two years ago the Canadian government released redacted covid-19 vaccine contracts and its raised eyebrows ever since prompting many inquiring minds to be increasingly curious about the legally binding implications of Novel mRNA Mass injection and today I'm bringing you an interview with a legal Advocate and lawyer that's Daniel freiheit to discuss just that will Canada release its vaccine contracts and is it ethical for vaccine companies to be charging such large amounts during a time of a global pandemic [Music] wow really taking me back to the challenges of peak covid [Music] see the one secret vaccine contract between covid-19 novel mRNA manufacturer Pfizer and South Africa have been made public and freiheit took 2x that's formerly known as Twitter to state that Health Canada is in big trouble he says this contract is the same as the one in Slovenia unlikely the same as Canada's well highlighting that long-term effects and efficacy were not currently known and Adverse Events are also not currently known that was at the time of the signing Health Canada knew he posted and misled Canadians our government understood that we needed to do everything we could to get vaccines here for Canadians because we understood that by getting vaccinated we would be able to get through this pandemic more quickly do things like lifting the lockdowns which were so challenging for the people working here and for the kids working here joining me to elaborate on this is fry hate himself have a listen in light of these unredacted covid vaccine contracts primarily from Pfizer and South Africa the Canadian court systems have taken judicial notice and that is that the safe and effective narrative they've taken at face value assuming that as judicial fact um and and basing legal decisions on that fact how has or how would rather these long-term consequences are unknown stipulations change the trajectory of the legal proceedings in light of this contract I mean this is uh this is a good question so I think the whole topic of judicial notice uh you know even among the judges is a contentious topic and you can see it in one of the cases where the judge actually goes through the vaccine mandates the vaccine safety and effective efficacy and go through all the different cases in the past two or three years where different judges took judicial notice and some did some didn't um how that's going to change now um now that there is more information coming out that maybe it isn't such an obvious fact that it's you just accept it from Health Canada without further questioning um there are quite a few of us a few lawyers who are just scratching their heads up but this is a contentious topic how do they just assume or accept safety and efficacy as fact when it's you can challenge all kinds of things with those claims uh you said that that Health Canada misled Canadians and and if that's the case and now in again in light of these unredacted contracts if Health Canada did mislead Canadians and they knew they were misleading Canadians with the safe and effective narrative what could the potential repercussions or Consequences be for that misleading and this I don't even I don't even know where it would go because you have cases that were that are now you know beyond their appeal period I guess they could be these cases could be reheard perhaps I don't know it's like because you have this concept of um you know um it's that it's already the case has already been decided right so you can't open it up again um but and plus some of those cases have had irreversible uh impacts on families right when you're dealing with you know child custody or you know child a difference of opinions among parents right about whether to get a kid vaccinated or not and you have a case where the judge just took judicial notice that it was safe and effective so of course the kid's gonna give the kid to the parent that wants the vaccine for the kid right um but in terms of how to specifically handle what maybe now um you know errors on the record um I don't actually know what the solution is I guess it'll depend on the case right but the reality is that um the the idea that you know that they're safe and effective without qualification what like without qualifying what that means um Now is really going to undermine I think a lot of the Public's trust in not just Health Canada but a lot of these decisions that relied squarely on health Canada without doing any kind of you know fact investigation uh I see repeatedly people reaching out to me that their claims are being filibustered or arbitrarily denied in light of these unknowns right they the the contracts stipulate right in there the long-term consequences are unknown there's multiple references to unknown unknown unknown so how is it that the vaccine injury Support Program knows that people can be denied their claim given these contracts okay and this is important for people to know because the vaccine injury support program and I did an access to Information Act request very early on for this information about how the the policy framework and the contract itself but the it's it's in there and if you ask enough people in the in the the case manager they should tell you that if there's new studies showing okay um a link between the person's injury um and the vaccine then the visc the visc should Pony up and assess that new information and so it could either be done by way of appeal or you can just resubmit people need to know this that they can resubmit within the first three years of uh having been vaccinated so in other words the vaccine injury Support Program almost recognizes this long-term unknown issue and the way they recognize this is by saying if there's a new study send your claim back in we'll take a look at it what do you hope to see coming out of Health Canada as they move forward with things you know like media advisories and press releases I mean my whole beef this whole time has just been give people full information so they can make a a best informed decision for themselves you know and that was what Toronto Public Health um a doctor eventually ended up coming out saying uh in November of 2022 let people decide for themselves based on their you know their covet history they know when they got coveted so don't make them get a vaccine again just so they could have have a job they know they've had covet three times why are you making them get a a booster shot you know it's so as long as health Canada is just bring information to the people like good on them but the problem is that it's a lot of these institutions kind of take these recommendations or this information from Health Canada and they twist it and they say Well since Health Canada recommended it now you have to like no they didn't but their Healthcare is not saying you have to they're just recommending it for certain populations um Health Canada really if they really wanted to step up they would speak out against mandates because that's causing more Health consequences than what you know than the uh then coveted in many regards socially uh you know the the fact that people's lives have been devastated by uh by these mandates like the Band-Aids have created a separate Health public health issue that Health Canada now needs to address so um in short as long as they you know as health Canada says this is the information don't no more mandates uh we should have never had mandates you know then I say let them say whatever they want earlier this year in June I did a report that asked did the Canadian government waive liability for covid-19 manufacturers perhaps knowing full well that they were authorizing an unprecedented product that did not undergo rigorous safety testing at that time I also released a list of all of the titles of the government officials who signed often indefinite non-disclosure agreements to view these top secret contracts for novel pharmaceutical products that the auditor general says cost taxpayers approximately 5 billion with a B billion dollars from December 2020 to May 2022 facing scrutiny about Canada's Hefty redactions liberal MP and parliamentary secretary for public services and procurement Anthony House Father explained that waiving liability was the reason behind the redactions listen to this colleague said in these documents and in other documents it's because these documents were signed at the beginning of a pandemic when everybody was desperate for vaccines when companies were being told to rush vaccine production do testing in an unprecedented way in a way they normally don't do it so these companies were exposed to way higher liability putting their products on the market than they normally would because they didn't do the type of testing that normally takes these drugs years to come to Market they did it all in less than a year so that's why these companies said if I'm going to deliver you this product that I haven't tested in my normal way I I want to have different conditions uh yes because Pfizer had to move at the speed of science as was explained by the pharmaceutical Giants president of international developed markets Janine small in the European Parliament last year um regarding the question around um did we know about stop and humanization before it sent you the market no these um you know we have to really move at the speed of science to really understand what is taking place in the market and and if Health Canada knew and they did in fact mislead Canadians then the need for transparency and accountability remains crucial when addressing the complexities around liability for Rebel news I'm Tamara ugalini as health Canada continues with authorization of Novel covid-19 boosters we've revamped our petition and campaign at firetam.com as Canada's Chief Public Health officer Teresa Tam should be following the science but instead she's dropping the ball in almost every policy and pandemic related measure implementation since the onset of the pandemic find our reports and support our work if you're able to and you sign our petition at firetam.com