 1999 were first developed to serve as a means by which we could build a vaccine vector, at the time thought to be useful for the treatment or prevention of HIV.

The problem with that work was it very specifically, beginning in 1999 with NIAID’s funding, directed by Anthony Fauci. It was very clear that what they had done, in their gain-of-function research in 1999, was take what was a normally occurring pathogen and turn it into what was then referred to as an ‘infectious non-transmissible pathogen”. In other words, they actually made it more dangerous to the human. And they made it more dangerous so that it could be used as a potential for vaccine vectors going forward. And that was in 1999…

…

This particular injection that we’re dealing with right now — this particular injection is an mRNA model, computer generated, not derived from a living or an organic material — this is a computer simulation of an mRNA strand which was thought to be a means by which we could turn the human body into a pathogen creator.

By that I mean the formation of the coronavirus-associated spike protein. And for the first time in vaccine history — and once again, I’m using that term because it’s what we’re calling it — and it is not, in fact, a vaccine. It’s a gene therapy to create a bioweapon. But for the first time in vaccine history, we are relying on the immune system to respond to a pathogen creation that we first inject into people.

So, the fact of the matter is, we have an unprecedented outcome. And if we go back and look at the patent record, if we go back and look at the laboratory record, and if we go back and look at the funding record, we see that the current pathogen called SARS-CoV-2 was clearly chimerically altered and was clearly chimerically developed in the laboratory so that it can be used both as a weapon and as a medical countermeasure in 2015.

University North Carolina at Chapel Hill — and we reported on this quite significantly — funded by NIAID, developed and violated the International Convention on Biological and Chemical Weapons — by taking a foreign uploaded model of SARS-CoV-2, and turning it into a recombinant, chimeric pathogen — which they said, and I quote, “was poised for human emergence”. And poised for human emergence not in 2019 as we’ve been told by the propaganda — but that publication was published in February of 2016. Published from work that was done from 2013 to 2015.

There is no novel coronavirus. There is a weaponized version of a computer simulation of a fragment that is, in fact, modelled to be the spike protein analogous to what we’ve been told is the spike protein associated with SARS-CoV-2.

The problem is we do not have anything that is actually derived from an actual pathogen. And we do not have anything that’s actually responsive to the immune system that was, in fact, responsive to a pathogen.

This is a computer simulation meant to harm and destroy what we call humanity.

 

Ted Kuntz

You know, David, just listening to you — I mean nothing that you said is new — and yet to hear it again still shocks me. That we are at this place, at this time, globally killing humanity.

 

David Martin

Yes. And, according to Pfizer, we have what they refer to in their own documents as an “acceptable death rate”.

I don’t know how many of you can sit with that statement. But the notion that there is something called an “acceptable death rate” is something I find morally repugnant.

But I find, more interesting than that, Canada’s role in this — which has achieved almost no fundamental coverage in any media or even in the counter culture media. And most Canadians don’t realize that Canada itself — and not just Canada but specifically the University of British Columbia — beginning in 2005 realized that, if it was going to be relevant in the biotech space, it had to be the country and it had to be the research hot-bed for establishing the delivery mechanism whereby mRNA vaccines could be developed.

The University of British Columbia, working in partnership with the Inex Pharmaceuticals in 2005, developed the lipid nanoparticle technology that ultimately became the basis of the formation of a company in British Columbia called Tekmira Pharmaceuticals.

In 2009 Tekmira had a very interesting set of challenges. And this was commensurate with the 2008 declaration by the World Health Organization that the coronavirus was, in fact, irradicated as a condition associated with SARS.

And because of the lack of funding, in 2008 both Canada and the United States struggled with the fact that they had developed the technology that was supposed to be for a vaccination of coronavirus and for a number of other viral models. But the problem was they ran out of funding.

And so there was a series of reorganizations. And in those reorganizations, two companies were formed: Arbutus Pharmaceuticals and Acuitas Pharmaceuticals. Acuitas is the one that, unfortunately, the government of Canada has not told the citizens of Canada is the reason why both Moderna and Pfizer have the ability to deliver the current bioweapons program.

And I think most people would be shocked to find out that when you have the prime minister of Canada getting up in front of a camera in the spring of 2020 telling the world that the only way forward is to allegedly return to a new normal when there is a vaccine.

What Trudeau did not tell the public was that he had a financial stake in the outcome of that being the selected pathway forward.

What he didn’t tell the Canadian public was that Canada’s blight on the moral record of what has been historically an amazingly wonderful set of innovations coming out of the Canadian research institutions and research laboratories, in fact created the mechanism whereby you could take mRNA and inject it into a population and try to stabilize that injection.

