(air whooshing)
(slow tense music)
- I'm Reiner Fuellmich
I'm a trial lawyer have been admitted to the German
and the California bar for 26 years.
And I have my firm and I have over these years
mostly represented consumers and small corporations
against fraudulent, large corporations like VW
and Deutsche bank.
And I got into this because a friend of mine asked me
to do something about this and my wife sort of confirmed.
Yes, you have to do something about it
and that's why we returned from California to Germany
in order to take part in the effort of finding out
what's really going on.
And now that we've more or less gotten a clearer picture
the big thing is to fight what these people are trying to do
- Is is your focus on the PCR test?
- Yeah our focus is on the PCR test
because if we managed to convince a court of law
that this is a fraudulent enterprise, the PCR test
being (clears throat) marketed with the assertion
that it can detect infections(clears throat).
If we can convince a court of law
that this is a false statement
then the whole house of cards is going to come crashing down
because there's nothing else that is the tool
that they're using in order to keep people in panic mode.
And, and there's no basis for this panic
because as I just pointed out
even according to the WHO which couldn't quite escape
the conclusions of John Hernandez, the mortality
is or lethality is roughly the same as that,
of the common flu.
- So inconsequential basically.
- Yeah Yeah.
- And so - And also there's a,
there's already herd immunity.
That's another thing that has been overlooked.
So there's absolutely no reason for vaccines
except for the pharmaceutical industry to make money
and probably cause a lot of damage
as far as health and, and even,
there's probably going to be a lot of fatalities too
because these vaccines haven't really been tested properly.
Usually it takes between five and seven years
to develop a new vaccine and now this should be done
or there they're claiming it can be done nine months or so.
I don't think so.
- And then can you comment on your lawsuit,
what're you gonna do next week, this will be published.
- No no, this is not going to be one single lawsuit
it's gonna be a number of different lawsuits
that are going to be filed both on here in Germany
on this side of the Atlantic and in the United States.
We're up here in Germany.
We're going to start filing these lawsuits
because we're a little bit ahead of the
of our American colleagues, even though we've
we've been discussing this
for quite a while now in numerous zoom conferences
but we're a little bit ahead of, of pack.
And so we're going to start filing these lawsuits
here in Germany for damages against people
like Dresden Wheeler and some of the others.
- And can you hold them personally liable? .
- Oh yeah, because they're the ones that lied.
They're the ones who stuck their heads out too far.
They're not doing this on their own.
They're making money with it, of course.
But somebody else is pulling their strings like Klaus Schwab
and Bill Gates who are lurking in the background
so to speak, but we have to start somewhere and it's,
and it's going to, the intent is
or the intention that we think is important here
is to uncover the whole thing, to use what we've learned
through the Corona committee to use these pieces
of evidence and the experts that we've heard
in order to convince a court of law
that this is a staged pandemic and that there's other goals
other people who are behind this
and trying to push completely different goals.
This has nothing to do with the worlds health.
- And, and how does an operation like this work?
Or how is it structured, do you think?
- We don't know and we don't care.
Right now we don't care.
The evidence is going to take us there in particular
if we take advantage of the Anglo-American judicial system
in order to win this case against Dresden,
we don't have to know who's behind him,
we know we can see that there's people behind him
because he's just not smart enough
to pull this up by himself.
And neither is Wheeler.
And, we know from listening to many
of these experts that they've been in touch with Wheeler
and, Dresden have been in touch with in close touch
with the players behind the field, the pharmaceutical
players like Roche is one of the big pharmaceutical players
or the welcome trust.
That's I think Wheeler used to work for them or with them.
So we know that there's something in the background
but it's not important for our lawsuit, for a lawsuit.
We can concentrate on one thing only.
These people lied when they're telling the general public
that PCR tests can tell us something about infections.
- And how contentious simple deception grow so hard
with this PCR test?
- Because it's, it's the panic Bobby Kennedy,
when he gave a speech here in Berlin on August 29th
that was the largest demonstration
that this country has ever had.
Even though the mainstream media
there more than a million people there
the mainstream media here made
this into something in of, of no consequence
like they're telling there's 17,000 people
or so that came together.
We know because we had 34 lawyers on the ground.
We're cooperating with members of the police force.
