Rules-based International Order: NATO, Goldman Sachs and the Council on Foreign Relations

 

Rules-based International Order: NATO, Goldman Sachs and the Council on Foreign Relations

By Rick Rozoff
Global Research, May 07, 2021
Anti-bellum 13 March 2021
Region:
Theme:

 7
 1  3
 
  11

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version). Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

North Atlantic Treaty Organization Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg had a busy week in the U.S., though he didn’t visit the institutions or meet with the personnel traditionally engaged by the head of history’s longest and largest military bloc. He didn’t, for example, interact with the Pentagon, the NATO Allied Command Transformation headquarters in Norfolk, Virginia, the State Department or the White House. Instead, in a revealing indication of where NATO understands substantive foreign policy decisions to be deliberated over and agreed upon, he addressed a university-based elite international affairs think tank, the Goldman Sachs investment bank and financial services company and America’s preeminent global affairs think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations.

From the most recent backwards, on March 11 Stoltenberg delivered the David A. Morse Lecture at the Council on Foreign Relations with Admiral James Stavridis, formerly NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe and now with the Carlyle Group, moderating. The NATO website reported his insisting “NATO must strengthen collective defence, step up transatlantic consultations, and stand up for the international rules based order – which he warned ‘is being challenged by authoritarian powers, including China.’”

NATO’s definition of the rules-based international order and its plans for China will be examined later.

He also, as though it was in his nature to refrain from doing so, condemned “Russia’s use of diverse tools such as cyber-attacks and disinformation on social media to interfere with Allied democracies and political processes.”

On March 10 Stoltenberg was guest of honor at the Talks at GS [Goldman Sachs] forum with John Waldron, president and chief operating officer of The Goldman Sachs Group. He didn’t waste much time before evoking NATO’s Article 5 collective war clause, which in 2001 was employed to deploy military forces to Afghanistan and later Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, and conduct under Operation Active Endeavor the naval surveillance and interdiction of the entire Mediterranean Sea. He affirmed that “our core task is to protect and defend each other,” and that, correspondingly, if “one Ally is attacked that will be regarded as an attack on the whole Alliance.” That is as stark a military threat as can be made in the nuclear age and it’s aimed squarely at Russia.

He also spoke of the almost twenty-year war in Afghanistan, where NATO troops now outnumber American ones by four times, 10,000 to 2,500, and Iraq where NATO recently announced it would have twice as many troops as the U.S., 5,000 compared to 2,500.

Although acknowledging that “The Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact was [sic] the main reason for NATO’s existence for decades,” despite the fact that both were dissolved thirty years ago NATO has gone from sixteen members and no partners to thirty members and forty partners in the interim, with members and partners on all inhabited continents. Stoltenberg didn’t address the obvious contradiction, nor did Goldman Sachs ask him about it. Global expeditionary NATO suits its concerns entirely. Though by way of both candor and no little vainglory, he said this about the process:

“There were actually some people talking about the possibility of Russia joining NATO because we had all the members….the Warsaw Pact – there were eight members to the Warsaw Pact, the Soviet Union, Poland, Eastern Germany, Romania and these central and eastern European countries. Out of those eight countries, seven are today a member of NATO. And the eighth, the Soviet Union, doesn’t exist. But three former republics in the Soviet Union, the Baltic countries, are member[s] of NATO….”

He went on to identify 2014 as the watershed year in which Russia went from a partner to an adversary, and itemized how NATO has pushed the military advance toward Russia in a detailed manner:

“[T]hings have really changed and especially in 2014, when Russia used military force to annex a part of another country, Crimea in Ukraine. And we see a more assertive Russia. We see Russia investing heavily in new military capabilities, new nuclear weapons, new advanced delivery systems and of course that’s the reason also why NATO has implemented the biggest reinforcement to our collective defence since the end of the Cold War, with combat ready battlegroups in the eastern part of the Alliance – we didn’t have that before, we have it now, higher readiness of our forces, increased defence spending – after years of cutting defence spending, all Allies have started to increase defence spending, and also changed our command structure and implemented really big changes of this Alliance since 2014.”

Surely someone in Russia must realize that, just as in 1812 and 1941, massive multinational military forces aren’t deployed along its entire western border with any other intent but to intimidate and ultimately attack the country.

His indictment of Russia, the precise sort of litany of accusations ordinarily used to justify a military attack, continued:

“But then, this is not only about military. Because what we see is that Russia is using a wide range of tools. Military tools, as they have done for instance in Syria or in Libya or against Ukraine, but they use economic tools and they use cyber and political tools, and they try to meddle in our domestic political processes. We have seen that in the United States. We have seen it in other European countries. We have seen many reports about cyberattacks.”

Truly, any adversary that nefariously, that comprehensively, that incorrigibly hostile and threatening must be neutralized. And that is what NATO is bent on achieving.

Once Russia is disposed of NATO will contend with China. In fact it’s already begun to do so. Stoltenberg had this to say on the topic:

“China is an authoritarian regime, they don’t share our values, they don’t pretend that they share our democratic values. They believe in another set of principles and values, and it will be the first time actually in centuries that the biggest economy in the world doesn’t share our liberal democratic values.”

At the NATO defense ministers meeting in February Stoltenberg said that “China and Russia are at the forefront of an authoritarian pushback against rules-based international order.”

This is a good time to discuss the expression rules-based international order as it’s employed on most every occasion by NATO of late. Variants of its are values-based international order and liberal international order. Much like the term a Europe whole and free (or a Europe whole, free and at peace) introduced by President George H. W. Bush in Mainz, Germany in 1989, it’s an example of a codeword, catchphrase, countersign, shibboleth routinely exchanged by Atlanticist and broader globalist elites but which the general public in their respective countries have never heard of.

It has to be understood that what is meant as the rules-based international order is distinct from and frequently openly opposed to international law, the United Nations Charter, treaties and traditional norms. practices and precedents in many cases going back centuries, in the case of Europe to the end of the Thirty Years’ War in 1648.

An excerpt from a presentation at the Royal Institute for International Affairs (Chatham House) in London in 2015 entitled Challenges to the Rules-Based International Order offers a concise and unequivocal illustration of what the NATO chief means when he speaks of threats to the rules-based international order:

“The danger today is that this questioning of US global leadership has opened the space for other countries to pursue a ‘might is right’ approach to their own policy priorities. Russia has annexed Crimea in violation of commitments to the Budapest Memorandum, has intervened directly in the conflict in Ukraine, and has laid out a doctrine that brazenly demands recognition of a Russian sphere of influence around its neighbourhood. [emphasis added – RR]

The Chinese leadership is taking steps to turn its contested claims over islands in the South China and East China seas into a fait accompli. And regional powers in the Middle East, concerned about the current and future US administrations responding to the post-Iraq experience by being more selective in their support for traditional allies, are taking the preservation of their security into their own hands. The question arises, therefore, whether the post-Second World War institutions and rules can survive these challenges to US global leadership.”

U.S. global leadership that includes control of international financial institutions and the Internet as well as assigning the entire surface of the earth to six regional military commands and six naval fleets.