The lipid nanoparticle technology that was developed, and ultimately passed to Arbutus, was the subject of a licensing agreement that was made with Acuitas Pharmaceuticals in British Columbia (private company) who conveniently had very little reporting requirements. And Acuitas misappropriated the lipid nanoparticle technology and ultimately made it available to both by BioNTech and Moderna.

It is absolutely critical for us to understand that without the Canadian contribution of the lipid nanoparticle technology from British Columbia we would have no meaningful response in the form of what’s being called a vaccination and we would not have a bioweapons program.

That’s a pretty important statement to make to an audience largely of Canadians. And it would be very interesting to find out why it is that Trudeau has not admitted to the public, and has been unwilling to actually put into the public record, the, what we know to be. at least billions of dollars of concessions. And it could be — I mean if we look at just Pfizer-BioNTech’s own situation — we know that in the case of Pfizer-BioNTech, that last quarter alone somewhere between eight and nine billion dollars came in the form of the revenue off of all of the interventions that are being sold off as as coronavirus vaccines.

In the last quarter alone, this would place this tiny little British Columbia company — which in 2009, people, was functionally owned by one person. I mean we need to kind of bear that in mind — one person actually owns this company. Thomas Madden who is the CEO of Acuitas –in 2009 he was largely the sole owner of it. He actually appropriated the technology in a labor dispute, which functionally was a trade secret argument around this.

And when we actually look at what happened in 2016 — and this is a very important point, people — in 2016 somebody in Canada knew that there was something going to happen with this particular vaccine platform. Because in 2016 Arbutus Pharmaceuticals and Acuitas Pharmaceuticals got into litigation on whether or not the license for the lipid nanoparticle technology that Acuitas had from Arbutus was, in fact, capable of being extended to other pathogens.

And in 2016 there was a significant amount of litigation and the license that Acuitas had to use lipid nanoparticle technology, developed by Tekmira, developed by Arbutus, the license was actually terminated in 2016. That coincides with the weaponization of SARS-CoV-2…

…There’s no public information to tell us what precisely transpired in 2016 — which allowed this particular dispute to erupt between these two Canadian firms, all based in the history of Tekmira. But somewhere in 2016 somebody knew that there was a lottery win to be had.

And my guess is that somewhere inside of the Canadian health system, and somewhere inside NIAID and the Vaccine Research Center, and somewhere inside the UNC Chapel Hill records, we will find that Trudeau government was fully aware by at least 2018 that we were going to have a significant pandemic requiring this core technology to be unleashed on the world — courtesy of the Canadian collaboration on lipid nanoparticles.

And there’s no question that by the time we get to 2019, March 19 specifically of 2019, we know that Arbutus, Moderna, Pfizer-BioNtech and others were, in fact, working on a vaccine for respiratory pathogen. And we know that information because they amended their patent filings to say exactly that.

 

Ted Kuntz

So let me just unpacked this a little bit, David.

Your revealing evidence here — that this technology has been in the works in Canadian University of British Columbia, supported by government of Canada, for a number of years now.

It was clear that there was a goldmine to be had here because there was a fight over it.

And when Trudeau announced in 2020 that we needed a vaccine to get back to normal, he didn’t say ‘Listen we’re part of the solution here. We’ve developed technology is gonna save the world.’ He didn’t talk about how great Canadian technology is.

I know you don’t like to speculate, but why would he not celebrate and announce that to the world?

 

David Martin

Well, I think it’s very clear that he has, for a significant period of time, become extremely compromised in the fact that he pretends, on the one hand, to be a victim of a public health crisis and, on the other hand, not unlike the governor of New York, the spokesperson for the alleged level-headed response of draconian lockdown and countermeasure approaches — which create the market demand that says that we’re going to remove civil liberties, we’re gonna remove the right for people to actually engage in any civil discourse. But, in fact, what we’re gonna do is pretend like we are somehow the victims of a natural set of events that have unfolded.

The fact of the matter is, he knows very good and well because he was party to — and the government certainly was party to agreements with Pfizer, with Moderna and with others — where there was no question that Canadian firms knew good and well that the lipid nanoparticle technology was actually a frontline contender for a respiratory pathogen simulation.

And, by no later than September of 2019, the Canadian government was fully aware and participating in what was supposed to be a global exercise to test the readiness of the world to deal with a respiratory pathogen pandemic that was planned and published in September of 2019.

And the Canadian government was very much a party of that. So there’s no chance that this was not fully known, fully anticipated, fully premeditated.

