SOTT's Spanish editor, Luis Miguel Chirinos, participated in RT's 'El Zoom' program, where he analysed the scandal involving the president of the European Commission due to her role in the signing of million dollar contracts with Pfizer.
Luis Chirinos
© RT
Together with the presenter, Javier Rodríguez Carrasco, and the founder of Izquierda Unida and former member of the Spanish Congress of Deputies, Ángeles Maestro, they delved into the investigation opened and revealed by a US media outlet that has been linked to Ursula Von der Leyen, and which is at the origin of the creation of a Special Committee to find out the details of the contracts signed with Albert Bourla, executive director of the pharmaceutical company.


Transcript

JAVIER CARRASCO: Private and individual contracts, vaccines that were not 100% tested. Concealment of data. Astronomical profits and expenses. A US company that was supposed to "save the lives" of Europeans in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic. A Scandal with a capital "S" in Europe. The responsibility of Pfizer and the negotiations that the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, allegedly conducted in private with the head of this firm. So much so that a Special Committee of Inquiry has been opened, which has revealed as much light as shadows, as many unanswered questions, as statements that make us shudder.

Moreover, the European Public Prosecutor's Office also wants to know the truth. And I suppose you do too. The Pfizer vaccine was not tested to see if it reduced the transmission of the virus, like so many others, but the politicians did not sell it to us like that. Reduced freedoms, unconstitutional lockdowns, like the one in Spain, were admonished by the Constitutional Court, economies were hit, lives were lost, mortality rates are soaring....

Welcome. I do not come today wearing an anti-vaxxer hat, far from it. I come to try to find out the truth of a case that hides a dirty business playing with the lives of millions and millions of people. Let's start:
[ON SCREEN: CRISTIAN TERHES, Romanian MEP: This is how they were revealed to us, to the citizens and to the press, after some of us and some brave journalists asked where the contracts signed between the European Commission and these pharmaceutical companies were. This is how these contracts of more than 100 pages were disclosed. In every contract with Pfizer, with Moderna, dozens of pages were blacked out].
JAVIER CARRASCO: You've seen it already: blacked out sentences, silences, clauses exempting responsibility. Paragraphs crossed out with prices, with deliveries, with deadlines? Without a doubt, I repeat, a real scandal. First of all, as I have always argued when we have discussed this issue, I believe that in the health sector, we must rely on science and trust in what has been achieved so far. And in order to avoid falling into polemics on whether or not the vaccine stops the transmission of Covid, it must be said that no, it does not stop it. The viral load might be another story. We will discuss this later. But it must also be said that in the United States we have heard messages to the contrary. "You don't get it" (from Mr. Fauci), "You are saved, the virus is not transmitted"... We have a video on our Telegram channel that I think is worth watching.

Having established the basis for all of this, and telling you as I think you all know that I am not anti-vaccine. I repeat, far from it. I believe in the effectiveness of the compounds (in fact, I am vaccinated, with doses of Sputnik and one of Janssen). I believe the shadows that Pfizer has generated in terms of its application, the haste and especially the way in which this, or several express contracts were signed by the president of the European Commission, have not been normal. And a year ago the news came to the fore with an article in The New York Times and led to a complaint from the Ombudsman... So what can I say, where there is smoke, there is fire.
[ON SCREEN: MISLAV KOLAKUSIC, Croatian MEP: Mrs von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, known for her 4.5 billion doses. Today 10 members of the European Parliament have asked you the following question: When will you present to the members of the European Parliament, as well as to the citizens of the European Union, whom you are supposed to represent, the communication you had with Pfizer during the procurement of 4.5 billion doses of the vaccine]?
JAVIER CARRASCO: The serious thing about this case, I repeat, is the way in which it has come about. And later we will also talk about why it is coming to light, why they are trying to get rid of Ursula von der Leyen. Because for me, it is a direct blow to the chin. But it is also very striking why there is so much silence in the general media. I don't know if you have read anything, if you have seen it. Maybe you have a recommendation to make, or maybe the law of silence, of censorship, must prevail so as not to upset a population that has been lulled to sleep, first by the pandemic, and now by "Putin's war", right?