In the same year then-U.S ambassador to Germany John Emerson presented an address to the 14th Berlin Security Conference: Euro-Atlantic Partnership entitled The Importance of a Rules-Based International Order, which contained these words:

“We have spent a lot of time today discussing the threat of terrorism, the crisis in Ukraine, and the war in Syria, but let me give you three aspects of our collective security interests that we must also address. They are cyber stability, climate control, and trade and investment.”

In this week’s presentations at Goldman Sachs, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University, Stoltenberg repeatedly mentioned cyber security and climate control and occasionally world trade and financial matters. He addressed Goldman Sachs after all.

On March 9 he spoke at the Center for International Security and Cooperation where he was hosted by Rose Gottemoeller, former Deputy Secretary General of NATO during the Barack Obama and Donald Trump administrations and also Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security at the U.S. State Department, and by Michael McFaul, U.S. ambassador to Russia from 2012-2014 and currently a professor at the International Studies in the Department of Political Science at Stanford University.

There he could hardly contain his enthusiasm for someone who has been militantly pro-NATO to a degree and for a length of time, in both intensity and duration arguably uncontested in the world currently, effusing: “[O]n the Biden administration, I really welcome the very strong commitment and a very strong message from a President Biden and from his whole security team, the message on strengthening alliances, strengthening NATO. And I have had the privilege of working with President Biden in his previous capacities as Vice President, but also as the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. And I know that he knows NATO and he knows Europe. And he really understands the importance of NATO bringing North America and Europe together.”

Specifically he applauded the Biden administration’s decision to rescind his predecessor’s pledge to withdraw a third of American troops stationed in Germany.

He also celebrated the deployment of NATO’s first surveillance drones in Sigonella in Italy, which the government of South Ossetia revealed had been deployed along its and Russia’s southern border almost immediately. And he praised NATO as “the only institution where North America and Europe meets [sic] every day.”

While touting NATO’s 2030 initiative he emphasized its role in preparing a new Strategic Concept to replace that adopted at the bloc’s summit in Lisbon, Portugal in 2010 because “the world has changed,” and “in the current Concept, we refer to Russia, where we say that we are aspiring for a strategic partnership with Russia.” But that “was before Ukraine, before Crimea and before the much more assertive behaviour of aggressive actions by Russia over the last years and especially since 2014.”

Similarly. he said that “the rise of China really is defining for the transatlantic relationship and NATO has to address the rise of China.” It would seem rather incumbent on China to address the rise of global NATO as the latter counts as military partners Asia-Pacific nations like Australia, Japan, South Korea, Mongolia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and New Zealand, six of which border China.

Further regarding China, and by extension the world, he said: China is “now the second largest defence spender in the world, soon the biggest economy, the challenge China represents to the rules-based order, to our core values of democracy, that we have a big power, China, not sharing our values, all of that makes it necessary for NATO to remain a regional alliance, but to respond to the global challenge that the rise of China represents.”

To the point he added: “NATO should respond in many different ways. Partly, we should work more closely with our partners in the Asia-Pacific: Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea and potentially also others.”

Again, no challenges to the rules-based international order will be tolerated.

And as for Russia:

“We have to understand that we have implemented the biggest reinforcement of our collective defence in a generation, since the end of the Cold War, with the battlegroups in the eastern part of the Alliance, something we never had before, combat-ready battlegroups in Poland and the Baltic countries, tripled the size of the NATO response force, higher readiness of our forces, and increased investments in defence, 190 billion extra across Europe and Canada just since 2014. Part of that adaptation is also new command structures for the Atlantic, the vital link between Europe and North America and in Europe, in Germany. Then, on the Black Sea, well, that has been part of our adaptation, that we also have increased our presence in the Black Sea, with air policing, with more naval presence. Just the last few couple of months we have seen several US naval ships sailing in the Black Sea. All the NATO Allies have operated there with naval and air assets.

“And we have also established what we call a tailored forward presence in Romania. And we are working not only, of course, we have three littoral states, Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey, but also two very close partners, Georgia and Ukraine, and we are working closely with them. So we have also the Enhanced Air Policing in the region. And all of this is part of NATO’s response to a more assertive Russia. Let me just add briefly that by saying that we are delivering credible deterrence and defence, because we see Russia responsible for aggressive actions against Ukraine, increased military presence in North Africa and elsewhere in the Middle East.”

Regarding both Russia and China, NATO’s activities at the top of the world were outlined by its secretary general as follows:

“Five NATO Allies are actually Arctic countries and much of NATO territory and NATO waters are in the Arctic. And therefore, NATO is present in the Arctic. And as part of the broader adaptation of our Alliance over the last years, we have increased our presence in the Arctic, meaning with more naval presence, more air presence. We have NATO Allies, but also including the United States, operating more in the Arctic.

“And we, of course, realise the increasing strategic importance of the Arctic, partly caused by global warming, because less ice, more open sea, and partly because of the increased Russian presence in the Arctic.”

The preservation and all-inclusive expansion of the post-World War II, post-Cold War U.S.-engineered rules-based international order is now NATO’s main mission. It is preparing final mopping-up operations after having dispensed with holdouts like Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Macedonia, Slovakia, Ivory Coast and others. The remaining recalcitrants, however, are in at least three instances nuclear powers.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

The original source of this article is Anti-bellum
Copyright © Rick Rozoff, Anti-bellum, 2021
at Nessun commento:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Beware of Covid PCR Testing and the Relentless “Vaccinate Vaccinate Vaccinate” Campaign

 

Beware of Covid PCR Testing and the Relentless “Vaccinate Vaccinate Vaccinate” Campaign

By Peter Koenig
Global Research, May 08, 2021
Theme:

 582
 172  151
 
  949

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

***

Updated on May 10, 2021

The validity of the PCR test has been questioned for months, if not from the very beginning of the declared covid-19 plandemic, including lately also by WHO. However, this test is still and ever more so being forced upon us. This despite the fact that ever more scientific evidence comes to the fore that the test is absolutely unsuited to determine whether a person is “infected” with the covid-19 virus. According to some scientists there are up to 90% false positives. Besides, a positive in 97% of the cases does not indicate that you will come down with symptoms. Especially young people, and people without any co-morbidities rarely show any symptoms.

On the other hand, there is a relentless drive by western countries, foremost Europe and the US to vaccinate-vaccinate-vaccinate – and this with a substance that is not even qualifying as a vaccine, namely a new type of what’s also called “gene-therapy”, a mRNA-type injection which will affect the human genome and most likely the human ADN. mRNA stands for messenger ribonucleuc acid.

The best-known pharma-manufacturers of these mRNA-type substances, falsely called vaccines, include Pfizer, Moderna and a few other inoculations from the Bill Gates created GAVI Alliance, or the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunizations, also called the Vaccine Alliance. They are located in Geneva, next door to WHO.

There are also adenovector-based covid so-called vaccines, such as AstraZeneca and J&J which have been banned by several countries, because of their high risk of blood clotting, or post-vaccination cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT). These are particularly dangerous for young people. In fact, AstraZeneca recently and officially acknowledged that thrombocytopenia (low blood platelet count due to an autoimmune reaction) is a ‘frequent (1% to 10%)’ vaccine adverse event, even though it wasn’t detected during the vaccine trial.

