Smoking Gun Evidence’ Discovered The COVID Injections Are Nothing Less Than ‘Pre-Meditated Murder’
Designed As ‘Killing Machines,’ They’re A Clear Violation Of The Nuremberg Code
– ‘This Shows A Conspiracy’ To Murder Americans And People Worldwide
American Attorney Thomas Renz reviewed the US Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) ‘Guidance for Industry’ documents and discovered what he believes is “smoking gun evidence” of pre-meditated murder.
“There’s no other conclusion that I can draw … This is the smoking gun evidence that proves they knew that the gene therapy products they masqueraded as ‘vaccines’ had the ability to shed, cause cancer and kill,” he said.
Thomas “Tom” Renz became well known early on during the covid era for leading federal lawsuits in six US states that challenged shutdowns, mask mandates and the safety of vaccines. He works through the law firm ‘Renz Law’ and regularly publishes articles on his Substack page titled ‘Tom Renz’s Newsletter’.
In an article on January 8th, Renz began by explaining that the covid vaccines are not vaccines. “It’s critical that people understand that the covid-19 injections are gene therapy,” he wrote.
He then led his readers through proof that US authorities knew that recipients of covid injections might shed onto others, including those who did not consent to being vaccinated.
Renz then demonstrated how they knew that these injections would cause cancer in 2006, as confirmed by a 2023 study on people with so-called “long covid.”
As if their criminality was not enough, Renz highlighted a science paper that showed their proposed solution to the problem they had created – the cancer caused by covid injections – is another gene therapy product whose recipients also have the potential to shed causing illness in others.
“This shows conspiracy,” Renz concluded.
You can read Renz’s entire article, which we have paraphrased below, on Substack HERE.
Covid Injections are Gene Therapy
Moreso, Moderna and Pfizer’s own SEC filings admit that covid injections are gene therapy products, Renz pointed out. Below is an extract from one of Moderna’s quarterly Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filings that says exactly this:
No mRNA drug has been approved in this new potential class of medicines and may never be approved as a result of efforts by others or us. mRNA drug development has substantial clinical development and regulatory risk due to the novel and unprecedented nature of this new class of medicines.
As a potential new class of medicines, no mRNA medicines have been approved to date by the FDA or other regulatory agency… currently mRNA is considered a gene therapy product by the FDA.
In March 2015, the US Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), the FDA and the Centre for Biologics Evaluation and Research (“CBER”) published a “Guide for Industry.” The Guide defines gene therapies as:
Gene therapies are defined in the FDA guidance document entitled, “Gene Therapy Clinical Trials – Observing Subjects for Delayed Adverse Events” dated November 2006 as “[p]roducts that mediate their effects by transcription and/or translation of transferred genetic material and/or by integrating into the host genome and that are administered as nucleic acids, viruses, or genetically engineered microorganisms. The products may be used to modify cells in vivo or transferred to cells ex vivo prior to administration to the recipient.”
For purposes of this guidance, a vectored vaccine is one that uses a virus or microbe (typically a bacterium), or a DNA plasmid to introduce DNA/RNA encoding for antigens to cells of the body. “Vector” refers to the virus, microbe, or DNA plasmid used as the carrier.
So, what does all this mean in plain English? “It means the covid vaccines are gene products,” Renz wrote.
They Knew Shedding was Possible Years Ago
Renz then talked readers through how they knew “shedding” was a possibility while vilifying those who warned of this happening as “conspiracy theorists.”
Vaccine shedding is where a vaccinated person releases the components of a vaccine. It is a form of viral shedding which can occur following a viral infection caused by live-attenuated vaccines which contain a weakened form of a pathogen. In other words, a vaccinated person transmits an illness to others. While it is known to occur, the “official narrative” denies that it is happening with covid “vaccines.”
“We were called ‘conspiracy theorists’ and gaslit and censored when we warned about shedding and questioned why unvaccinated females were bleeding abnormally after being exposed to the jabbed,” Renz wrote.
To prove they knew recipients of covid injections could shed and harm those who never consented to gene therapy he shared an excerpt from another “Guidance to Industry” also published by the HHS, FDA and CBER in 2015:
The Centre for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER)/Office of Cellular, Tissue, and Gene Therapies (OCTGT) is issuing this guidance to provide you, sponsors of virus or bacteria-based gene therapy products (VBGT products) and oncolytic viruses or bacteria (oncolytic products) with recommendations on how to conduct shedding studies during preclinical and clinical development.
For purposes of this guidance, the term “shedding” means release of VBGT or oncolytic [cancer] products from the patient through one or all of the following ways: excreta (faeces); secreta (urine, saliva, nasopharyngeal fluids etc.); or through the skin (pustules, sores, wounds).
Shedding raises the possibility of transmission of VBGT or oncolytic products from treated to untreated individuals (e.g., close contacts and health care professionals).
The possibility that the shed VBGT or oncolytic product may be infectious raises safety concerns related to the risk of transmission to untreated individuals. [Emphasis added]
“They knew about the potential for this to transfer (shed) from those injected with the covid-19 gene therapy product to those who did not consent. They identified multiple vectors in which a non-consenting person could be affected and harmed through the body fluid or excretions of a treated person. This is an open admission and a clear violation of the Nuremberg Code’s first principle of voluntary consent,” Renz said.