If you don't mind, let's take it one step at a time. First of all, we have to place ourselves in that time of lockdowns in Europe, when the continent was running out of vaccines, and criticism of European management was at its peak. Every other day. It is the truth. After a production problem at AstraZeneca, Ursula herself, mobile phone in hand, "tick-tick-tick", without anyone knowing, exchanged messages and calls with Albert Bourla, Pfizer's executive director. A negotiation that resulted in the delivery of millions and millions of doses from Pfizer, of which little or nothing is known to the European parliamentarians.
[ON SCREEN: FRANCESCA DONATO, MEP for Italy: President von der Leyen's refusal to disclose the content of her text messages, and Mr Bourla's refusal to appear before Parliament, followed by Mrs Small's reticent behaviour yesterday, raise worrying doubts about the legitimacy of the whole process of awarding the contract, thus raising suspicions of corruption.]
JAVIER CARRASCO: Well, more than suspicions. In fact, this special committee, as well as opening an investigation into how all these contracts were signed, why they were signed in this way, must shed light on the money that was spent, because it is a huge amount. And furthermore, if this was done unilaterally by von der Leyen, in Europe which is committed to transparency. I wonder: why are these SMSs which were exchanged not made public? Why are the real prices and the legal stipulations not made public? Strikethroughs, redacted sentences, secrets, half-truths, in a decision made with taxpayer's money, from which a company in the United States benefited. But of course, since it was during a pandemic, anything goes.
[ON SCREEN: EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS: We asked the Commission to provide us with information on the preliminary negotiations of this agreement (scientific experts consulted and advice received, timetable of the talks, minutes of the discussions and details of the terms and conditions agreed). However, there has been none. Date: 12 September 2022. Source: www.eca.europa.eu
The European Public Prosecutor's Office has confirmed that it has an open investigation into the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines in the European Union. This exceptional confirmation comes after extremely high public interest. No further details will be made public at this stage. Date: 14 October 2022. Source: www.eppo.europa.eu
JAVIER CARRASCO: On another note, it is important to take into account the unease of many EU parliamentarians and millions of people that their rights have been violated. In some cases, it was even unconstitutional, such as the lockdown, I repeat, imposed in Spain, by the declaration of the State of Emergency. In fact, entire countries like Italy stood up to measures and restrictions to try to save their economy. We were introduced to a green passport that is now worthless, and a series of restrictions whose goal was that the majority of the population be vaccinated.

Some think that these have been political and ideological decisions rather than health related ones. Coercion has been real in many cases.

Don't forget to follow us on social media and on our Telegram channel. You know that we are becoming more and more active.

Today we are pleased to be able to count on Luis Miguel Chirinos, independent journalist and editor of SOTT.net, and Ángeles Maestro, medical doctor specialising in public health and former Deputy of the Spanish Parliament. Luis, Ángeles, thank you very much for being with us today on El Zoom. Ángeles, I'll start with you. I believe that this is not the first time that we have been faced with a case that, in my opinion, is more than a mere suspicion of corruption, because of the way it has been done, and above all, quite special because of the situation in which it took place, because it was in the middle of a pandemic in which so many lives were at stake. In Europe we are facing one of the biggest scandals, can we call it that?

ÁNGELES MAESTRO: Yes, and I am honestly very happy that this scandal at least tries to break the silence that has fallen on governments and the mainstream media, after suppressing specialists, Nobel laureates, prestigious people whose lives are dedicated to science. Of course, it has come about, as you were saying... There has been a very important fact in Spain. I think it is key to analyse this: in April 2020, that is, barely a month after the pandemic was declared, the Committee of Experts of the Ministry of Health was gathered and told that the decisions that were going to be taken were political decisions that had nothing to do with technical-epidemiological decisions. That made the experts leave, because, of course, to make political decisions not based on scientific criteria, the Guardia Civil, the police or the army are enough.

JAVIER CARRASCO: I would like to focus on this case, because it has also been followed very closely from where you are, Luis, this whole case. What is this... because I was very struck by the personal diplomacy aspect. That is to say, if Mrs Ursula von der Leyen, who has made these contracts, is not clearly putting all the facts on the table, all the figures... we are looking at the contracts that have been made, all of which have been crossed out, and this is something that should be, let's say, public knowledge... As it is a fait accompli, it looks like she is getting away with it. But it shouldn't be like that. We are facing a big shock, a scandal, as I was saying to Ángeles, a full-blown scandal.

LUIS CHIRINOS: Yes, look, Javier, first we have to understand that this is not an isolated case, as you were saying. Now it seems to be the norm. The pharmaceutical companies involved and their sponsored politicians - because that's what they are - could not allow transparency in this type of negotiation because their business would have fallen apart, and the implicit corruption could have been exposed. The whole negotiation was done in secret. Suddenly the European Union was forced to purchase 1.8 billion vaccines from Pfizer. That's 35 billion euros from the public purse, if the deal were to go through in full. Now Emily O'Reilly, the European Ombudsman, initiated this procedure on 16 September last year because of the European Commission's refusal to grant public access to text messages exchanged between European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer's CEO during preliminary negotiations. MEPs now have denounced a long list of irregularities in the procurement of the vaccines, negotiations via SMS, no official documentation, lack of analysis and lack of control. Albert Bourla, the CEO of the Pfizer company, was also invited to appear and did not attend. I think that says a lot.

