Reiner Fuellmich (Corona Committee) interviews another expert, Dr. Peter McCullough.
Why are these interviews important? These are the independent experts coming forward about the truth of the plandemic; and they will most likely be witnesses in the international NUREMBERG 2.0. So for all politicians, government officials, health officials, nurses, doctors "going along with the the fraud" or "just doing your jobs" know the truth will come out (that's a Biblical promise).
GLOBAL BIOTERRORISM. REINER FUELLMICH WITH DR. PETER MCCULLOUGH. CORONA COMMITTEE
Dr. Peter McCullough - The fear of the virus was used very quickly, and surprisingly, to generate tremendous influences in human life, lockdowns and all the things you know about. And every single thing don in the public health in response to the pandemic made it worse.
How I got involved was I thought the virus was going to be pretty easy to treat once we understood there were three phases. As I started to promulgate early treatment, I started to meet resistance at all levels. In terms of actually treating patients and publishing papers. And I'm an editor of two major journals and I'm in the business of publishing.
Fortunately, I had enough some publishing strength to basically publish two papers in the entire medical literature that teaches doctors how to treat Covid19 at home to prevent hospitalization and death. It results in about an 85% reduction.
We were discovered was the suppression of early treatment was tightly linked to the development of a vaccine. And the entire program – as this in a sense –
Bioterrorism Phase 1 – was rolled out was really all about keeping the population in fear and in isolation; and preparing them to accept the vaccine which appears to be Phase 2 of a Bioterrorism Operation.
A supportive article to this story on Off-Guardian – The Wuhan lab-leak story is more fear porn
If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you will forget how they redefined a medical “case” to [include perfectly healthy people, and then reported an explosion of “cases.”
If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you’ll totally forget how they defined a “Covid hospitalization” as anyone in hospital, for any reason, who tested positive with a PCR test jacked up to 40 or 50.
If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you’ll totally forget how they defined a “Covid death” as anyone who died, of any cause, who tested positive with a PCR test within the previous 28 days.
If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you’ll forget how they suddenly decided that herd immunity had never existed, and could only be achieved with an experimental “vaccine.”
The Nuremberg 2.0 trial announced for July 4 was fake news -
What Dr. Reiner Fuellmich’s recent social media message on Telegram (below) establishes is that he is not involved in anything like this, that this myth had been created in the first place with likely dubious motives, and that the zoom call of last Sunday had to be fake. We apologize to readers for passing this along.
I think the point is that the corruption and trials could easily turn into a Nuremberg-type level given its scope.
Brian Gerrish's testimony to Reiner Füllmich: Our oppressors are very frightened people
Saturday, 29th May 2021
On 28 May 2021, I gave evidence to the 54th session of the Stiftung Corona Ausschuss, the German-based extraparliamentary inquiry by lawyers into the medical establishment’s and public policymakers’ handling of the Covid crisis internationally.
The theme for the day during the 54th session was “Caught between nudging and side effects”. A transcript of my testimony is below.
Auch auf Deutsch erhältlich.
Reiner Füllmich: Brian, I apologise for having kept you waiting for twenty minutes or so.
Brian Gerrish: That’s absolutely fine, and I’d just like to say that I don’t speak German but it was fascinating watching you and listening, and it was wonderful to see you start laughing, because you looked very serious in most of the dialogues that I’ve listened to.
There was one word that I picked up that I found very interesting, and that was Wahnsinn, which came up several times, particularly when [persecuted primary school headmistress] Bianca was speaking.
Reiner Füllmich: You know what it means, right?
Brian Gerrish: Yes, “madness”. And I’m going to say to you: it’s not madness. What we are facing is calculated, and it’s a mistake to call it “madness”, because it’s very precise; it’s very calculated. We need to understand that in order to be able to deal with what we’re facing.
Reiner Füllmich: That’s very interesting to hear, because we have come to the conclusion that “the other side”, as we call them, is using two major tools. One is, of course, psychology, psychological operations; and the other, which transports this psychological operation, is the mainstream media.
Can you tell us a little about your background?
Brian Gerrish: Well, my personal background is, professionally, I was military: I was in the Royal Navy for twenty-one years. I then worked in industry, essentially, for a while, but after a few years, I began to understand that things were not good in the UK, and I began to see things and investigate things.