Yet, AstraZeneca and J&J do not have the decency to withdraw them from the market. To the contrary, they continue to push them – letting governments ban them, if they feel the risk is too high. What’s even worse is that the European Medicine’s Agency (EMA) has approved them and is silent in the face of increasing injuries and death rates.

Both of these therapies are basically untested. No substantial animal trials. In the few animal trials carried out on ferrets and rats, all animals died. Claiming an emergency, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recognizes the gravity of the current public health emergency and has granted a so-called Emergency Use Application (EUA) for what effectively is a gene-therapy, not a vaccine. Therefore, further animal trials were skipped and this experimental gene-treatment, the mRNA-type jabs went directly to humans – which are now acting as guinea pigs.

For the tremendous risks and dangers of this therapy, see the recent exclusive interview with Lifesitenews.com (7 April 2021), and testimony of former Pfizer VP and Chief Science Officer, Mike Yeadon, who says “Your government is lying to you in a way that could lead to your death.’ See full interview here. 

It appears that so-called vaccination and testing are in reverse proportions related, i.e. the fewer people volunteer to take the jab, the more governments force these false PCR test on the population. In many countries, Switzerland is a case in point, governments “allow” schools to test school children, including Kindergarten up to four times per month, and businesses may do the same, for the “safety of co-workers” – never mind that most people in many countries still work from their home offices. Not submitting to a test or a highly questionable vaccine, may result in dismissal – losing your job. That’s as gloomy and spooky as it has become, this covid-craze.

Now they have introduced “self-testing kits” sold or distributed by pharmacies. Despite intense propaganda, most of these government bought and subsidized tests remain in pharmacies warehouses, as ever fewer people are willing to submit to this lunacy. On top of it all, you have to report only the positive tests of the self-tests – a further up-wards distortion of the anyway false picture of the so-called “infection rate”. – And nobody seems to ask why. Or if they do, they do it not LOUD ENOUGH.

Of course, the higher the number of covid positives, the higher the willingness to vaccinate, so the propaganda assumes, and if not, the better the justification for more lockdowns, more fear – and again – maybe – more willingness to vaccinate. You see – all actions drive to more fear and eventually “more vaccination”. It is as if countries were given a vaccination quota they have to fulfill, and there seems to be no measure of coercion strong enough to get people to submit to this awful, untested jab.

Even the US top-doc, Dr. Anthony Fauci, expresses his doubts on the vaccines’ effectiveness. See here.

One may also ask, why does Europe and the US not allow the Russian Sputnik V or one of the internationally rolled-out Chinese vaccines? Maybe because these vaccines are real vaccines, based on a decades long experience, the traditional method of injecting a weak or dead virus which will react when it comes in contact with a live virus and creates antibodies to create immunity – without affecting your DNA?

It becomes increasingly obvious that there is a special agenda behind this fierce testing and vaccination craze. To top it all off, and to come closer with a reason for it all, a recent report suggests (yet to be confirmed) that according to Johns Hopkins University, You can be vaccinated with a PCR test, even without knowing (11 April 2021). There we go. See here for more details.

So, why is “vaccination” so important? – And especially vaccination with an mRNA-type injection   why? – One reason may be this: as reported by The Daily Mail and RT.

Pentagon scientists reveal a microchip that senses COVID-19 in your body.

The technology was developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which operates under the Pentagon. The microchip is sure to spark worries among some about a government agency implanting a microchip in a citizen. And who knows what else the microchip does in your body. Anything coming from DARPA is not as benign as it is made to believe, and is certainly not an attraction or a convincer for people who are anyway not keen on getting covid-jabbed.

In addition, the collateral damage of these untested toxins that go as vaccines, the immediate side effects are already by an order of magnitude higher than those of conventional vaccinations. The Defender (Children’s Health Defense – CHD) lists statistical figures from CDC, that the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) received data that between Dec. 14, 2020 and April 1, 2021, a total of 56,869 adverse events were reported, including 2,342 deaths — an increase of 93 over the previous week — and 7,971 serious injuries, up 245 over the same time period. This is the latest from CDC.

According to CDC, these figures are vastly under-reported.

*

In January 2019, the WHO defined the growing number of vaccine critics as one of the ten greatest threats to global health, and since the unprecedented corona vaccination fiasco, the number of vaccine refusers has multiplied. Meanwhile, resistance is emerging even within the conventional medical community. But the masterminds at WHO continue to insist on an unrealistic vaccination rate of at least 70 percent.

Why this tremendous push for vaccination? We know that the covid-19 death rate is comparable to that of a common flu. See Dr. Fauci in peer-reviewed “Navigating the Uncharted”. Listening to Dr. Yeadon, we also know that vaccination is unnecessary, as there are many effective preventive and curing medicines available.

In addition to the immediate side effects, the medium to long-term collateral damage may be much more significant. Dr. Yeadon, Pfizer’s former VP says that two to three years down the road, we may see massive genocide-like deaths from mRNA-type injections. See this.

It is increasingly clear that behind this covid cum vaccination drive, there is a eugenics agenda of gigantic proportions. This has recently also been recognized by the leading German Human Rights lawyer, Dr. Reiner Füllmich, a member of the Corona Investigative Committee, which investigates globally on the prosecution of fraudulent reporting of covid- vaccination, testing and leading to fraudulent “case figures” – and to a massive drive to instill fear in the population. He and his team are launching several Class Action suits in the US and in Canada, and several lawsuits against individuals and institutions in Europe and the US. He calls these coming trials “Nuremberg 2”, after the Nuremberg trials following WWII.

In a recent interview (12 April 2021), Dr. Füllmich said he sees the light at the end of the tunnel. He also said about Corona measures,

“These are the worst crimes against humanity ever committed. The few people who can still think independently, about 10 to 20 percent of the population, they know that the question was never about a virus or human health, but about a massive thinning of the world population, and total control.” – See the full interview here.

Add to the horrendous deadly future for maybe hundreds of millions of people from the vaccines, that more mRNA-type substances will be implanted in people old and young, including children, without them knowing, by repeated testing – and in some countries even forced or coerced repeated testing.

If we go by the words of experienced Dr. Mike Yeadon, former VP Chief Science for Pizer, we might be in for mass-dying – an outright genocide – in a few years.

And this in addition to the collateral social, economic and health damage already perpetuated by false covid-data and government fear-instilling lying, leaving hundreds of millions in misery, despair and abject famine – leading to death.

Is massive depopulation an objective of this corona fraud?

Hence, be aware of even more exposure to the risk by accepting the incessant call for testing-testing and more testing. Be alert and aware and follow the light.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he has worked for over 30 years on water and environment around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and  co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020)

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

The original source of this article is Global Research
Copyright © Peter Koenig, Global Research, 2021
at Nessun commento:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Video: “Crimes Against Humanity”: The German Corona Investigation. “The PCR Pandemic”

Video: “Crimes Against Humanity”: The German Corona Investigation. “The PCR Pandemic”

Full Transcript

By Reiner Fuellmich
Global Research, May 11, 2021
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich 3 October 2020
Region:
Theme: ,

 5800
 549  589
 
  10.2K

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version). 