And there is no question that the script that Trudeau read from was a script that was in fact marketing what would become a federal restraint of trade violation in Canada — which was a very important restraint of trade.

By making the allegation, before we even knew what the actual pathogen was technically, what we know is: that Trudeau’s statements biased the market place against the consumer, so that there was, in fact, declared by the government a single pathway, a single market opportunity, out of this particular pandemic.

And by telling the world that the only way forward was a vaccine, what that did was, it actually precluded the use of life-saving countermeasures that were medicines that could have helped and could have supported the health of people.

And instead of that, we watched people die while we were waiting for an economic windfall. And that economic windfall is going to a private corporation whose accountability is not to a shareholder, is not anything that has public visibility. It has the private benefit of being a private British Columbia company they can be used as a front for all manner of things.

And it is, in fact, without question, participating in one of the greatest crimes in terms of racketeering and collusion that this world has ever seen.

 

Ted Kuntz

Well, David, that was the question in my head. What kind of crimes are these? I mean this is treason, amongst other things. This is criminal. This is homicide.

 

David Martin

Yeah, and it’s important for us to really focus in on this because most people have have heard me talk about the racketeering and antitrust laws that are violated. And both the U.S. and Canada have very robust antitrust laws.

The fact of the matter is there’s three fundamental elements of antitrust and all three are violated.

The first is that you cannot do what’s called market allocation. In other words, you cannot use either a public or a private institution where colluding parties get together and say we are going to tell the consumer what their only option is. That’s a market allocation violation of a racketeering thing.

You also cannot suppress information and coerce people into accepting a single scenario when the market forces are not at play. In other words, you cannot suspend from market consideration other alternatives — so that you pick the only winner in which, by the way, you’ve already placed bets on the table in the form of funding and you also have an economic gain.

And you can guarantee yourself that the Canadian government knows very good and well that it has huge economic gains to gain from the use of the lipid nanoparticle technology. And it had everything to lose if the lipid nanoparticle technology didn’t win.

So we know that the collusion was there. We know that the racketeering was there. We also know that there was insider information, non-transparent transactions from what’s called interlocking directorates — where individuals who have the ability to set prices, to allocate research dollars and to ultimately set acquisition policy to take that technology on board — is in fact by very definition the racketeering that is anti-competitive, antitrust.

Now why is this important? It’s important because these are all felony violations. And what makes a felony violation far more important than a civil crime, is that a felony violation actually pierces the veil of corporate liability.

And this is a very important point, people need to understand. The reason why I’m so obsessed with going after felonies, and not going after civil cases, is because the felony violation of antitrust laws which is prima facie established in this pandemic, would, in fact, mean that the manufacturers would not have the protections provided here in the United States under the 1986 Act, under the PREP Act and, in Canada, under those acts equivalents.

In other words, no corporation gets civil liability immunity if they are complicit in a felony crime.

And once we establish that that is, in fact, the case –which by the way does not require legal expertise — this is a prima facie case, meaning the facts present themselves — there is no question that this was an act of racketeering and collusion.

There is no question that this is an act of willful manipulation of market forces in violation of statutes both sides of the border. And the fact of the matter is, the minute this becomes felony violation, all of the liability flows back. Civil and criminal liability flows back to the manufacturer.

And I can guarantee that the day Pfizer and Moderna have to be on the hook for the lives they’re harming and the lives that they’re taking — there is no question that the entire terror campaign would shut down the next day…

…

The civil society of the world has been duped to believe that we should be arguing about face masks and social distancing, whether businesses stay open or not. We have been duped into having a conversation that is the wrong conversation.

There is a crime that is being committed. Our public officials are complicit in that crime. And there is no question, as a civilization, we owe it to ourselves and future generations to make sure that we are not silent while those who are in positions of elected authority are committing willful acts of crimes against humanity.

 

Ted Kuntz

With this information should there not be a criminal investigation starting this minute?

 

David Martin

There absolutely should be. Here in the United States we have the unfortunate reality of not having the benefits of some of what you guys have in Crown law. But the fact of the matter is, in Canada as well as the rest of the Commonwealth, you actually have a mechanism where you can allege and actually initiate criminal proceedings without relying on the Justice Department we have in the U.S.

We know that our DOJ here in the United States is entirely corrupt. We know that they have been willfully incapable of prosecuting any of the known crimes — which by the way, include here in the United States. One of the one of the best known crimes, that apparently we can now get away with, which is lying to Congress.