We know it was way more than a million
but he reminded people of some things
that not just of what his uncle said some 50 years ago
"Ich bin ein Berlina" famous, absolutely famous.
Every, every German will always remember this
but also of a quote of Franklin D. Roosevelt.
"We have nothing to fear, but fear itself".
And that's what they're doing.
They're trying to keep everyone in fear by pretending
by using these marionettes like Dresden and Wheeler.
And Tedrus, who's kind of, kind of slipped
into the background right now, but trying to use fear
so that people will believe everyone, even their closest
neighbors and relatives is a danger to them.
Could be a super spreader, even if they're completely
healthy and show no symptoms.
That's why I'm saying it's not just a lie
about PCR tests can tell us something about infections.
In addition, they needed to lie about
people can be infectious,
even if they don't show any symptoms.
And that's another thing because Dresden
knows that he's lying.
When he first published a pre-print
where he wrote a pre-print about on January the 30th
about how this woman from Wuhan came to Frankfurt
and infected a lot of people without her having
any symptoms that was wrong.
There was a journalist by the name of Kyle Kufashtman
who pointed this out and said,
"Hey, this is wrong, this woman did show symptoms
because she was taking anti flu medication".
You don't do that if you don't have any symptoms
but still he published his paper without correcting this.
So what you have here is line number one,
there can be infections without symptoms
so that everybody here is afraid of.
Everybody even though nobody shows any symptoms,
nobody is seriously sick.
And the second lie is the PCR tests
with their positive results.
Tell us about infections.
And there you have it that's the stage
which is perfect for this, for this panic,
which is playing out.
- So could you maybe reiterate the first one
in the sense to concisely like, you know
we were told there was this asymptomatic spreading
and that's there that isn't true.
And that's the basis of masks.
- Okay .-Yeah.
Just cause there's such a big point
that I think has lost some...
- So one of the law professors who advises us
in the background pointed out to me in this tort case
there's two really important lies
that have to be put front and center.
One is PCR tests can tell us something about infections.
The truth is it can not,
in particular not the way these PCR tests addressed
and tests are set up because everybody says everybody agrees
that if you using these PCR tests
you take a swab and then you have these molecules
which are invisible to the human eye.
So you have to amplify them by putting them into a machine.
Most of them produced by Roche
and amplifying them in cycles.
Anything above 35 cycles
everyone agrees is completely unusable.
Doesn't make any sense It's unscientific
the dressed in test, just like the CDC test, by the way,
which used the dress and test as a blueprint,
were set at 45 cycles.
Lie number one, you cannot tell anything
about infections by using these PCR tests
because what they do is they test positive
to almost everything, including, for example,
the debris the fragments of a common cold,
of your immune systems fight against the common cold.
Lie number two, even more important I think is
he says that there are asymptomatic infections,
which basically means anyone who is surrounding us
our relatives, our friends, and who shows no symptoms
who's perfectly healthy or appears perfectly healthy
could be a threat.
That's what this, that's what this induces.
That's what this fraud
there are asymptomatic infections induces.
It tells us, Oh my God
everybody could be potentially dangerous.
That is not true.
And we know that Dresden when he wrote this in a pre-print
knew that it was not true.
because he was referring to a woman from Wuhan
who traveled to Frankfurt and who apparently
spread whatever virus she had to a lot of people.
And she, he claims didn't have any symptoms.
A journalist pointed out that is wrong.
She did have symptoms because she was taking
anti-flu medication.
- So basically this is just like the normal flu
where if you're sneezing coughing, then you're infectious.--
- Yeah, yeah unless you show any symptoms
you are not infected.
There is I think Dr. Mike Yeadon,
he found a really great way
of defining what an infection is.
He says "there is a cold infection
and there's a hot infection
If a test, whatever test finds or is, is positive
because it finds some debris, some fragment
of your body's prior fight against the common cold
for example, or that doesn't mean anything,
If it's just there
only if a virus enters your cells
and then replicates, are you contagious?
And that's when you have symptoms
meaning if you don't have any symptoms
whatever virus is there hasn't done.
Anything isn't dangerous
is being probably killed by your body's immune system.
It's only contagious.
It's only infectious in that common sense.