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

First published in October 2020

The German Corona Investigative Committee has taken testimony from a large number of international scientists and experts since July 10, 2020.

Scroll down for the Video and Full Transcript of Dr. Reiner Fuellmich‘s  presentation.

Their conclusions are the following: 

  • The corona crisis must be renamed the “Corona Scandal”
  • It is:
    • The biggest tort case ever
    • The greatest crime against humanity ever committed
  • Those responsible must be:
    • Criminally prosecuted for crimes against humanity
    • Sued for civil damages
  • Deaths
    • There is no excess mortality in any country
    • Corona virus mortality equals seasonal flu
    • 94% of deaths in Bergamo were caused by transferring sick patients to nursing homes where they infected old people with weak immune systems
    • Doctors and hospitals worldwide were paid to declare deceased victims of Covid-19
    • Autopsies showed:
      • Fatalities almost all caused by serious pre-existing conditions
      • Almost all deaths were very old people
      • Sweden (no lockdown) and Britain (strict lockdown) have comparable disease and mortality statistics
    • US states with and without lockdowns have comparable disease and mortality statistics
  • Health
    • Hospitals remain empty and some face bankruptcy
    • Populations have T-cell immunity from previous influenza waves
    • Herd immunity needs only 15-25% population infection and is already achieved
    • Only when a person has symptoms can an infection be contagious
  • Tests:
    • Many scientists call this a PCR-test pandemic, not a corona pandemic
    • Very healthy and non-infectious people may test positive
    • Likelihood of false-positives is 89-94% or near certainty
    • Prof. Drosten developed his PCR test from an old SARS virus without ever having seen the real Wuhan virus from China
    • The PCR test is not based on scientific facts with respect to infections
    • PCR tests are useless for the detection of infections
    • A positive PCR test does not mean an infection is present or that an intact virus has been found
    • Amplification of samples over 35 cycles is unreliable but WHO recommended 45 cycles
  • Illegality:
    • The German government locked down, imposed social-distancing/ mask-wearing on the basis of a single opinion
    • The lockdown was imposed when the virus was already retreating
    • The lockdowns were based on non-existent infections
    • Former president of the German federal constitutional court doubted the constitutionality of the corona measures
    • Former UK supreme court judge Lord Sumption concluded there was no factual basis for panic and no legal basis for corona measures
    • German RKI (CDC equivalent) recommended no autopsies be performed
    • Corona measures have no sufficient factual or legal basis, are unconstitutional and must be repealed immediately
    • No serious scientist gives any validity to the infamous Neil Ferguson’s false computer models warning of millions of deaths
    • Mainstream media completely failed to report the true facts of the so-called pandemic
    • Democracy is in danger of being replaced by fascist totalitarian models
    • Drosten (of PCR test), Tedros of WHO, and others have committed crimes against humanity as defined in the International Criminal Code
    • Politicians can avoid going down with the charlatans and criminals by starting the long overdue public scientific discussion
  • Conspiracy:
    • Politicians and mainstream media deliberately drove populations to panic
    • Children were calculatedly made to feel responsible “for the painful tortured death of their parents and grandparents if they do not follow Corona rules”
    • The hopeless PCR test is used to create fear and not to diagnose
    • There can be no talk of a second wave
  • Injury and damage:
    • Evidence of gigantic health and economic damage to populations
    • Anti-corona measures have:
      • Killed innumerable people
      • Destroyed countless companies and individuals worldwide
    • Children are being taken away from their parents
    • Children are traumatized en masse
    • Bankruptcies are expected in small- and medium-sized businesses
  • Redress:
    • A class action lawsuit must be filed in the USA or Canada, with all affected parties worldwide having the opportunity to join
    • Companies and self-employed people must be compensated for damages

Full Transcript 

Hello. I am Reiner Fuellmich and I have been admitted to the Bar in Germany and in California for 26 years. I have been practicing law primarily as a trial lawyer against fraudulent corporations such as Deutsche Bank, formerly one of the world’s largest and most respected banks, today one of the most toxic criminal organizations in the world; VW, one of the world’s largest and most respected car manufacturers, today notorious for its giant diesel fraud; and Kuehne and Nagel, the world’s largest shipping company. We’re suing them in a multi-million-dollar bribery case. 

I’m also one of four members of the German Corona Investigative Committee. Since July 10, 2020, this Committee has been listening to a large number of international scientists’ and experts’ testimony to find answers to questions about the corona crisis, which more and more people worldwide are asking. All the above-mentioned cases of corruption and fraud committed by the German corporations pale in comparison in view of the extent of the damage that the corona crisis has caused and continues to cause. 

This corona crisis, according to all we know today, must be renamed a “Corona Scandal” and those responsible for it must be criminally prosecuted and sued for civil damages. On a political level, everything must be done to make sure that no one will ever again be in a position of such power as to be able to defraud humanity or to attempt to manipulate us with their corrupt agendas. And for this reason I will now explain to you how and where an international network of lawyers will argue this biggest tort case ever, the corona fraud scandal, which has meanwhile unfolded into probably the greatest crime against humanity ever committed. 

Crimes against humanity were first defined in connection with the Nuremberg trials after World War II, that is, when they dealt with the main war criminals of the Third Reich. Crimes against humanity are today regulated in section 7 of the International Criminal Code. The three major questions to be answered in the context of a judicial approach to the corona scandal are: 

  1. Is there a corona pandemic or is there only a PCR-test pandemic? Specifically, does a positive PCR-test result mean that the person tested is infected with Covid-19, or does it mean absolutely nothing in connection with the Covid-19 infection?
  2. Do the so-called anti-corona measures, such as the lockdown, mandatory face masks, social distancing, and quarantine regulations, serve to protect the world’s population from corona, or do these measures serve only to make people panic so that they believe – without asking any questions – that their lives are in danger, so that in the end the pharmaceutical and tech industries can generate huge profits from the sale of PCR tests, antigen and antibody tests and vaccines, as well as the harvesting of our genetic fingerprints?
  3. Is it true that the German government was massively lobbied, more so than any other country, by the chief protagonists of this so-called corona pandemic, Mr. Drosten, virologist at charity hospital in Berlin; Mr. Wieler, veterinarian and head of the German equivalent of the CDC, the RKI; and Mr. Tedros, Head of the World Health Organization or WHO; because Germany is known as a particularly disciplined country and was therefore to become a role model for the rest of the world for its strict and, of course, successful adherence to the corona measures?

Answers to these three questions are urgently needed because the allegedly new and highly dangerous coronavirus has not caused any excess mortality anywhere in the world, and certainly not here in Germany. But the anti-corona measures, whose only basis are the PCR-test results, which are in turn all based on the German Drosten test, have, in the meantime, caused the loss of innumerable human lives and have destroyed the economic existence of countless companies and individuals worldwide. In Australia, for example, people are thrown into prison if they do not wear a mask or do not wear it properly, as deemed by the authorities. In the Philippines, people who do not wear a mask or do not wear it properly, in this sense, are getting shot in the head. 