As most of you now Anthony Fauci has now on two documented occasions actually lied to Congress — which is a violation of…Section 1001 of the Criminal Statute. But lying to Congress is something that Fauci started doing in the fall of 2020 when he willfully failed to disclose the financial interests that NIAID had in a number of the technologies that were being promoted in this particular pandemic, failed to disclose NIAID and NIH’s financial interest in a request that was made by Congress.

In a report submitted to Congress, Anthony Fauci lied about his financial position which is, in fact, a felony…

…

We know that there are countless crimes which are felony violations on both sides of the border.

And we know that it will not be until the public forces this into action that any action will be taken…

…

There is no question that your prime minister has violated, not only the laws of Canada, but has participated in a bioweapons treaty violation.

And let me be very precise on why I say that, because when I make an allegation it has to stick. And the allegation comes from the definition of a bioweapons program.

Inside the definition of biological and chemical weapons, the manufacture or the ability to provide the means by which you manufacture a biological weapon, defined under the statute as a fragment or a modeled fragment of a pathogen known to cause human harm.

The fact that it is Canadian-company technology that is required to deliver this particular weapon means that the government of Canada is complicit in violating biological and chemical weapons laws. And that falls to the prime minister. So when I make the allegation I’m dead serious about it…

 

Ted Kuntz

…The impact of this, the consequence of this, is so significant. It needs to be heard. It needs to be broadcast from coast to coast.

We need to recognize what we’re facing. And we’re facing the active crimes against humanity as we speak…

 

David Martin

…I am unwilling to be silent because I know that I actually have information, and I have compiled information.

And the bad news for people like Trudeau is, if you think that this is the only piece of information I have on things that he’s been involved in, that’s the tip of the iceberg.

The fact of the matter is, I’m very comfortable making public allegations against public seated people in authority because I happen to know that this is not one situation, this is not isolated. This is the beginning of a contest and I would be more than delighted to find out how deep they want to go head-to-head with me on what I know about their actions…

…

In 2014 the veterinarian Peter Daszak, who ran EcoHealth Alliance, the company that has been criticized for its role in laundering NIAID funds to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. But it’s important for you to all realize that in 2014 Peter Daszak specifically said at a public meeting, ‘We need the public to accept a medical countermeasure for pan coronavirus vaccine.’ And I’m quoting from him. ‘We need the media to create the hype and we need to use the hype to our advantage. Investors will follow if they see profit at the end of a process.’

Those are the published words of the guy who was the Wuhan Institute of Virology SARS-CoV-2 architect…

…

And if we, in fact, have the perpetrators of this crime telling us that they are going to do the crime, why are we left sitting at a gate in 2020 or 2021 going ‘Oh, man that just sounds like a conspiracy’.

Well, it sounds like a conspiracy because it is a criminal conspiracy. It is a racketeering conspiracy meant to harm and destroy human life…

 

Ted Kuntz

David, could you connect some dots for us? Why is this injection so important to their agenda? What piece does it play in the larger agenda?

 

David Martin

Well, once again, let’s go back and visit that statements made by Peter Daszak.

As you all know we had a period of time where the idea of a vaccine became quite popular among a certain ilk within the established public health community.

We know that, beginning with the 1986 Act, there was a means by which pharmaceutical companies were very interested in sheltering themselves from liability because they knew they were entering a phase where the increased danger of their actions was going to ultimately mean that business was not viable.

If you know you’re going to harm a population, you need to make sure that you do the groundwork to make sure, from a litigation standpoint, you move yourself as far away from prosecution as possible.

We know that, beginning in 1986, there was a commitment on the part of the people who bought Congress, bought elected officials in the U.S., in Canada and around Europe — and in 1986 there was a willful act to take what was supposedly a loss-leading public health product, like vaccines, and turn it into a money-maker.

And it turns out, it’s a great idea to do that. Because if what you’re going to do is ultimately trying to sell people on a whole host of other pharmaceuticals, it is exceptionally good to build the autoimmune disease pattern which builds habituation to classic pharmaceutical intervention. That began in 1986.

And as we moved into the 1990s, it became very clear that the HIV campaign, which was supposed to be the giant payday — where we had the ability to somehow finally get everybody to be afraid of the pathogen — didn’t pay off very well because it was classified as a lifestyle-oriented disease. And then what we had in the mid 1990s was the birth of the obsession about what was called a universal influenza vaccine.

The desire on the part of industry was to make sure that every person would get addicted to taking the influenza shot every year. It’s a great money maker. It’s a wonderful way for the industry to keep jabbing people on an annual basis.

