I saw that in the news yesterday and wondered what would happen. From a purely legal analysis of contracts, has Pfizer got a viable argument?

Expand full comment

Yes, probably.

In the Motion to Dismiss, Pfizer also argues that the “Government’s ‘actual behavior’ here says it all. Both the complaint itself and the public record show the Government has been fully aware of [whistleblower Jackson’s] Relator’s allegations for nearly two years without withdrawing authorization or stopping payment for Pfizer’s vaccine.”

This is entirely true. Jackson told the FDA, and the FDA moved ahead anyway. Jackson told the Department of Justice, and the DOJ declined to prosecute.

Pfizer’s response to allegations of clinical trial fraud isn’t that the fraud didn’t occur. It’s that Pfizer never had an obligation to conduct sound clinical trials, and that that was built in to its contracts with DOD.

They will probably prevail and get the case dismissed.

Expand full comment

👏👏👏. Exactly. That's why the original contracts of agreement were taking so long (considering the "emergency"!), to create, negotiate and particularly the level of secrecy, under cover of IP. Neither party wished to see the public paying attention to the clauses that outlines "demonstration" protection vs "EUA" protection- very few would have taKen the shot. Frankly, it's not surprising that Pfizer wanted to have an extra parachute on top of the standard EUA, given the EUA is really covering the government, given history of dodgy clinical trial practice of pharma over the last 70+years. GOP and trial work, when done correctly are prohibitively expensive. Pharma would not make squillions, if they adhered properly, only millions. And that's just not acceptable to shareholders.

Expand full comment

Well, they have to do something to justify those CEO salaries!

Expand full comment

Yep, they always have a "Plan B" as you have so skillfully informed us.

It is "baked in" and was actually required to get this cluster---- "rolling."

Ever notice that, like New York City bankers, these guys never go to jail?

Expand full comment

Except this is Plan A - the plan from the beginning.

We haven’t seen Plan B yet.

I think we only get to see Plan B if we spread the word far enough, fast enough to get a critical mass that’s openly angry at the government, and shrink the Plan A critical mass that’s been manipulated into being supportive of the government or being angry, but silent.

Expand full comment

I'll be waiting on "Plan G" where they come to kill/kidnap us "not a vaccine" holdouts and we are waiting for them!

Expand full comment

Similar to “Red Dawn”


Expand full comment

Think more high explosives, soap suds mixed with gasoline, wireless comms, suppressed automatic rifles, night vision, and so forth.

Expand full comment

That's exactly what I feared.

Expand full comment

"neither Pfizer nor FDA ever believed anyone had a legal or moral obligation to protect the safety of the people taking the injections"

This is so shocking that the buildings for both should be burnt down, all surrounded by enough snipers and minefields as to guarantee nobody makes it out alive!

While this "solution" may seem extreme, it is nowhere as extreme as what has been done to not just Americans, but humanity!

Is this what it all has come too?

Someone will say "You can't solve a problem by becoming just like those you are eliminating."

My reply, "I'm OK with that!"

Expand full comment
May 25, 2022Liked by Katherine Watt

So, "SAFE and effective" is just a marketing term that implies neither safety nor efficacy?

Expand full comment

That’s correct. The manufacturers were never required to show safety, and the only efficacy hurdle they had to jump was to get the HHS Secretary to declare that the product “may be effective.”

See Federal Food Drug and Cosmetics Act, 21 USC 360bbb-3(c)(2)(A), as revised by Congress in 1997 and 2004.

Yesterday I also discovered that one of the factors to be considered by HHS secretary in making determinations about qualified security countermeasures and use of Special Reserve Fund (money for the Strategic National Stockpile of pharmaceuticals) to procure the countermeasures from pharmaceutical corporations is "whether there is a lack of a significant commercial market for the product at the time of procurement, other than as a security countermeasure." 42 USC 247d-6b (c)(5)(B)(iii), as revised by Congress in 2004.

