Pfizer buckles under pressure during heated hearing, admits the unthinkable about the jab…
There is so much controversy, coverup, and conspiracy surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine. So much that sometimes it’s hard to keep up with what’s fact or fiction. But one hearing that was recently held down under in Australia might be the key to unlocking many of the mysteries about the jab. We’re learning that many elites took a different “jab” than the rest of us. That’s the bombshell that came out of a heated hearing where Aussie senators grilled Pfizer employees who eventually admitted that they took a “special” batch of the vaccine that was not available to the rest of the public.
Pfizer spokesperson admitted company employees were given a “special batch” of Covid-19 vaccine, materially different to the vaccine distributed to the rest of the population. The shocking revelation came during a Senate hearing in Australia, when the Pfizer spokesperson revealed that the Big Pharma giant imported a special batch of COVID-19 vaccines solely for their employee vaccination program.
Australian Senator Malcolm Roberts led the interrogation of Pfizer Australia’s Country Medical Director, Dr. Krishan Thiru, and Head of Regulatory Sciences, Dr. Brian Hewitt, with his forceful inquiries eventually leading to Dr. Thiru admitting Pfizer employees did not receive the normal vaccine.
The grilling continued:
The piece goes on to explain that the revelation that Pfizer employees received a different Covid vaccine compared to the one distributed to the general public might not be all that surprising, after all. Dr. Ugur Sahin, the CEO of BioNTech, Pfizer’s collaboration partner for the vaccine, openly admitted on camera that he chose not to take the Covid vaccine. Senator Roberts also brought up an interesting point – the pharmaceutical industry profited significantly from vaccinating the Australian population, and this was largely attributed to the government’s stringent pandemic management approach that closely aligned with the World Economic Forum. What vaccine did WEF officials take?
Sen. Roberts demanded to know what role Pfizer played in the government’s decisions to make vaccines mandatory for employment and their participation in potential government bans on alternative treatments such as Ivermectin.
“Pfizer has no involvement, had no involvement in the imposition of vaccine mandates… Pfizer has had no involvement in relation to Ivermectin,” said Dr. Thiru.
However, the inquiry took a contentious turn when Roberts probed into Pfizer’s confidential indemnity agreements with the Australian government, suggesting that the taxpayers who funded the vaccine have the right to see the details of what they bought.
“Does the indemnity you have with the government extend to providing you with indemnity in the situation where an employee is forced by their employer to undergo vaccination and then experiences harm? And if you do have indemnity, I want the proof,” Roberts asked.
Dr. Thiru maintained that the specifics of these agreements remain confidential, per standard practice for contractual arrangements between the government and private organizations.
“Senator, any indemnity agreements between Pfizer and the Australian government are confidential and we are not able to discuss that in this forum,” said Thiru.
You’ve got to admit, Big Pharma hit the jackpot with those confidential agreements and lawsuit shields. Makes you wonder who else might have gotten their hands on a “special batch” right here in America. After all, we’ve all seen the celebs and politicians rolling up their sleeves for the cameras. Was it a show, like some folks have suspected all along?