And the problem with that is, as we all know, the influenza vaccine was far less effective than people hoped it would be. And the public, not surprisingly, wasn’t willing to fall for it — which led to a series of meetings which took place at the NIAID advisory council, together with international partners, to come up with a way to build a mechanism whereby we could convince the world that we needed to have a universal vaccine program for the world.

The World Health Organization, NIAID, the Vaccine Research Center, and their international collaborators got together and said, basically what we need is — we need to have an event which allows a mass campaign of terror to be unleashed, so that the public accepts something.

And so they went down the pathway of a universal influenza and a universal coronavirus vaccine.

Tragically, there is, in fact, no evidence that either of the pathogens was isolated. There was no evidence that we had a basis to create this mass campaign of terror. And, even in what was reportedly a pandemic, we actually didn’t have people getting sick from the pathogen.

One of the reasons why the World Health Organization made it abundantly clear that “covid” could be declared with no laboratory evidence is because, if in fact there was a requirement for laboratory evidence, we would actually have to test for a virus.

But you didn’t have to to have Covid-19. You had to have a series of clinical symptoms.

Ironically, what we have now is a situation where we are, in fact, injecting people — and this is where we need to get very clear on this and remember, people, if you don’t hear anything else, remember the word vaccine is misleading.

What is happening is the mRNA computer simulation of an S1 spike protein, thought to be modeled off of the possible SAR-Cov-2 — and so you got all of those preconditions.

This is not a virus. This is not to disrupt a virus. This is actually an injection to make your body produce a foreign pathogen. That’s what this injection is…

…

Every single public statement that says that this is a covid vaccine is a lie…

…

We do not have an injection that is, in fact, associated with the actual pathogen model that is called SARS-CoV-2. And, as a result, we must call it what it is — a foreign-supplied computer model, delivered to the world from China at some point in the early hours of 2020, sometime between January 7 and January 20.

It is a computer model of a simulated pathogen which was simulated from sample populations of as many as 40 people prior to the 30th of December. That model that was uploaded to servers around the world was then used to identify a computer model of what might be the mRNA strand that would code the spike protein…

…

Our elected officials have willfully coerced the population, using acts of domestic terror…

 

Ted Kuntz

What can we do now? What’s the most important thing we ought to be focusing our energy and our attention on now?

 

David Martin

Well, as a Commonwealth country, what I would say is that you need to reexamine your statutory basis of action and make sure that your members of parliament are inundated with the information that we’re sharing right now.

Complicity with allowing government-committed crime in Canada is something that must, must be done immediately. And if you are living north of the U.S./Canada border, you know, your member of parliament must be informed that there is an active racketeering and criminal conspiracy that is actively harming the public and it is using the resources, the wealth, and the innovation of Canada to violate international and domestic bioweapons and bioterrorism statutes.

So, the first thing is to make sure that people hear this message.

The second thing is to hold them accountable…

…

The crimes that are being committed are racketeering, bioweapons and, in fact, at least reckless homicide, if not willful murder of massive members of our population. And we cannot sit idly by and allow that to persist…

…

It actually is human to stand with the truth. And I am delighted to stand, not only with the certainty of what I know, but I’m delighted that we have the thousands of people who are participating in this conversation — who are ultimately going to now have a firm foundation upon which they can stand to make sure that they have the ability to have the candle of truth against the torrent of the darkness of those who wish to destroy us.

We will, as we the people, we will prevail…

 

---

See related:

Dr. David Martin w/ Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: “This, My Friends, Is the Definition of Criminal Conspiracy…This Is Not a Theory. This Is Evidence.”

Dr. David Martin w/ Stew Peters: There Is No Virus. This Is Organized Crime. 

Dr. David Martin Releases ‘The Fauci/COVID-19 Dossier” | 205 Pages, 22 Years of Research

---

Connect with David Martin

Connect with Vaccine Choice Canada

Informed Consent: You’re a Lab Rat

by Dr. David Martin, David Martin World
May 26, 2020

 

[TCTL Editor’s Note: Several US readers shared links to information, from a number of sources, regarding the use of Standard Form 95 to legally challenge the unfolding medical tyranny.  Based on clarity, prepared documents, and strength of understanding, I selected the work of Dr. David Martin to share here.

TCTL provides a partial transcript to use as reference after viewing Dr. David Martin’s video. The original video has been mirrored to TCTL Bitchute channel in the event that it is removed from YouTube.

Please note that this posting is not legal advice. Nothing found on this website will ever be offered as legal advice. This is shared as reference and potential tool for your use. Do your own research and take responsibility for your own actions.