In other words, if no consumers would buy a product under normal commercial circumstances, but the pharmaceutical companies and US government want to sell it and inject it into people anyway, the HHS Secretary classifies it as a qualified security countermeasure, and then the US government buys it in massive bulk and then mandates that people take it.

Expand full comment
May 25, 2022Liked by Katherine Watt

Delightful...and I wonder how Canada will spin this, if it's ever spoken of at all?

Expand full comment

I read somewhere that Canada had invested in it; gets paid per every shot given....

Expand full comment
May 25, 2022Liked by Katherine Watt

That quote and Pfizer's pledge, is proof that our world is now insane.

Expand full comment
May 25, 2022Liked by Katherine Watt

Tuesday, September, 8, 2020 - 10:00am

"Nine CEO's sign historic pledge to continue to make the safety and well-being of vaccinated individuals the top priority in development of the first COVID-19 vaccines."

The CEO's of AstraZeneca, BioNTech, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Merk, Moderna, Novavax, Pfizer, and Sanofi, today announced a historic pledge, outlining a united commitment to uphold the integrity of the scientific process as they work towards potential global regulatory filings and approvals of the first COVID-19 vaccines."


Brooke Jackson is a hero. Out of all of the people involved in these egregious clinical trials, she is the only person in the world who stood up to EVERYTHING and said, NO, NO, NO, - NOWAY. NOT ON MY WATCH, NOT ON ANYBODY'S WATCH. I find that incredibly sad. She could probably use some support since she is basically taking on all the evil in our government by herself.

Brooke Jackson's story is COVID-19 in a nutshell. If this story doesn't blow up on the news, nothing will.

Expand full comment

Basically, Pfizer says the government (DoD) was a party to the operative contract so the government has signed off on the shoddy/rigged/fraudulent trials. So, yes, Pfizer AND the government should be held liable for the massive damages. But we all know nothing will happen as we all know that no wrongful death or personal injury lawsuit will ever make it to a jury. If just one verdict was returned for any plaintiff, this would open the floodgates for millions of subsequent verdicts. The defendants in these cases would be virtually every company and large organization in the world (every one that either mandated or coerced employees or student, athletes, etc. into getting these jab). This could literally bankrupt every one of these organizations. The judges and Court System will provide the protection against these lawsuits and throw out any lawsuits that do get filed. I also note that hardly any lawsuits have been filed (that I am aware of). This tells me that our fearless Plaintiff Trial Lawyers intuitively know what lawsuits they should not file. This is just like all the "journalists" who intuitively know what stories they cannot write, or investigations they cannot perform.

Expand full comment

Crimes against humanity were committed, and those should be persued, rather than the run of the mill product liability route.

I'm not interested in opening the floodgates for restitution to those who willingly took these obviously shady shots. At the expense of those of us who did not lose our minds. No. Not one person was forcibly injected. If any of these weaklings had stood their ground, the injectors would have stood down. Instead, by complying, they made it harder for us to resist.

And now we need to destroy society to give them a payday to boot?! Anyone who profited on these shots should lose the profits, it should go to shoring up the rest of society that will need to care for the damaged and the orphans. But no windfall damages settlements for "victims" who willingly got injected. No.

Expand full comment

"This could literally bankrupt every one of these organizations."


Expand full comment
May 25, 2022Liked by Katherine Watt

What the AF. Just when I thought it was evil it gets diabolical.

Expand full comment
May 25, 2022Liked by Katherine Watt

This is outrageous! What can we do?

Expand full comment

Continue intellectually and emotionally processing the level of evil that’s confronting us all, stay away from medical facilities as much as possible, and if you’re on social media, spread the word.

I’ve posted a bit about the ‘what to do’ question here:


Expand full comment

The fakery runs wide and deep. The website A Warrior Calls.com /ai dominion games with Hawkins goes to a massive source and here I think we are hitting closest to the bottom of this vile barrel. We're so much closer than we think. Between you and a few others the whole thing unraveling fast.