Ultimately, that’s led me, over nearly another twenty years, to team up with a gentleman called Mike Robinson, and for fourteen years now, we’ve been running a media outlet called the UK Column, where I’m delighted to say that we’re expanding, and it’s clear that our viewers and listeners are now not only in the UK; they’re across the world.
Reiner Füllmich: Excellent. And now, of course, you’re busy covering Coronavirus and all the ramifications of what Coronavirus is bringing about.
Brian Gerrish: Well, the key point is that we originally started by looking at some of the issues that you’ve just mentioned. We we were looking at how propaganda had come into the country; we were looking at the use of applied behavioural psychology by the Government; and we were looking at changes which were very serious (or we thought they were very serious) that were particularly affecting the style of democracy, and that were also affecting our constitutional rights.
It was against that background of reporting that we have then encountered, obviously, what’s happened with Coronavirus. So I would say to you that our analysis of what has happened with Coronavirus is seen very much against the background of what was happening politically, and in particular the use of applied behavioural psychology and propaganda.
Viviane Fischer: So what do you think is the “calculated madness”? The [description] “madness” is more our judgement from when we look at what was the normal status of things before. No-one would have thought, had you asked us a year ago, that this could have ever happened; at least not us, I guess.
And also, we were really surprised how the legal system has deteriorated, or at least, how it has become obvious that it is really in bad shape. But we also have the feeling, at the same time, that it’s very orchestrated, what’s happening: that it’s like a jigsaw puzzle. They move this piece and this piece, and then the picture is becoming more and more clear what’s going on. But what are your experiences or your analysis of the situation?
Brian Gerrish: First of all, I’d agree with you that the Coronavirus “pandemic”, if we want to call it that in inverted commas, did catch everybody by surprise. I don’t think we saw that coming, and it happened very quickly. So I’d certainly agree with you on that.
But I’ll come back to the fact that we started to see very, very serious things things happening in the UK. If I just focus immediately on the Government’s use of applied behavioural psychology: back in 2010 and 2011, we as the UK Column were warning that the Government had set up a team which was called the Behavioural Insights Team [UK Column note: whose former homepage address 'behaviouralinsights.co.uk' now redirects to the consciously globalist 'bi.team']. This was a team of psychologists who were working directly alongside not only the political process, but the policy-forming process within the British Government.
A critical document which we found in 2010 was called Mindspace (you can find it very easily by searching online for it as a PDF document). In that document, the Government admitted that it was using applied behavioural psychology to influence how it designed policy and how it implemented policy.
At one particular point in that document—in fact, it’s at the bottom of page 66, if I remember correctly—the Government boasts that it can change the way people think and behave, and that people will not be aware that this has been done to them. But it adds the caveat that if they do realize that their behavior is changed, they will not know how it was changed.
We read this document and we were shocked, and we then started to research further. That then led us to discover that, around that time and of course a little bit earlier, the British Government had been conducting meetings with the French, in which we were bringing the political psychology teams together to produce joint plans with the French. The key Frenchman who was present in the meetings was called Olivier Ouillier, and he was working directly at that time for Sarkozy’s private office......
Senior UK Lawyer discusses serving notices of liability on vaccinators and potential criminal trials for Crimes against Humanity
Anna de Buisseret is a senior UK lawyer and a retired Army Officer with nuclear, biological warfare training. “That’s why I’m standing up and speaking out. I’m upholding my Oath to We the People to ‘Protect and Serve’,” she says. She has previously also worked as a management consultant at Pfizer.
During an interview with Tony Gosling de Buisseret explained what led her to believe Covid-19 was biowarfare. Because of her previous nuclear, biological and chemical weapons training and knowing that bioweapons had been in the making for a long time, she was “on high alert for bioweapons being released”. In March/April 2020 she contacted an ex-army friend in China to discuss “the evidence, what was going on and comparing notes about what he was being told over in Beijing compared to what we were being told over in the UK.” For example, pictures at the start of the ‘pandemic’ of people falling dead in the streets in China – her contacts in China said, “it’s all nonsense”. De Buisseret had also heard Francis Boyle speaking out very early on saying, “this is a bioweapon, this is biowarfare”.
