Dr. David Martin w/ Vaccine Choice Canada: On Canada’s Role in Producing the Weaponized “Covid” Injections Which Have Seriously Harmed and Killed Many

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