Let me first give you a summary of the facts as they present themselves today. The most important thing in a lawsuit is to establish the facts – that is, to find out what actually happened. That is because the application of the law always depends on the facts at issue. If I want to prosecute someone for fraud, I cannot do that by presenting the facts of a car accident. So what happened here regarding the alleged corona pandemic? 

The facts laid out below are, to a large extent, the result of the work of the Corona Investigative Committee. This Committee was founded on July 10, 2020 by four lawyers in order to determine, through hearing expert testimony of international scientists and other experts: 

  1. How dangerous is the virus really?
  2. What is the significance of a positive PCR test?
  3. What collateral damage has been caused by the corona measures, both with respect to the world population’s health, and with respect to the world’s economy?

Let me start with a little bit of background information. What happened in May 2019 and then in early 2020? And what happened 12 years earlier with the swine flu, which many of you may have forgotten about? In May 2019, the stronger of the two parties which govern Germany in a grand coalition, the CDU, held a Congress on Global Health, apparently at the instigation of important players from the pharmaceutical industry and the tech industry. At this Congress, the usual suspects, you might say, gave their speeches. Angela Merkel was there, and the German Secretary of Health, Jens Spahn. But, some other people, whom one would not necessarily expect to be present at such a gathering, were also there: Professor Drosten, virologist from the Charite hospital in Berlin; Professor Wieler, veterinarian and Head of the RKI, the German equivalent of the CDC; as well as Mr. Tedros, philosopher and Head of the World Health Organization (WHO). They all gave speeches there. Also present and giving speeches were the chief lobbyists of the world’s two largest health funds, namely the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust. Less than a year later, these very people called the shots in the proclamation of the worldwide corona pandemic, made sure that mass PCR tests were used to prove mass infections with Covid-19 all over the world, and are now pushing for vaccines to be invented and sold worldwide. 

These infections, or rather the positive test results that the PCR tests delivered, in turn became the justification for worldwide lockdowns, social distancing and mandatory face masks. It is important to note at this point that the definition of a pandemic was changed 12 years earlier. Until then, a pandemic was considered to be a disease that spread worldwide and which led to many serious illnesses and deaths. Suddenly, and for reasons never explained, it was supposed to be a worldwide disease only. Many serious illnesses and many deaths were not required any more to announce a pandemic. Due to this change, the WHO, which is closely intertwined with the global pharmaceutical industry, was able to declare the swine flu pandemic in 2009, with the result that vaccines were produced and sold worldwide on the basis of contracts that have been kept secret until today. 

These vaccines proved to be completely unnecessary because the swine flu eventually turned out to be a mild flu, and never became the horrific plague that the pharmaceutical industry and its affiliated universities kept announcing it would turn into, with millions of deaths certain to happen if people didn’t get vaccinated. These vaccines also led to serious health problems. About 700 children in Europe fell incurably ill with narcolepsy and are now forever severely disabled. The vaccines bought with millions of taxpayers’ money had to be destroyed with even more taxpayers’ money. Already then, during the swine flu, the German virologist Drosten was one of those who stirred up panic in the population, repeating over and over again that the swine flu would claim many hundreds of thousands, even millions of deaths all over the world. In the end, it was mainly thanks to Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg and his efforts as a member of the German Bundestag, and also a member of the Council of Europe, that this hoax was brought to an end before it would lead to even more serious consequences. 

Fast forward to March of 2020, when the German Bundestag announced an Epidemic Situation of National Importance, which is the German equivalent of a pandemic in March of 2020 and, based on this, the lockdown with the suspension of all essential constitutional rights for an unforeseeable time, there was only one single opinion on which the Federal Government in Germany based its decision. In an outrageous violation of the universally accepted principle “audiatur et altera pars”, which means that one must also hear the other side, the only person they listened to was Mr. Drosten. 

That is the very person whose horrific, panic-inducing prognoses had proved to be catastrophically false 12 years earlier. We know this because a whistleblower named David Sieber, a member of the Green Party, told us about it. He did so first on August 29, 2020 in Berlin, in the context of an event at which Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. also took part, and at which both men gave speeches. And he did so afterwards in one of the sessions of our Corona Committee. 

The reason he did this is that he had become increasingly sceptical about the official narrative propagated by politicians and the mainstream media. He had therefore undertaken an effort to find out about other scientists’ opinions and had found them on the Internet. There, he realized that there were a number of highly renowned scientists who held a completely different opinion, which contradicted the horrific prognoses of Mr. Drosten. They assumed – and still do assume – that there was no disease that went beyond the gravity of the seasonal flu, that the population had already acquired cross- or T-cell immunity against this allegedly new virus, and that there was therefore no reason for any special measures, and certainly not for vaccinations. 

These scientists include Professor John Ioannidis of Stanford University in California, a specialist in statistics and epidemiology, as well as public health, and at the same time the most quoted scientist in the world; Professor Michael Levitt, Nobel prize-winner for chemistry and also a biophysicist at Stanford University; the German professors Kary Mölling, Sucharit Bhakti, Klud Wittkowski, as well as Stefan Homburg; and now many, many more scientists and doctors worldwide, including Dr. Mike Yeadon. Dr. Mike Yeadon is the former Vice-President and Scientific Director of Pfizer, one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world. I will talk some more about him a little later. 

At the end of March, beginning of April of 2020, Mr. Sieber turned to the leadership of his Green Party with the knowledge he had accumulated, and suggested that they present these other scientific opinions to the public and explain that, contrary to Mr. Drosten’s doomsday prophecies, there was no reason for the public to panic. Incidentally, Lord Sumption, who served as a judge at the British supreme court from 2012 to 2018, had done the very same thing at the very same time and had come to the very same conclusion: that there was no factual basis for panic and no legal basis for the corona measures. Likewise, the former President of the German federal constitutional court expressed –  albeit more cautiously – serious doubts that the corona measures were constitutional. But instead of taking note of these other opinions and discussing them with David Sieber, the Green Party leadership declared that Mr. Drosten’s panic messages were good enough for the Green Party. Remember, they’re not a member of the ruling coalition; they’re the opposition. Still, that was enough for them, just as it had been good enough for the Federal Government as a basis for its lockdown decision, they said. They subsequently, the Green Party leadership called David Sieber a conspiracy theorist, without ever having considered the content of his information, and then stripped him of his mandates. 

Now let’s take a look at the current actual situation regarding the virus’s danger, the complete uselessness of PCR tests for the detection of infections, and the lockdowns based on non-existent infections. In the meantime, we know that the health care systems were never in danger of becoming overwhelmed by Covid-19. On the contrary, many hospitals remain empty to this day and some are now facing bankruptcy. The hospital ship Comfort, which anchored in New York at the time, and could have accommodated a thousand patients, never accommodated more than some 20 patients. Nowhere was there any excess mortality. Studies carried out by Professor Ioannidis and others have shown that the mortality of corona is equivalent to that of the seasonal flu. Even the pictures from Bergamo and New York that were used to demonstrate to the world that panic was in order proved to be deliberately misleading. 