JAVIER CARRASCO: These are all facts that make it clear that everything has been done, let's say, behind the curtain. But I think, and you know very well, Ángeles, that this is not the first time that they have tried to cover this up. I would like us to talk a bit about what it is (because you know, with your political experience, and with your medical experience). We know the power that these pharmaceutical companies have. We know how they can exert pressure. We know how they condition governments, and we know how they have been able to manage these contracts that have been signed, with confidentiality, so that the conditions cannot be known. In other words, this is blatant. Ángeles:

ÁNGELES MAESTRO: First of all, the pharmaceutical industry manages more money and more profits than arms dealers and drug traffickers. In other words, it is a factual, real power that has an immense capacity for corruption, not only of the political authorities but also of the health authorities. And at the moment (we will talk about this another day) it has control over the training of doctors. As I know we have little time, let me share a very important fact: In 2010, the World Health Organisation, a United Nations body financed more than 80% by the pharmaceutical industry (i.e. it is a pawn of the pharmaceutical industry) had to declare in 2010 that its Committee of Experts for influenza A had been bribed by the pharmaceutical industry. All this after, in the previous crisis, millions of taxpayer's money went to buy vaccines that were useless: Tamiflu, Relenza perhaps... let's remember these names that were later discarded. At this moment the pharmaceutical industry, the big pharmaceutical multinationals, Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Johnson&Johnson, etcetera, have managed to create an apocalyptic scenario, to make people panic about dying because it was an unprecedented situation. In these conditions of terror among the population, control measures and the elimination of fundamental rights were imposed, massive closures of small and medium-sized companies that have not reopened, and the conditional approval of vaccines that had never been used before; and which also had two months of clinical trials, when the rest of the vaccines that have been used throughout the history of humanity have had clinical trial periods of at least five years.

JAVIER CARRASCO: I would now like to talk a little about the issue of censorship, because I don't know if we are one of the few media outlets that is, not uncovering, but at least reporting this. I'll ask you again later, Ángeles, but I don't know, from where you are, Luis, if it's being dealt with a lot, because in Latin America Pfizer has also done its thing, not only in countries like the Dominican Republic, but also in Peru, Colombia, Chile, they have had different contracts. And I don't know if the media, many of them even sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, as it is revealed, are serving as a firewall. Because if you go to Google (and here in Moscow it's a bit cut and bare), you won't find many search results with "scandal + Pfizer + Ursula". I don't know about where you are. Tell me, Luis.

LUIS CHIRINOS: No, no, not at all, Javier. And this has also been an ongoing problem with regard to pharmaceuticals. Like you were saying, the mass media serve as fronts for the interests of the pharmaceutical industry. And well, let's remember that Pfizer and other big pharmaceutical companies have a long list of corruption. Of course not only in Latin America (lobbying, bribery, kickbacks and hundreds of practices that violate the most basic ethical standards in the pharmaceutical and medical field). And we cannot forget either that Pfizer had to pay the highest fine in the history of the United States in an out-of-court settlement for its fraudulent business practices. It is the highest fine in US history. Now, to think that suddenly during the pandemic this and other big pharma companies have changed their business model (because that's what they are, they are businesses), that they have reformed, and that they did everything for the greater good, is pure cognitive dissonance, isn't it? That's how they work.

JAVIER CARRASCO: We were talking before about testing, about checking the vaccines. But with so many doses being ordered, the numbers are fluctuating. Millions and millions of doses, in this case from the European Commission, Ángeles, to Pfizer. And we are seeing a lot of them going to waste. I don't know what is going to be done with this stock, who is going to benefit (certainly the company that has taken so many millions) and if it is going to be imposed on us, or on the Europeans, because there was practically talk of it being compulsory. Some political parties, and in some countries, it was not imposed, but there was talk of this, of having to have these vaccines. And now we see how the contract was made, and how the vaccines were, let's say, "tested".

ANGELES MAESTRO: I think that the house of cards that has been set up around the multi-million dollar vaccine business is crumbling. And it is crumbling because of fundamental facts. Apart from what you have pointed out from the European Parliament, the most terrible thing that can happen with a vaccine is coming out. And that is the mortality. The excess mortality of young people, of children between 4 and 11 years of age, in all age groups except children from 0 to 4 years of age, who until now, fortunately, have not been vaccinated. In other words, young, previously healthy people are dying. This has been seen in athletes, but it is also being seen in any other type of professions. From cardiovascular diseases in particular, to rampant cancers, to diseases such as herpes, to autoimmune diseases. It is estimated, a whistle blower agency in the US estimates, that Pfizer alone has perpetrated damages worth 3.3 billion dollars, and that leaves aside the major scandal that all those doses bought with public money, and vaccinated the population through deceit: the multinational pharmaceutical companies were exempted from payment from the adverse effects, that is one of the major scandals of the European Commission.