“We took enough witness evidence and looked at enough of the evidence – and as you know, with lawyers it has to become beyond reasonable doubt if you’re going to allege criminal activity – and it got to a point where, unfortunately, we reached the conclusion that it was beyond reasonable doubt,” de Buisseret said. After reviewing the definitions of genocide, crimes against humanity and biowarfare compared with what was going on, it was irrefutable. In April 2021 they made an urgent application to the International Criminal Court requesting an investigation of the UK government.
During the interview she was asked about her “encounter with the police” where, outside a vaccination centre, police officers prohibited her serving notices of liability to the those injecting the public, “the vaccinators”. “It’s not legal,” de Buisseret said, “because it’s not being authorised and regulated under the correct [legal] framework.” She goes on to explain, “This is not a human medicine. These, specifically the mRNA injections, cannot be legally defined either as a vaccine or as a human medicine, which is how they’ve been regulated – under the human medicines regulations.” According to expert teams the mRNA synthetic genetic code, which is nanotechnology encased in a lipid particle casing, fits the definition of a medical device rather than a human medicine. As such, it should be regulated under the medical device regulations.
The question of legality of the mass vaccination programme goes across several areas of law. It’s not just whether it’s being regulated properly under that particular bit of legislation. “And they’ve only got an emergency temporary authorization on the basis that a) there’s an emergency well, there is no emergency because we’ve got alternative treatments and we know the figures have been manipulated etc. And, as for the basis on which to justify it: it has to be on the basis that there are no alternative treatments, well there are. So, their whole legality comes massively into question which is why I was very firm saying it’s not legal,” de Buisseret said.
In terms of deciding whether something is criminal one needs to look at the definition of the crimes and the definition of criminal acts. Whether it’s criminal or not in terms of how a tribunal order judge or the public will determine this, only time will tell.
“With criminal law you have to commit the acts. The acts that led to the harm, suffering, loss or death. And you have to have committed the act with intent, to do harm. But the thing about intent is that you can infer the intent because it’s based on knowledge. So, if you know that the act you’ve committed is going to cause harm, loss, suffering, or death then that’s your intent to do it,” de Buisseret explained. She continued, “it crosses many different areas of both statute law, civil law, criminal law, common law, God’s laws, international laws. So, frankly, the legal analysis is vast because there is so many different laws being broken. It’s absolutely horrendous. We lawyers are totally gobsmacked at just how all the laws seem to be being trashed and nobody seems to care to uphold them. And it’s a crisis.”
She points out that another of the reasons the UK was in such crisis is because the police – being our public servants are obliged to investigate if a member of the public comes with prima facie evidence but, – are just “not interested” and do not even “want to look at it”.
“In our local community [we established] that there was sufficient evidence to know that various clinics in the area would not obtaining informed consent from people. And that people were in fact dying and being seriously harmed by [the Covid injection],” de Buisseret said.
De Buisseret also discussed the Nuremberg Trials in the context of Covid-19. “A lot of people haven’t even heard of the Nuremberg Trials let alone bothered to read the judgments,” she said and explains that the judgements are incredibly important reading because everything that is happening now, is cited in the Nuremberg Trials – doctors and nurses saying, through the culture of blame and silence: “I had to keep my job”, “I had to keep quiet”, “I had a mortgage”, or, “I had relatives to look after” – all the same reasons that people are giving today.
“And yet, when you hear how those defences were put forward and then how the tribunal dealt with them, you will see very clearly that, there is first of all, ignorance of the law is no defence. So, the fact that people say ‘well, I didn’t know I was breaking the law’, is no defence,” said de Buisseret. And, turning a blind eye or just assuming any comparison to the Nuremberg Trials is “a crazy conspiracy theory”, is ignorance. Because, it is a legal process of bringing people to account.
De Buisseret gave some ideas how the public can get involved in their “Informed Consent Campaign” and if you want to find out more, they will be setting up a website “Consent Alliance” and a channel on Telegram.
You can listen to Anna de Buisseret’s full 30-minute interview HERE.
(Natural News) What follows is one of the most important interviews of the year. Biological warfare expert Prof. Francis Boyle appeared as a guest with Alex Jones on the Alex Jones Show, sharing his “smoking gun” findings about the coronavirus being engineered as a weapon that’s designed, “for efficient spreading in the human population,” according to one of the science papers he references.