From The United States Department of Justice on the use of SF 95:

Standard Form 95 is used to present claims against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) for property damage, personal injury, or death allegedly caused by a federal employee’s negligence or wrongful act or omission occurring within the scope of the employee’s federal employment. These claims must be presented to the Federal agency whose employee conduct gave rise to the injury.

Standard Form 95 is not required to present a claim under the FTCA, but it is a convenient format for supplying the information necessary to bring an FTCA claim. Please note that a completed form must state a claim for money damages in a “sum certain” amount (that is, a specific amount) claimed for personal injury, death, or injury to or loss of property. In addition, if a sum certain is not specified in Standard Form 95 block 12d, or in accompanying information, a submission cannot be considered a valid presentation of a claim. The completed Standard Form 95 must be presented to the appropriate federal agency within two years after the claim accrues.

See Dr. David Martin’s CLAIM FOR DAMAGES ARISING FROM NEGLIGENCE AND POSSIBLE CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY for complete understanding of the experimentation you have been subject to without your consent, and the criminal elements involved.

You might have questions about how to determine a dollar value as compensation for emotional distress or mental anguish, for possible future health issues due to forced mask wearing, etc.  These and other questions, such as how to fill out forms, etc. will require your own research.  Contact information for Dr. David Martin is included below. I would suggest following his work for updates.

Feel free to share your research and experiences in the comment section below and/or send a note to the email address found on the TCTL contact page. — Kathleen]

 

Form & Addendum:

Example Form 95 claim:
https://www.davidmartin.world/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/SF95-07a-DOJ-Standard-Form-95-Sample-for-COVID.pdf

Form 95 addendum (include this with your form, it outlines the basis for the claim):
https://www.davidmartin.world/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/SF95Addendum.pdf

Form 95 download:
https://www.gsa.gov/forms-library/claim-damage-injury-or-death

Sources:

Mentioned at 8:13 — Declaration under the public readiness and emergency preparedness act for medical countermeasures: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/03/17/2020-05484/declaration-under-the-public-readiness-and-emergency-preparedness-act-for-medical-countermeasures

Mentioned at 10:00 — L Song Richardson’s article “When Human Experimentation is Criminal: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7314&context=jclc

Mentioned at 12:45 — U.S vs. Stanley case: https://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/research/stanley.htm

Link to the slides used in the video:
https://www.davidmartin.world/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/BotW_slides_05252020.pdf

 

 

Partial Transcript of Informed Consent: You’re a Lab Rat by Dr. David Martin

 

[TCTL Editor’s Note: the following transcript was sourced using YouTube’s transcript function, with some additional editing by us along with the addition of hyperlinks for your convenience.]

“At the end of this video I am going to be giving you an opportunity to actually do something, which you can do: 1) for free and 2) to start taking action to stand up against all of the tyranny that’s happening.

…For those of you who don’t know, the 21 Code of Federal Regulations is the rules that govern the Food and Drug Administration. And those rules are set out for the guidelines of how we constitute what is safe and what is effective in medicine in the United States.

Rules on Informed Consent, which is actually one of the early sections of the the provisions of the code of federal regulations that govern the FDA, say in Section 50.20 that, except as provided in 50.23 and 50.24, no investigator may involve a human being as a subject in research covered by these regulations unless the investigator has obtained the legally effective consent of the subject or the subjects legally authorized representative.

…But the problem with the Declaration of Helsinki and the problem with the trials in Nuremberg was that the United States and other countries specifically decided that, while they wanted to punish the Germans for what they did during the Second World War, they wanted to keep a wiggle-room-out clause that allowed them to continue to do human experimentation on people without their consent.

That sounds like the pot calling the kettle black and that’s the reason why it sounds like it is because it’s illegal, immoral and unethical. But Section 50.23 and section 50 24 gives, in 50.23, the Department of Defense an opportunity to waive all requirements of informed consent for anybody serving in the military. Which means that if you are serving in the military, or you’re part of any of the branches of the armed services, you actually not only have no rights to inform consent.

But it’s worse than that… What’s worse than that is the  Supreme Court, in a very famous case of the United States v Stanley, decided that not only do you have no rights but you have no redress either. Congress thankfully passed a law later… that actually gave a tiny bit of room for people who have been severely harmed by federal government research, without their consent, a way to get redress.

But the law and the Supreme Court actually ruled that basically the Department of Defense can waive informed consent and can do basically anything they want to anybody in the military.

50.24 is more problematic.

…I found something really problematic when I found was a thing called … MCMs — Medical Counter Measures.

And I want to read what the Federal Register has — and this is the law in the United States — that during declared emergencies medical industry is exempted from liability.

