Have you heard that Bill Gates and a few other people are getting sued in the Netherlands by seven people who claim to have suffered serious health consequences after getting a COVID vaccine?
Wait, why Bill Gates?
The Expert Witnesses in That Dutch Civil Lawsuit About COVID Vaccines
Well, it’s not just Bill Gates.
They are also suing the CEO of Pfizer, the Dutch government, and the former Dutch prime minister and health ministers.
But we are not going to talk about that or even why they are suing in this post.
Let’s just talk about their “expert witnesses.”
Not surprisingly, they are a who’s who of anti-vaccine influencers, and include.
Mike Yeadon, who is often presented as the ‘head of Pfizer research.’
What’s the problem with that?
Mike Yeadon left Pfizer in 2011 - long before COVID. And while he held a high position, he was not the head of Pfizer research. He worked in the Allergy & Respiratory department.
Also, not surprisingly, all of the extreme claims against COVID vaccines made by Mike Yeadon have been thoroughly debunked, including that:
mRNA vaccines were intentionally designed to injure and kill people
mRNA vaccines were intended to damage fertility and reduce reproduction
mRNA vaccines are biological weapons
COVID-19 didn’t exist as a distinct illness, and it was the hospital treatments that killed people
None of that is true.
Next we have Sasha Latypova, who is often described as a “former pharmaceutical research and development executive.”
In reality though, Sasha Latypova is an entrepreneur with a BA in Foreign Languages and an MBA in General Management and Business Administration who worked in the pharmaceutical clinical-trial services industry. At iCardiac Technologies, for example, she helped commercialize technology for analyzing electrocardiograms (ECGs) during pharmaceutical clinical trials.
What’s missing?
Anything that makes her an expert on vaccines.
And that’s why her extreme claims are also easy to debunk, including that:
COVID-19 vaccination was a military-led operation rather than a conventional public health program.
Vaccine clinical trials were essentially theater.
Emergency authorization allegedly eliminated meaningful safety regulation.
COVID vaccines allegedly contained dangerous, improperly disclosed ingredients or contaminants.
COVID vaccines were deliberately harmful biochemical countermeasures that amounted to mass poisoning.
Again, none of that is true.
Who’s next?
That would be Catherine Austin Fitts.
Is she an expert on vaccines?
Nope.
Catherine Austin Fitts is a former investment banker and a former assistant secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development in the first Bush administration who makes the extreme claims that:
The response to the COVID pandemic facilitated a financial and political takeover.
COVID vaccination was part of a plan to establish digital surveillance and centralized control.
Digital identities, digital currencies and injectable technologies would eventually restrict individual freedom.
The COVID-19 crisis helped advance a preexisting financial restructuring agenda.
Is anything of that true?
Of course not!
Lastly, we have Dr. Joseph Sansone.
Unfortunately for the plaintiffs, Dr. Joseph Sansone is not a medical doctor.
Instead, he has a PhD - and it isn’t in anything that would make him an expert on vaccines.
Joe Sansone has a doctorate in psychology.
And he makes the extreme claims that:
mRNA vaccines allegedly qualify as biological and technological weapons of mass destruction.
Vaccine deployment allegedly violated biological-weapons laws.
COVID vaccines can lead to death through shedding
Officials promoting vaccination allegedly displayed patterns of authoritarianism and psychopathic behavior.
Government and institutional conduct allegedly reflected coordinated coercion, censorship and deliberate harm.
Claims that aren’t true.
Claims from four people who have no real standing as vaccine experts.
How do we know that?
“The court refused to hear them as expert witnesses under oath during the hearing in November last year. Stassen tried again, but the judge went even one step further: in May, the experts were forbidden to take the floor — whether or not under oath. They can be present as an audience, but everything has been said with that.”
The lawsuit that focuses all eyes on Leeuwarden on 22 October
The court didn’t even recognize them as experts.
Why not?
“After reviewing the summons, I called Joe Sansone and expressed my concerns that the summons was recklessly written, no credible evidence was provided and that we were not qualified to be witnesses.
Joe informed me that in the Netherlands you can bring a lawsuit against someone based on hearsay and force the defendants (or their attorneys) to respond to the court.”
The Netherlands Case is a Media Campaign: Why I Declined to Participate
These folks are anti-vaccine influencers - not experts about vaccines.
Bottom line - the only thing this case did was to help publicize the extreme views of today’s anti-vaccine movement.
Basically: he's suing with a dude that used to be at the top way before COVID who then got the nobel effect, and 2 or so random people who know jack about vaccines.