Expand full comment

Sorry I didn't see this article earlier. I feel everyone's pain here, but here's what you're missing: no facet of the gov't (in the US) is required to give a dang about anyone's health (except MAYBE the V.A.). Basically, the Constitution left every subject it didn't specifically address to the various states; and no law says you have A RIGHT to health, OR to appropriate healthcare. There's endless propaganda implying that you do, but that's nonsense. Instead, the entire medical-industrial complex exists for the profit of its private owners, & the gov't (at various levels) steps in to guide your regressive tax dollars toward upholding those owners' monopolies, limiting competition, etc. It's ALL about money; & science has nothing to do w/ it (except when it's part of someone's business model, or patents). Read my book, WHY THE U.S. GETS THE WORST CHILDBIRTH OUTCOMES IN THE INDUSTRIALIZED WORLD (or, wait for the updated version). Read E. Richard Brown's ROCKEFELLER MEDICINE MEN. Read Ellen Brown's FORBIDDEN MEDICINE. Read Randall Fitzgerald's THE HUNDRED YEAR LIE.

Expand full comment







Read about it here: http://www.preearth.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1184


The data is from the British/English government agency UKHSA (United Kingdom Health Security Agency).

Let's look at the (covid-19) death data for those over 80 years of age, both vaccinated, and un-vaccinated, from week 3, 2022 (the week of the great fraud) onwards:

The following table has 4 "columns".

Column 1 lists the period/week of 2022.

Column 2 is deaths among those vaccinated per 100,000

Column 3 is the deaths among the un-vaccinated per 100,000

Column 4 tells the number of deaths saved/lost (i.e, Column 3 minus Column 2) due to the vaccines per 100,000.

week03 39 309 => the vaccines save 270 deaths per 100,000

week04 57 322 => the vaccines save 265 deaths per 100,000

week05 78 326 => the vaccines save 248 deaths per 100,000

week06 103 324 => the vaccines save 221 deaths per 100,000

week07 114 280 => the vaccines save 165 deaths per 100,000

week08 120 243 => the vaccines save 124 deaths per 100,000

week09 120 190 => the vaccines save 70 deaths per 100,000

week10 110 152 => the vaccines save 42 deaths per 100,000

week11 101 141 => the vaccines save 40 deaths per 100,000

week12 90 134 => the vaccines save 44 deaths per 100,000

week13 84 122 => the vaccines save 37 deaths per 100,000

week14............. they suddenly decided to stop publishing the data.


So Column 4 is the number of deaths that are prevented for every 100,000 people who are vaccinated. If this number is negative then it records the number of deaths caused by the vaccines (per 100,000 vaccinated).

Graphing Column 4 we can see that as it approaches zero it levels off (from week 10 onwards). This is due to those presenting the data finding some fraud to keep the data positive, or simply making up the data. Anything, to keep the data from proving that the vaccines are killing more than they are saving.

Image/Graph http://www.preearth.net/images/deaths-caused-saved-by-vaccines.png

I must emphasize that the above data only records deaths due to covid-19. It does not record any deaths due to adverse reactions to the vaccines.

Anyway, after manipulating the data for the weeks 10, 11, 12, and 13, the evil people decided that the data was henceforth always going to show that the vaccines are killing more than they are saving, so they stopped publishing the data. To provide an excuse for this they had to arrange for the UK Government to stop paying for covid-19 testing, so that is what they did. In the week 14 surveillance report they state:

"From 1 April 2022, the UK Government ended provision of free universal covid-19 testing for the general public in England, as set out in the plan for living with COVID-19. Such changes in testing policies affect the ability to robustly monitor covid-19 cases by vaccination status, therefore, from the week 14 report onwards this section of the report will no longer be published."

The relevant data from the reports can be found in the following PDF:


Previously, this very data was used to justify the vaccine mandates. The argument was that the vaccines were saving more than they are killing. This is no longer true. What is now true, is that; The vaccines are killing more than they are saving.

Expand full comment