And you heard what I just said. If you declare an emergency, the current 1379 trials on medical devices for diagnostics and therapeutics around coronavirus — every single one of those manufacturers, every single one of those individuals — from the date of the declared emergency, has immunity from any liability.

They can literally poison you. They can literally kill you with their therapy and there is no recourse in law, courtesy of the exemption that’s in 21 CFR.

…In other words, the reason why governors are so dedicated to keeping up the illusion of a pandemic and the illusion of the state of emergency is because, it turns out, that any action taken under an emergency use authorization by the FDA — any action taken by any manufacturer for any research that they’re doing they get a get-out-of-jail-free card and they can do anything that they want and they have… no liability.

They have absolute immunity.

For those of you who have the time to do it, I highly recommend L. Song Richardson’s article When Human Experimentation is Criminal.

…But there’s a little tiny problem and I told you there’s going to be hope at the end of this very disappointing, very abysmal, very unfortunate set of facts. The hope is that, under Section 50.24,  Anthony Fauci, and the CDC, and all the criminal co-conspirators I’ve talked about before at the Department of Health and Human Services, forgot to read a little tiny clause…

And the one thing they got wrong was for 50.24 to work there has to be, and I quote, “concurrence of a licensed physician who is a member of or consultant to the Institutional Review Board and who is not otherwise participating in the investigation“.

In other words — if there was going to be a clinical trial on any intervention for coronavirus, there had to be somebody not associated with any of the therapies.

Ha. Ha! This, my friends, is where we enter into the rabbit hole of the fun.

Because, you’ll notice that every individual that is in the Advisory Program, and every individual that has been active in stipulating the biggest of the clinical trials, which is called social distancing and face mask wearing, which is clinical research as a defined term under the FDA standard of clinical research, they screwed up by not having an independent and institutional review board which is required under the 50.24 waiver.

In other words, they thought they were getting away with absolute immunity, but they screwed up. Because they kept the conspirators all in the room and forgot that they have to have somebody who is independent.

…I read the entirety of the case United States versus Stanley, a case that was argued in 1986. and while Justice Antonin Scalia gets my absolute loser of the week, right, because he’s the guy who decided for the majority — and basically came up with this doctrine that says that the US can get away with anything and is absolutely incapable of having their immunity pierced.

Justice Brennan and Justice O’Connor dissented with the majority in that Supreme Court case.

Now I want to read you what Justice Brennan wrote: “The court confers absolute immunity from money damages on federal officials, military and civilian alike, without consideration of long-standing case law establishing the general rule that such officials are liable for damages caused by their intentional violation of well-established constitutional rights.” That is the absolute statement by Justice Brennan.

And Justice O’Connor says “No judicially crafted rule should insulate from liability the involuntary and unknowing human experimentation alleged to have occurred in the case.”

And the case, remember, was actually an outgrowth of the MKULTRA case. This was when the CIA and DOD were injecting people with LSD and then trying to figure out what the side effects were.

Indeed, as Justice Brennan observes, the United States military played an instrumental role in the criminal prosecution of Nazi officials who experimented with human subjects during the Second World War. And the standards that were the Nuremberg military tribunals developed to judge the behavior of defendants, stated that, quote, “voluntary consent of human subject is absolutely essential“.

Did you hear what she said?  “is absolutely essential to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts.”

…”If this principle is violated, the very least that society can do is see that victims are compensated as best they can be by the perpetrators. I am prepared to say that our Constitution’s promise of due process of law guarantees this much.” That is a quote from Sandra Day O’Connor.

…if two well-respected Supreme Court jurists actually come to the same conclusion that any normal human being would come to, which is that no constitutional rights can be abridged because somebody decides to act in an arbitrary and capricious manner, and put against their will a human subject in an experiment, then what’s going on right now?

Now let’s break this down really simply.

You are part of an experiment.

There is no medical or scientific evidence at all that the 6-foot distance has anything to do with the way a healthy population stays healthy in our society.

Social distancing is based on droplet studies which have never been associated with actual epidemiologic data.

So when Dr. Birx gets up and says we now think that there’s science to justify social distancing, Dr. Birx is lying to you.

There is no science justifying it.

It’s a belief system.

And the Supreme Court has been very clear on the difference between science and belief. Which means if you are currently living in under an order to social distance, you are part of a large epidemiologic experiment.

There is no science for this. You are a lab rat.

…The tyrant that is Governor Northam seeks to impose upon the population of Virginia, a face mask ordinance.