That paper describes the CoVid-19 novel coronavirus as possessing unique “gain-of-function” properties that make it the perfect bioweapon, while confirming these new properties were from artificial origins, not natural viral evolution. (In other words, it was engineered.)
Below, we print the full transcript of the Francis Boyle / Alex Jones interview, along with the video of the full exchange below, via Brighteon.com. (The full show is also posted on Banned.video)
The Nuremberg trials tried several Nazis for crimes against humanity and most of the trials were concerned with the Nazi policy of ‘Endlösung’ or the Final Solution — the extermination of all Jews in the world. (Image: www.ushmm.org)
The year 2018 marks the 70th anniversary of the culmination of the Nuremberg trials in post-World War II Germany. The defendants, who were sentenced to be hanged, were finally executed in 1948. For the uninitiated, the Nuremberg trials tried several...
It is more than evident that a significant part of humanity is stampeding to take experimental vaccines for COVID-19. However, the “experimental” vaccines violate all 10 of the Nuremberg Codes, which carry the death penalty for those who seek to break these International Laws. Now, more than ever, we need new trials, not after the fact, as was the situation after WWII, but while the crimes against humanity are in progress.
Instead of these Nazis above the tables would be full of executives from Pfizer, Moderna, Johnston and Johnston, Dr. Fauci and the infamous Bill Gates, and many others. Even the politicians, who pretended to play doctor and healthcare official, promoting life-threatening and depressing masks, lockdowns, and death shots, should be held accountable. Dr. David Martin clearly shows that all of them are guilty of breaking American laws.
Front and center should be multiple members of the FDA and CDC, who are not trustful governmental agencies but richly paid whores for the vaccine companies.
American Heart Association Journal Publishes Data that U.K. Medical Doctor Claims are “Proof” that COVID-19 Vaccines are “Murder.” `We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy and other vascular events following vaccination.’
23 Nazi doctors were charged with conducting experiments on prisoners without consent, most at concentration camps. The aftermath of the trials led to creation of the Nuremberg Code, which the FDA and CDC do not follow. The Dr. Rath Health Foundation tells us that, “After six decades of silence, the historical records of the key war crimes tribunal that determined the responsibility for WWII were finally made available. Currently, history books teach that WWII was launched by a lunatic dictator, Hitler, and his ruthless Nazi henchmen.
However, tens of thousands of historical documents from the Nuremberg Tribunal – newly released online – unequivocally document that:
WWII – a war that cost the lives of more than 60 million people – was planned and financed by the world’s largest chemical/ pharmaceutical cartel. At that time, Germany’s I.G. Farben consisted of Bayer, BASF, Hoechst, and others.
The driving force behind WWII was I.G. Farben’s ambition to control the global oil and drug markets and eliminate, by force, any competition.
The I.G. Farben companies financed the rise to power of the Nazi party and transformed German democracy into a dictatorship.
“The pharmaceutical industry does not act in the tradition of the protector of humanity, but in the tradition of I.G. Farben, a group of organized criminals willing to sacrifice countless human lives to maintain their profits,” writes Dr. Mathias Rath pleaded in 2012 with his fellow Germans to not go down the same road that Germans have traveled twice before. He, too, claims that the two world wars were driven by the insatiable greed of the pharmaceutical and chemical cartels. The legacy of I.G. Farben is carried on by Bayer/Monsanto, Pfizer, and the other COVID vaccine companies.
Telford Taylor, US Chief Prosecutor at the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal against the executives of great I.G. Farben, wrote, “The crimes with which these men are charged were not committed in rage or under the stress of sudden temptation. One does not build a great war machine in a fit of passion nor an Auschwitz factory during a passing spasm of brutality. Their purpose was to turn the German nation into a military machine so it could impose its dominion on Europe and other nations beyond the seas. They were the warp and woof of the dark mantle of death that settled over Europe.”
Reiner Füllmich informs about "Nuremberg 2.0": International criminal proceedings should start "in a few weeks"
The German-American lawyer Reiner Füllmich told Maria Zeee that the long-awaited international criminal trial, which many also call “Nuremberg 2.0″, will begin in a few weeks.
