“This is Not A Vaccine” – It’s a Medical Device to Make Us Sick [VIDEO: Focus on Fauci]

Video: Focus on Fauci. “This is Not A Vaccine”

SACHA STONE, ROCCO GALATI, ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR., DR. JUDY MIKOVITS & DR. DAVID MARTIN

”Let’s make sure we are clear… This is not a vaccine. They are using the term “vaccine” to sneak this thing under public health exemptions. This is not a vaccine.”  Dr David Martin 

This means that all those ‘pushing this non vaccine … this untested, experimental toxin‘ are now complicit.

Scroll down for complete transcript of Dr. Martin’s statement

***

Video Program

Clarion Call with host Sacha Stone

and guests Dr. Judy Mikovits, Dr. David Martin, Robert F. Kennedy Jr andConstitutional Lawyer Rocco Galati.

VIDEO LINKS

https://earthheroestv.com/programs/special-free-live-broadcast-5th-jan-2021-focus-on-fauci-46120-a90064Video Player

TRANSCRIPT

The bombshell revelation:

”Let’s make sure we are clear… This is not a vaccine. They are using the term “vaccine” to sneak this thing under public health exemptions. This is not a vaccine.” 

Dr David Martin 

This means that all those ‘pushing this non vaccine … this untested, experimental toxin‘ are now complicit.

Our leadership who are actively participating in this malfeasance must be made aware that this participation will have consequences. This kind of complicity is no different than what the German doctors and scientists were accused of and went to trial for, at Nuremburg.

Dr David Martin gave to the world yesterday the smoking gun, so that we can now claim Public Health in Canada (and around the world) has become weaponized.

Dr David Martin also gave us the understanding to help ‘we the people” reclaim the narrative.

“This is mRNA packaged in a fat envelope that is delivered to a cell. It is a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator. It is not a vaccine. Vaccines actually are a legally defined term under public health law; they are a legally defined term under CDC and FDA standards.[1] And the vaccine specifically has to stimulate both the immunity within the person receiving it and it also has to disrupt transmission.

And that is not what this is. They (Moderna and Pfizer) have been abundantly clear in saying that the mRNA strand that is going into the cell is not to stop the transmission, it is a treatment. But if it was discussed as a treatment, it would not get the sympathetic ear of public health authorities because then people would say, “What other treatments are there?”

The use of the term vaccine is unconscionable for both the legal definition and also it is actually the sucker punch to open and free discourse… Moderna was started as a chemotherapy company for cancer, not a vaccine manufacturer for SARSCOV2. If we said we are going to give people prophylactic chemotherapy for the cancer they don’t yet have, we’d be laughed out of the room because it’s a stupid idea. That’s exactly what this is. This is a mechanical device in the form of a very small package of technology that is being inserted into the human system to activate the cell to become a pathogen manufacturing site.

And I refuse to stipulate in any conversations that this is in fact a vaccine issue. The only reason why the term is being used is to abuse the 1905 Jacobson case that has been misrepresented since it was written. And if we were honest with this, we would actually call it what it is: it is a chemical pathogen device that is actually meant to unleash a chemical pathogen production action within a cell. It is a medical device, not a drug because it meets the CDRH definition of a device. It is not a living system, it is not a biologic system, it is a physical technology – it happens to just come in the size of a molecular package.

So, we need to be really clear on making sure we don’t fall for their game. Because their game is if we talk about it as a vaccine, then we are going to get into a vaccine conversation but this is not, by their own admission, a vaccine. As a result it must be clear to everyone listening that we will not fall for this failed definition, just like we will not fall for their industrial chemical definition of health. Both of them are functionally flawed and are an implicit violation of the legal construct that is being exploited. I get frustrated when I hear activists and lawyers say, “we are going to fight the vaccine”. If you stipulate it’s a vaccine, you’ve already lost the battle. It’s not a vaccine. It is made to make you sick.

80% of the people exposed to SARSCOV2 are asymptomatic carriers. 80% of people who get this injected into them experience a clinical adverse event. You are getting injected with a chemical substance to induce illness, not to induce an immuno-transmissive response. In other words, nothing about this is going to stop you from transmitting anything. This is about getting you sick and having your own cells be the thing that get you sick.

When the paymaster for the distribution of information happens to be the industry that’s doing the distributing, we lose. Because the only narrative is the one that will be compensated by the people writing the check. That goes for our politicians… and our media – it has been paid for – if you follow the money you realize there is no non-conflicted voice on any network.”

– Dr. David Martin, Jan 5th 2021,

[1] The word “vaccine” originates from the Latin Variolae vaccinae (cowpox), which Edward Jenner demonstrated in 1798 could prevent smallpox in humans. Today the term ‘vaccine’ applies to all biological preparations, produced from living organisms, that enhance immunity against disease and either prevent (prophylactic vaccines) or, in some cases, treat disease (therapeutic vaccines).