But here’s the problem: There is no scientific evidence that those work, and more importantly, there is very specific evidence that they actually impair the healthy functioning of society.

You, if you are asked to wear a face mask, are a lab rat.

You are subject to an investigation.

Social distancing, face mask wearing, both are experiments. They are experiments promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services, supported by the Center for Disease Control.

And they have no Institutional Review Board authorization — which means they are in violation of the law.

And that, my friends, is the reason why I hope millions of people hear what I’m about to say.

After the injustice that was given to the Stanley case. And, just for your reference, the Stanley in the Stanley case was a veteran of the Korean War and I believe also the Vietnam War. He was subject to all kinds of clinical experimentation and his life was actually severely damaged. He went on to be a Florida police officer and continued to serve his country. But his country didn’t serve him back. And after reading the dissent to the Supreme Court’s decision in 1986, Congress passed an interesting law that created a very interesting action you can take.

…You go to the US Department of Justice website and you download Standard Form 95.

…It is your pathway to actually find a criminal or a civil liability, define it, and seek redress from the agency of the federal government that harmed you.

What’s harm? Well if you lost your job, if you lost customers, if you were physically harmed because you couldn’t go to doctors appointments, you couldn’t do the things that you needed to do to maintain your health, the Department of Human Services is actually supposed to get their liability notice from you.

…You need to send it to the US Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the General Counsel, 200 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington DC 20201.

And in that form you need to say that:

• The Department of Health and Human Service, through the Center for Disease Control and the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Disease, sought and filed and received a patent starting in 2003 which made the identification, the detection and detection kits for coronavirus not available to the general population. They, by virtue of that act, by filing that patent, they made it impossible for the public health interest to be served.  And that’s the beginning of the damage.
• In 2007 they extended their patent filing and in that patent filing sought to actually patent the virus, which is against 35 US Code Section 101.
• In 2013 and 2018 they worked to use international sources and take the research on gain-of-function, which was determined by the National Institutes of Health in 2013 to be unethical.
• They decided to take it offshore and work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology so that they could get around the ethical and legal implications of the work being done here in the United States. And they did that willfully.
• So that at September 2019, in the publication World at Risk from the World Health Organization, Dr. Anthony Fauci and the members of the committee, that actually are affiliated with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, could make a recommendation that a respiratory-based pathogen simulation must be run with no Institutional Review Board review, with no independent physician certifying that their actions were legal — therefore, getting them out from the exclusions of Section 50.242 of the 21 Code of Federal Regulation.

They decided to start a clinical trial that you have become an unwilling participant in.

And the damages that you have, the damages that are your loss of livelihood, your loss of access to health, your loss of access to Liberty, the costs associated with your shutdown, the fact that you have not been able to work, the fact that you have not been able to deal with child care — every one of those facts is now a financial liability under the Standard Form 95 submission to the US Department of Health and Human Services.

Now here’s what it’s going to get fun.

They are required by law to respond to you. And the best thing about it is there’s a time limit on it. They have to respond within 90 to 180 days depending, on whether they get some wiggle room. But here’s the other part of that.

You have two years from the date of the injury or from the date of the civil claim or from the date of the crime — you have two years to do this filing.

…I want the office of the general counsel of the Department of Health and Human Services to be overwhelmed with millions of claims.

I want every person who has filed an unemployment claim, I want every one of those people to fill out a form 95 and send it to the office of the General Counsel. I want the Department of Health and Human Services to know that their violation of their own rules, which led to the destruction of your life and your livelihood, I want them to know that it comes at a cost.

… my goal, thirty million individual forms of claims for benefits for an illegal clinical trial.

And the specifics on the clinical trial, just so you get it right, are you have been forced to an experiment in which you did not give consent. And the experiment was called social distancing and face mask wearing. That’s the experiment. There is no institutional review board, there is no independent doctor, and it is up to you now to take a stand.

…Remember in the Stanley case, one courageous veteran — one courageous veteran — stood against the tyranny of the Department of Defense’s experimentation with LSD and stood against the tyranny of the CIA’s investigations with LSD. One veteran stood alone and that got Congress to act in 1986 and 1987.

Please understand, ladies and gentlemen, if a million of us act, if 30 million of us act, if a hundred million of us act, we will be heard.  Because they have no recourse. Because they wrote the rules and they didn’t follow them.

…I want to see 35 million of us standing together and actually sending the bill for this crime to the place that it started–  the United States Department of Health and Human Services.”

In the event that the original video is censored and deleted by the source social media platform,
link here to a mirrored copy on Truth Comes to Light Bitchute channel.