Then, the so-called “Panic Paper” was leaked, which was written by the German Department of the Interior. Its classified content shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that, in fact, the population was deliberately driven to panic by politicians and mainstream media. The accompanying irresponsible statements of the Head of the RKI – remember the [German] CDC – Mr. Wieler, who repeatedly and excitedly announced that the corona measures must be followed unconditionally by the population without them asking any question, shows that that he followed the script verbatim. In his public statements, he kept announcing that the situation was very grave and threatening, although the figures compiled by his own Institute proved the exact opposite. 

Among other things, the “Panic Paper” calls for children to be made to feel responsible – and I quote – “for the painful tortured death of their parents and grandparents if they do not follow the corona rules”, that is, if they do not wash their hands constantly and don’t stay away from their grandparents. A word of clarification: in Bergamo, the vast majority of deaths, 94% to be exact, turned out to be the result not of Covid-19, but rather the consequence of the government deciding to transfer sick patients, sick with probably the cold or seasonal flu, from hospitals to nursing homes in order to make room at the hospitals for all the Covid patients, who ultimately never arrived. There, at the nursing homes, they then infected old people with a severely weakened immune system, usually as a result of pre-existing medical conditions. In addition, a flu vaccination, which had previously been administered, had further weakened the immune systems of the people in the nursing homes. In New York, only some, but by far not all hospitals were overwhelmed. Many people, most of whom were again elderly and had serious pre-existing medical conditions, and most of whom, had it not been for the panic-mongering, would have just stayed at home to recover, raced to the hospitals. There, many of them fell victim to healthcare-associated infections (or nosocomial infections) on the one hand, and incidents of malpractice on the other hand, for example, by being put on a respirator rather than receiving oxygen through an oxygen mask. Again, to clarify: Covid-19, this is the current state of affairs, is a dangerous disease, just like the seasonal flu is a dangerous disease. And of course, Covid-19, just like the seasonal flu, may sometimes take take a severe clinical course and will sometimes kill patients. 

However, as autopsies have shown, which were carried out in Germany in particular, by the forensic scientist Professor Klaus Püschel in Hamburg, the fatalities he examined had almost all been caused by serious pre-existing conditions, and almost all of the people who had died had died at the very at a very old age, just like in Italy, meaning they had lived beyond their average life expectancy. 

In this context, the following should also be mentioned: the German RKI – that is, again the equivalent of the CDC – had initially, strangely enough, recommended that no autopsies be performed. And there are numerous credible reports that doctors and hospitals worldwide had been paid money for declaring a deceased person a victim of Covid-19 rather than writing down the true cause of death on the death certificate, for example a heart attack or a gunshot wound. Without the autopsies, we would never know that the overwhelming majority of the alleged Covid-19 victims had died of completely different diseases, but not of Covid-19. The assertion that the lockdown was necessary because there were so many different infections with SARS-COV-2, and because the healthcare systems would be overwhelmed is wrong for three reasons, as we have learned from the hearings we conducted with the Corona Committee, and from other data that has become available in the meantime: 

A. The lockdown was imposed when the virus was already retreating. By the time the lockdown was imposed, the alleged infection rates were already dropping again.

B. There’s already protection from the virus because of cross- or T-cell immunity. Apart from the above mentioned lockdown being imposed when the infection rates were already dropping, there is also cross- or T-cell immunity in the general population against the corona viruses contained in every flu or influenza wave. This is true, even if this time around, a slightly different strain of the coronavirus was at work. And that is because the body’s own immune system remembers every virus it has ever battled in the past, and from this experience, it also recognizes a supposedly new, but still similar, strain of the virus from the corona family. Incidentally, that’s how the PCR test for the detection of an infection was invented by now infamous Professor Drosten. 

At the beginning of January of 2020, based on this very basic knowledge, Mr. Drosten developed his PCR test, which supposedly detects an infection with SARS-COV-2, without ever having seen the real Wuhan virus from China, only having learned from social media reports that there was something going on in Wuhan, he started tinkering on his computer with what would become his corona PCR test. For this, he used an old SARS virus, hoping it would be sufficiently similar to the allegedly new strain of the coronavirus found in Wuhan. Then, he sent the result of his computer tinkering to China to determine whether the victims of the alleged new coronavirus tested positive. They did. 

And that was enough for the World Health Organization to sound the pandemic alarm and to recommend the worldwide use of the Drosten PCR test for the detection of infections with the virus now called SARS-COV-2. Drosten’s opinion and advice was – this must be emphasized once again – the only source for the German government when it announced the lockdown as well as the rules for social distancing and the mandatory wearing of masks. And – this must also be emphasized once again – Germany apparently became the center of especially massive lobbying by the pharmaceutical and tech industry because the world, with reference to the allegedly disciplined Germans, should do as the Germans do in order to survive the pandemic. 

C. And this is the most important part of our fact-finding: the PCR test is being used on the basis of false statements, NOT based on scientific facts with respect to infections. In the meantime, we have learned that these PCR tests, contrary to the assertions of Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, do NOT give any indication of an infection with any virus, let alone an infection with SARS-COV-2. Not only are PCR tests expressly not approved for diagnostic purposes, as is correctly noted on leaflets coming with these tests, and as the inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, has repeatedly emphasized. Instead, they’re simply incapable of diagnosing any disease. That is: contrary to the assertions of Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, which they have been making since the proclamation of the pandemic, a positive PCR-test result does not mean that an infection is present. If someone tests positive, it does NOT mean that they’re infected with anything, let alone with the contagious SARS-COV-2 virus. 

Even the United States CDC, even this institution agrees with this, and I quote directly from page 38 of one of its publications on the coronavirus and the PCR tests, dated July 13, 2020. First bullet point says:

“Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019 nCOV [novel coronavirus] is the causative agent for clinical symptoms.”

Second bullet point says:

“The performance of this test has not been established for monitoring treatment of 2019 nCOV infection.” Third bullet point says: “This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.” 

It is still not clear whether there has ever been a scientifically correct isolation of the Wuhan virus, so that nobody knows exactly what we’re looking for when we test, especially since this virus, just like the flu viruses, mutates quickly. The PCR swabs take one or two sequences of a molecule that are invisible to the human eye and therefore need to be amplified in many cycles to make it visible. Everything over 35 cycles is – as reported by the New York Times and others – considered completely unreliable and scientifically unjustifiable. However, the Drosten test, as well as the WHO-recommended tests that followed his example, are set to 45 cycles. Can that be because of the desire to produce as many positive results as possible and thereby provide the basis for the false assumption that a large number of infections have been detected? 

The test cannot distinguish inactive and reproductive matter. That means that a positive result may happen because the test detects, for example, a piece of debris, a fragment of a molecule, which may signal nothing else than that the immune system of the person tested won a battle with a common cold in the past. Even Drosten himself declared in an interview with a German business magazine in 2014, at that time concerning the alleged detection of an infection with the MERS virus, allegedly with the help of the PCR test, that these PCR tests are so highly sensitive that even very healthy and non-infectious people may test positive. At that time, he also became very much aware of the powerful role of a panic and fear-mongering media, as you’ll see at the end of the following quote. He said then, in this interview: “If, for example, such a pathogen scurries over the nasal mucosa of a nurse for a day or so without her getting sick or noticing anything, then she’s suddenly a MERS case. This could also explain the explosion of case numbers in Saudi Arabia. In addition, the media there have made this into an incredible sensation.” 

