Pinned Tweet
My beautiful son with took his life in 2017. My heart is missing you today 💔💔💔Matt Moran - Long December - Acoustic COVER of Counting Cro - YouTube youtube.com/watch?v=shsCkXPh…
Annette D retweeted
Just so that everyone is aware… this is exactly why there has been a traditionalist reaction in the Catholic Church in the United States.
This, right here.
Next time you ask why the Catholic vote went left… understand this has been an infiltration for decades.
Good for the bishop to be on this, and hopefully a quick resolution will be in order towards orthodoxy.
Time for good conversation!
I’m going to @FireBursts’s upcoming Space. Will you join too? xitter.cf/i/spaces/1MEXQpyqOdPWX…
1
4
78
They don’t care about us.
Only money $$$$$$
Health Canada does not test vaccines for safety or efficacy.
It is important to understand that Health Canada does not do any testing of drugs, including vaccines, when determining whether to approve a drug for human use.
All testing is done by the pharmaceutical company with a financial interest in having the drug approved by Health Canada.
The Covid-19 vaccines were exempted from the regular drug approval test. Rather, a substitute approval test was used.
Under this substituted test:
1. safety did not need to be proven;
2. efficacy did not need to be proven, and
3. that the benefits of the vaccine outweighed the risks of the vaccine did not need to be proven.
If the test was met, Health Canada was legally obligated to authorize the vaccine for human use. The test Covid-19 vaccines were approved under is:
The Minister must issue an authorization in respect of a COVID-19 drug if the following requirements are met:
- the Minister has sufficient evidence to support the conclusion that the benefits associated with the drug outweigh the risks, having regard to the uncertainties
relating to the benefits and risks and the necessity of addressing the urgent public health need related to COVID-19.
The test only requires the pharmaceutical company seeking approval, to make an argument that the Minister does not need to agree with.
The wording is not:
- the Minister has sufficient evidence to conclude (which would require the Minister to be convinced), or
- the Minister has concluded (which would require the Minister to be convinced).
Rather the wording is:
- the Minister has sufficient evidence to support the conclusion (not the Minister’s conclusion).
This wording does not require the Minister (Health Canada) to conclude anything. Rather there only needs to be evidence to support a conclusion that the Minister is not making.
Read more at: covidtestimony.com/exhibits-…
@Shawnbuckleylaw @DeanAllisonMP
3
64


