In all likelihood, a committee of inquiry will look into the case. Charges are to be brought against four leading figures: Bill Gates, Christian Drosten, Anthony Fauci and WHO chief Tedros, said Füllmich. “You will pay a very high price. You will go to jail. “
All sorts of experts will testify about what is really going on, about the agenda that has been developed to divert our attention from population reduction on the one hand and population control on the other, the lawyer said.
He added that a new judiciary is being worked on as the system “is so corrupt that we can no longer rely on it”. “We have to set up our own system,” he said.
An important part of the case is a “vaccine manufacturer” investigation conducted by Mike Yeadon, a former vice president of Pfizer. This investigation found that some batches of vaccine caused no problems at all, while others were highly dangerous, causing thousands of deaths.
“They are trying to find out how to kill as many people as possible without the alarm bells ringing,” emphasized Füllmich. “It’s diabolical. How can people be so angry? “
The attorney went on to say that this entire operation, which takes decades, is being carried out by a few hundred, at most a few thousand people. They try to get as many doctors and politicians on their side as possible through bribery and blackmail. For example, think of ritual child abuse, he said.
Do Mandatory Masks & Vaccines Break the 10 Points of the Nuremberg Code?
Saturday, February 19, 2022
https://beforeitsnews.com/altMandatory masks continue to be the standard operating procedure for many counties, regions, districts, states and nations worldwide, as the COVID cult agenda progresses. In many places, while COVID vaccines are not yet mandatory, authorities are rushing to prepare to make them so, by setting up schemes like immunity passports, vaccine certificates and mandatory tracking databases, which log who has taken the shot and who has not. Meanwhile, inherent sovereign human rights are being limited to those who acquiesce to take the shot. The insanity and absurdity of the COVID cult is all the more apparent when you realize that its mandatory or quasi-mandatory rules stand in contradiction to a very important set of principles decided upon in 1947. I refer to the Nuremberg Code, the set of 10 points that arose from the infamous Nuremberg Trials conducted in the aftermath of World War II. I am not passing judgement on how impartial those trials were, because I know they were mainly run by the US and the Allies (as the victors), who for obvious reasons did not press charges against American generals such as Eisenhower (who later became US President) for his POW camps inside of Germany and carpet-bombing of Dresden. Nonetheless, the trials produced the Nuremberg Code which enshrined the principle of informed consent – a principle which, in the advent of the COVID scamdemic, is now highly relevant and is continually being put to the test. This article will look briefly at each of the 10 points in the light of COVID restrictions and rules.
The 10 Points of the Code
This website gives a brief history of how the 10 points of the Nuremberg Code came into existence. Interestingly, although the code is an international ethical landmark, it is apparently still not enshrined in American or German national law. We must assume those governments via their secret agencies like the CIA wanted to keep the door open to conduct medical experimentation (such as bioweapon programs like weaponized ticks) upon their citizenry without technically breaking the law:
“On August 19, 1947, the judges of the American military tribunal in the case of the USA vs. Karl Brandt et. al. delivered their verdict. Before announcing the guilt or innocence of each defendant, they confronted the difficult question of medical experimentation on human beings. Several German doctors had argued in their own defense that their experiments differed little from previous American or German ones. Furthermore they showed that no international law or informal statement differentiated between legal and illegal human experimentation. This argument worried Drs. Andrew Ivy and Leo Alexander, American doctors who had worked with the prosecution during the trial. On April 17, 1947, Dr. Alexander submitted a memorandum to the United States Counsel for War Crimes which outlined six points defining legitimate research. The verdict of August 19 reiterated almost all of these points in a section entitled “Permissible Medical Experiments” and revised the original six points into ten. Subsequently, the ten points became known as the “Nuremberg Code.” Although the code addressed the defense arguments in general, remarkably none of the specific findings against Brandt and his codefendants mentioned the code. Thus the legal force of the document was not well established. The uncertain use of the code continued in the half century following the trial when it informed numerous international ethics statements but failed to find a place in either the American or German national law codes. Nevertheless, it remains a landmark document on medical ethics and one of the most lasting products of the “Doctors Trial.””
Nuremberg Code #1: Voluntary Consent is Essential
The first point of the Code is:
*“The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.”*ernative/2022/02/do-mandatory-masks-vaccines-break-the-10-points-of-the-nuremberg-code-7-3767733.html