Has he forgotten this? Or is he deliberately concealing this in the corona context because corona is a very lucrative business opportunity for the pharmaceutical industry as a whole? And for Mr. Alford Lund, his co-author in many studies and also a PCR-test producer. In my view, it is completely implausible that he forgot in 2020 what he knew about the PCR tests and told the business magazine in 2014. 

In short, this test cannot detect any infection, contrary to all false claims stating that it can. An infection, a so-called “hot” infection, requires that the virus, or rather a fragment of a molecule which may be a virus, is not just found somewhere, for example, in the throat of a person without causing any damage – that would be a “cold” infection. Rather, a “hot” infection requires that the virus penetrates into the cells, replicates there and causes symptoms such as headaches or a sore throat. Only then is a person really infected in the sense of a “hot” infection, because only then is a person contagious, that is, able to infect others. Until then, it is completely harmless for both the host and all other people that the host comes into contact with. 

Once again, this means that positive test results, contrary to all other claims by Drosten, Wieler, or the WHO, mean nothing with respect to infections, as even the CDC knows, as quoted above. 

Meanwhile, a number of highly respected scientists worldwide assume that there has never been a corona pandemic, but only a PCR-test pandemic. This is the conclusion reached by many German scientists, such as professors Bhakti, Reiss, Mölling, Hockertz, Walach and many others, including the above-mentioned Professor John Ioannidis, and the Nobel laureate, Professor Michael Levitt from Stanford University. 

The most recent such opinion is that of the aforementioned Dr. Mike Yeadon, a former Vice-President and Chief Science Officer at Pfizer, who held this position for 16 years. He and his co-authors, all well-known scientists, published a scientific paper in September of 2020 and he wrote a corresponding magazine article on September 20, 2020. Among other things, he and they state – and I quote: 

“We’re basing our government policy, our economic policy, and the policy of restricting fundamental rights, presumably on completely wrong data and assumptions about the coronavirus. If it weren’t for the test results that are constantly reported in the media, the pandemic would be over because nothing really happened. Of course, there are some serious individual cases of illness, but there are also some in every flu epidemic. There was a real wave of disease in March and April, but since then, everything has gone back to normal. Only the positive results rise and sink wildly again and again, depending on how many tests are carried out. But the real cases of illnesses are over. There can be no talk of a second wave. The allegedly new strain of the coronavirus is …” 

– Dr. Yeadon continues – 

“… only new in that it is a new type of the long-known corona virus. There are at least four coronaviruses that are endemic and cause some of the common colds we experience, especially in winter. They all have a striking sequence similarity to the coronavirus, and because the human immune system recognizes the similarity to the virus that has now allegedly been newly discovered, a T-cell immunity has long existed in this respect. 30 per cent of the population had this before the allegedly new virus even appeared. Therefore, it is sufficient for the so-called herd immunity that 15 to 25 per cent of the population are infected with the allegedly new coronavirus to stop the further spread of the virus. And this has long been the case.” 

Regarding the all-important PCR tests, Yeadon writes, in a piece called “Lies, Damned Lies and Health Statistics: The Deadly Danger of False Positives”, dated September 20, 2020, and I quote

“The likelihood of an apparently positive case being a false positive is between 89 to 94 per cent, or near certainty.”

Dr. Yeadon, in agreement with the professors of immunology Kamera from Germany, Kappel from the Netherlands, and Cahill from Ireland, as well as the microbiologist Dr. Arve from Austria, all of whom testified before the German Corona Committee, explicitly points out that a positive test does not mean that an intact virus has been found. 

The authors explain that what the PCR test actually measures is – and I quote:

“Simply the presence of partial RNA sequences present in the intact virus, which could be a piece of dead virus, which cannot make the subject sick, and cannot be transmitted, and cannot make anyone else sick.”

Because of the complete unsuitability of the test for the detection of infectious diseases – tested positive in goats, sheep, papayas and even chicken wings – Oxford Professor Carl Heneghan, Director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, writes that the Covid virus would never disappear if this test practice were to be continued, but would always be falsely detected in much of what is tested. Lockdowns, as Yeadon and his colleagues found out, do not work. Sweden, with its laissez-faire approach, and Great Britain, with its strict lockdown, for example, have completely comparable disease and mortality statistics. The same was found by US scientists concerning the different US states. It makes no difference to the incidence of disease whether a state implements a lockdown or not. 

With regard to the now infamous Imperial College of London’s Professor Neil Ferguson and his completely false computer models warning of millions of deaths, he says that – and I quote: “No serious scientist gives any validity to Ferguson’s model.” He points out with thinly veiled contempt – again I quote:

“It’s important that you know, most scientists don’t accept that it …” – that is, Ferguson’s model – “was even faintly right. But the government is still wedded to the model.” Ferguson predicted 40 thousand corona deaths in Sweden by May and 100 thousand by June, but it remained at 5,800 which, according to the Swedish authorities, is equivalent to a mild flu. If the PCR tests had not been used as a diagnostic tool for corona infections, there would not be a pandemic and there would be no lockdowns, but everything would have been perceived as just a medium or light wave of influenza, these scientists conclude. Dr. Yeadon in his piece, “Lies, Damned Lies and Health Statistics: The Deadly Danger of False Positives, writes: “This test is fatally flawed and must immediately be withdrawn and never used again in this setting, unless shown to be fixed.” And, towards the end of that article, “I have explained how a hopelessly performing diagnostic test has been, and continues to be used, not for diagnosis of disease, but it seems solely to create fear”. 

Now let’s take a look at the current actual situation regarding the severe damage caused by the lockdowns and other measures. Another detailed paper, written by a German official in the Department of the Interior, who is responsible for risk assessment and the protection of the population against risks, was leaked recently. It is now called the “False Alarm” paper. This paper comes to the conclusion that there was that there was and is no sufficient evidence for serious health risks for the population as claimed by Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, but – the author says –  there’s very much evidence of the corona measures causing gigantic health and economic damage to the population, which he then describes in detail in this paper. This, he concludes, will lead to very high claims for damages, which the government will be held responsible for. This has now become reality, but the paper’s author was suspended. 

More and more scientists, but also lawyers, recognize that, as a result of the deliberate panic-mongering, and the corona measures enabled by this panic, democracy is in great danger of being replaced by fascist totalitarian models. As I already mentioned above, in Australia, people who do not wear the masks, which more and more studies show, are hazardous to health, or who allegedly do not wear them correctly, are arrested, handcuffed and thrown into jail. In the Philippines, they run the risk of getting shot, but even in Germany and in other previously civilized countries, children are taken away from their parents if they do not comply with quarantine regulations, distance regulations, and mask-wearing regulations. According to psychologists and psychotherapists who testified before the Corona Committee, children are traumatized en masse, with the worst psychological consequences yet to be expected in the medium- and long-term. In Germany alone, to bankruptcies are expected in the fall to strike small- and medium-sized businesses, which form the backbone of the economy. This will result in incalculable tax losses and incalculably high and long-term social security money transfers for – among other things – unemployment benefits. 