JAVIER CARRASCO: That is one of the premises of the contracts that we are seeing. Pfizer is totally exempted in this case from any damages caused by side effects or whatever happens. In some countries, even if Pfizer is taken to litigation, it's going to be the country itself which has to bear the costs of the proceedings. It's nonsense. It is equivalent to signing, I don't know, a kind of will in which you are going to lose absolutely everything. And that has been done in this way, I repeat: there have been more companies, but in the case of Ursula von der Leyen, through messages that they don't want to publish because, "whatever", they are not of a basic necessity. As Ángeles says, taxpayer money was spent and involved in these contracts, and what they are trying to do is to hide it. I do not know if Ursula von der Leyen is going to come out of this unscathed, Luis, or what is going to happen, because it is not just a handful of MEPs who are behind it. We are talking about the Anti-Fraud Prosecutor's Office. We are talking about a Special Committee, I don't know what is going to happen, or if these lobbies are going to have more power. Luis:

LUIS CHIRINOS: Well, to begin with, Von der Leyen had a great responsibility, which was to make the best decisions for the benefit of Europeans. This of course was not the case. She made the decision to benefit her husband, herself, and the big pharma companies involved. Now MEPs are calling for Von der Leyen's immediate resignation, but were that to happen, it does not mean that everything will be over. Because it was just a taste of what goes on behind the scenes day in and day out. Now something very curious is happening, because the CEO of Pfizer said, "No, no, no, no, there were no SMS messages in the negotiation, there were papers". "No, no, no, no, there were pre-negotiation papers, not negotiation papers. The whole negotiation took place via SMS". And then Von der Leyen comes out and says, "You know what? I'm not going to reveal my messages". So, well, from that point on, there is a contradiction.

JAVIER CARRASCO: Well, in fact, the vice-president of the European Commission (and we even had a graphic prepared that said so, but unfortunately we are short of time) said that, well, that they were not relevant and that decisions were taken as a matter of urgency. "Well, we have taken this decision because it is the best thing to do". I don't know, you are a representative of all Europeans, and you are taking decisions with public money, which are impacting all the economies of the European Union.

LUIS CHIRINOS: Exactly, exactly.

ANGELES MAESTRO: I would like to insist, because it seems to me that if we approach it exclusively from an economic point of view, it is true but it is partial, because with Covid vaccines a real crime against humanity is being committed. At the moment, according to official data, by June 2022, 45,000 people in the European Union had died directly as a result of vaccines, and there would have been two million serious adverse effects. The data that are coming in, it is not just that the RNA vaccines have not saved a single life, as was published in the British Medical Journal, but that the Pfizer trials show that people who have received the Pfizer vaccine have 36% more serious adverse events than those who have received the placebo. In other words, I am talking about a crime against public health that has been carried out by the pharmaceutical industry, with the support of the media, with the complicity of the governments of the countries, and of the European Union, and with the bribery of health authorities; hospital directors, directors of medical societies, scientific societies, etc. With an issue that is also strictly economic, I agree with you on that point. All this has been possible because there is a concentration of capital in the big investment funds (Black Rock, Vanguard, State Street) that control the big media, the social networks and have an enormous capacity to bribe governments. As Luis was saying, when influenza A broke out, the European Parliament requested the appearance of the Committee of Experts of the World Health Organisation, which had been bribed. They did not appear, and nothing happened. Only a rebellion of the people in the face of overmortality, in the face of the risk of paying not only with our public money, but also with our lives...

JAVIER CARRASCO: We are running out of time. Let's hope that the outcome is different in this case, because we are seeing that these are political decisions and it's the citizens that have suffered. I am running out of time, but we are going to return to this issue and I really hope to be able to count on you again. Ángeles, Luis, thank you very much for being on El Zoom. I send you a big hug. Thank you very much.

I end today's programme with some conclusions on a subject that is as controversial as it is transcendental in our present, and with something that has marked our lives, which is the pandemic. And I am going to do so without going into conspiracy theories or anything like that, because that is not what this is about. It is about how some politicians have taken advantage of the situation to profit illegally. It's about shadow contracts, it's about "every man for himself" instead of solidarity. It's about corporations still having the upper hand, and some politicians carrying out those orders at our expense. It speaks to the fact that if you want to be the example of transparency and democracy, you cannot hide data that is in the public interest because lives are at stake, because money is public. And it also speaks to the fact that this virus changed the way we live, just as coercive policies and unilateral sanctions are doing. They are also doing it right now. If Ursula Von der Leyen has committed a crime, let her pay for it. Let her tell how Europeans' money has been spent, how they have been induced to put up with unconstitutional measures, how those who voluntarily do not want to be vaccinated have been stigmatised. Or how a company outside the bloc has lined its pockets thanks to mobile phone conversations. Let's be serious. If she has to pay, let her pay, but I'm afraid she's going to get away with it again, because it's already a fait accompli, a fact that adds up to a long list.

That's it. You know where to find me. Write to me. Bye!