Since, in the meantime, pretty much everybody is beginning to understand the full devastating impact of the completely unfounded corona measures, I will refrain from detailing this any further. 

Let me now give you a summary of the legal consequences. The most difficult part of a lawyer’s work is always to establish the true facts, not the application of the legal rules to these facts. Unfortunately, a German lawyer does not learn this at law school but his Anglo-American counterparts do get the necessary training for this at their law schools. And probably for this reason, but also because of the much more pronounced independence of the Anglo-American judiciary, the Anglo-American law of evidence is much more effective in practice than the German one. A court of law can only decide a legal dispute correctly if it has previously determined the facts correctly, which is not possible without looking at all the evidence. And that’s why the law of evidence is so important. On the basis of the facts summarized above, in particular those established with the help of the work of the German Corona Committee, the legal evaluation is actually simple. It is simple for all civilized legal systems, regardless of whether these legal systems are based on civil law, which follows the Roman law more closely, or whether they are based on Anglo-American common law, which is only loosely connected to Roman law. 

Let’s first take a look at the unconstitutionality of the measures. A number of German law professors, including professors Kingreen, Morswig, Jungbluth and Vosgerau have stated, either in written expert opinions or in interviews, in line with the serious doubts expressed by the former president of the federal constitutional court with respect to the constitutionality of the corona measures, that these measures – the corona measures – are without a sufficient factual basis, and also without a sufficient legal basis, and are therefore unconstitutional and must be repealed immediately. Very recently, a judge, Thorsten Schleif is his name, declared publicly that the German judiciary, just like the general public, has been so panic-stricken that it was no longer able to administer justice properly. He says that the courts of law – and I quote – “have all too quickly waved through coercive measures which, for millions of people all over Germany, represent massive suspensions of their constitutional rights. He points out that German citizens – again I quote – “are currently experiencing the most serious encroachment on their constitutional rights since the founding of the federal republic of Germany in 1949”. In order to contain the corona pandemic, federal and state governments have intervened, he says, massively, and in part threatening the very existence of the country as it is guaranteed by the constitutional rights of the people. 

What about fraud, intentional infliction of damage and crimes against humanity?

Based on the rules of criminal law, asserting false facts concerning the PCR tests or intentional misrepresentation, as it was committed by Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and WHO, as well as the WHO, can only be assessed as fraud. Based on the rules of civil tort law, this translates into intentional infliction of damage. The German professor of civil law, Martin Schwab, supports this finding in public interviews. In a comprehensive legal opinion of around 180 pages, he has familiarized himself with the subject matter like no other legal scholar has done thus far and, in particular, has provided a detailed account of the complete failure of the mainstream media to report on the true facts of this so-called pandemic. Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and Tedros of the WHO all knew, based on their own expertise or the expertise of their institutions, that the PCR tests cannot provide any information about infections, but asserted over and over again to the general public that they can, with their counterparts all over the world repeating this. And they all knew and accepted that, on the basis of their recommendations, the governments of the world would decide on lockdowns, the rules for social distancing, and mandatory wearing of masks, the latter representing a very serious health hazard, as more and more independent studies and expert statements show. Under the rules of civil tort law, all those who have been harmed by these PCR-test-induced lockdowns are entitled to receive full compensation for their losses. In particular, there is a duty to compensate – that is, a duty to pay damages for the loss of profits suffered by companies and self-employed employed persons as a result of the lockdown and other measures. 

In the meantime, however, the anti-corona measures have caused, and continue to cause, such devastating damage to the world population’s health and economy that the crimes committed by Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and the WHO must be legally qualified as actual crimes against humanity, as defined in section 7 of the International Criminal Code. 

How can we do something? What can we do? Well, the class action is the best route to compensatory damages and to political consequences. The so-called class action lawsuit is based on English law and exists today in the USA and in Canada. It enables a court of law to allow a complaint for damages to be tried as a class action lawsuit at the request of a plaintiff if: 

  1. As a result of a damage-inducing event …
  2. A large number of people suffer the same type of damage.

Phrased differently, a judge can allow a class-action lawsuit to go forward if common questions of law and fact make up the vital component of the lawsuit. Here, the common questions of law and fact revolve around the worldwide PCR-test-based lockdowns and its consequences. Just like the VW diesel passenger cars were functioning products, but they were defective due to a so-called defeat device because they didn’t comply with the emissions standards, so too the PCR tests – which are perfectly good products in other settings – are defective products when it comes to the diagnosis of infections. Now, if an American or Canadian company or an American or Canadian individual decides to sue these persons in the United States or Canada for damages, then the court called upon to resolve this dispute may, upon request, allow this complaint to be tried as a class action lawsuit.

If this happens, all affected parties worldwide will be informed about this through publications in the mainstream media and will thus have the opportunity to join this class action within a certain period of time, to be determined by the court. It should be emphasized that nobody mustjoin the class action, but every injured party can join the class.

The advantage of the class action is that only one trial is needed, namely to try the complaint of a representative plaintiff who is affected in a manner typical of everyone else in the class. This is, firstly, cheaper, and secondly, faster than hundreds of thousands or more individual lawsuits. And thirdly, it imposes less of a burden on the courts. Fourthly, as a rule it allows a much more precise examination of the accusations than would be possible in the context of hundreds of thousands, or more likely in this corona setting, even millions of individual lawsuits. 

In particular, the well-established and proven Anglo-American law of evidence, with its pre-trial discovery, is applicable. This requires that all evidence relevant for the determination of the lawsuit is put on the table. In contrast to the typical situation in German lawsuits with structural imbalance, that is, lawsuits involving on the one hand a consumer, and on the other hand a powerful corporation, the withholding or even destruction of evidence is not without consequence; rather the party withholding or even destroying evidence loses the case under these evidence rules. 

Here in Germany, a group of tort lawyers have banded together to help their clients with recovery of damages. They have provided all relevant information and forms for German plaintiffs to both estimate how much damage they have suffered and join the group or class of plaintiffs who will later join the class action when it goes forward either in Canada or the US. Initially, this group of lawyers had considered to also collect and manage the claims for damages of other, non-German plaintiffs, but this proved to be unmanageable. 

However, through an international lawyers’ network, which is growing larger by the day, the German group of attorneys provides to all of their colleagues in all other countries, free of charge, all relevant information, including expert opinions and testimonies of experts showing that the PCR tests cannot detect infections. And they also provide them with all relevant information as to how they can prepare and bundle the claims for damages of their clients so that, they too, can assert their clients’ claims for damages, either in their home country’s courts of law, or within the framework of the class action, as explained above. 

These scandalous corona facts, gathered mostly by the Corona Committee and summarized above, are the very same facts that will soon be proven to be true either in one court of law, or in many courts of law all over the world.

These are the facts that will pull the masks off the faces of all those responsible for these crimes. To the politicians who believe those corrupt people, these facts are hereby offered as a lifeline that can help you readjust your course of action, and start the long overdue public scientific discussion, and not go down with those charlatans and criminals. 

Thank you.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is from Pixabay

The original source of this article is Dr. Reiner Fuellmich
Copyright © Reiner Fuellmich, Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, 2021

 

at Nessun commento:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Iscriviti a: Commenti (Atom)

Lettori fissi