If it has entered the cells
and is replicating before that, nothing to worry about".
- So if you don't have symptoms
you're not infected and you're not contagious.
- Absolutely. Absolutely.--
- And that's the big--
- That's the big thing, because symptoms
is like a sore throat or a headache or diarrhea, whatever.
- Just like the normal flu.
That's what it all boils down to.
- Yeah cause it's really discussing TV things in the media
with people walking with blood on the ground and all this.
(laughing) just fear--
- It's just playing stupid but it works.
If you just like Bobby Kennedy said
"there's nothing to fear, but fear itself".
But now we have a lot of fear and many people
have simply decided we're not going to think anymore.
We're just going to react to whatever triggers us
whatever they use to trigger us.
- And what's your goal with all this?
You think you can get injunctions on these things or get--
- Yeah If we're lucky we're going to get injunctions
depending on which court we address
we have had not just lawyers who are trying to help more
and more lawyers who are coming out of hiding more or less
but we've also the Corona committee that is...
We've also had judges calling us, getting in touch with us
and asking us how they can help.
They're not intending to bend the law or break the law
but they want to apply the law in order to stop this.
So there is going to be lots more pushback
than we can see right now.
- And are there efforts to change the laws
to make that harder or?
- Yeah, the government is in fact they are trying
to change the laws because just like in the United States
here in Germany and in Austria, more, more courts
have declared governmental decisions,
which are not based on a parliamentary hearing
on our law makers the ones who, who we voted into office
deciding about these laws but simply made up regulations.
They many courts of laws, including the constitutional court
in Austria, the Supreme courts of Michigan and Wisconsin,
a federal court in Pennsylvania
a superior court in, in California has said
you can have you governor, you can make
emergency regulations for a few days, but then
you have to get the parliament involved.
You have to get the law makers involved.
And that means you have to have a discussion
about the pros and cons.
What about the mask?
Does it serve any purpose?
Is there any other opinion out there that says,
no it doesn't serve any purpose.
Are they maybe dangerous and particular to children?
Are there any studies out there?
That's the kind of discussion that we need to have.
And that's one of the things that we need, want to push
as the Corona committee, a public scientific discussion
about what's going on.
And that's what the other side of course wants to suppress
because once we have this, the results are gonna be the same
as those that we have had in the Corona committee,
because the people who we have listened to the witnesses
that we have listened to are basically the same
plus some more we're going to go to court.
So they're not going to change their minds.
I don't think
- Have any of the events this year changed your perspective
of the world?
- Any other events?
- The events of this year, as it is.
- Oh yeah the events of this year have it's,
you know, as I said in the beginning,
I was not completely surprised to see
how governmental functions have been taken over
by private corporations, the most important thing however,
and that's something that I'm still quite shocked at
the most important thing is that private companies
like YouTube and Facebook are deciding about
the range of the freedom of speech.
They're the ones who are deciding whether or not
somebody's opinion can be heard or not.
That cannot be we have to stop this
because this is a sovereign task.
It's up to the courts of law to decide whether
some but some speech is defamation or, or whatever
but it's not up to private corporations to decide
whether or not it is an opinion that is being
that is being told to the world through a video
is covered by the right to freedom of speech or not.
It's us, It's the people who have to decide about this.
- So their behavior have surprised you?
- Yeah what what surprised me is how,
how careless we have been over the last 10
or maybe 20 years because the encroachment
of our individual rights has been going on
for a lot longer.
This is just maybe the final stage of this plan
because there is a plan behind this.
You know, there must be a plan behind this when it turns out
that the pandemic isn't a pandemic, but it's just something
like the common flu.
And when it turns out these people were telling us
about these PCR tests are lying to us.
So the next question of course
is who's doing this for what purpose?
- And what do you think this is heading towards?
What do you think is the goal?--
- From what I've read and again,
this is not important for our lawsuits,
but from what I've read and the people who we talk to here
on this committee, historians and journalists
this is the so-called great reset
that some very rich players of the corporate world,
including Bill Gates but also including Klaus Schwab,
he's using his world economic forum as a meeting forum
for the corporate elite self appointed corporate elite
and the self appointed political elite to influence them
to manipulate them, to basically lobby them.
What the goal is probably population reduction
is one of the goals so that the resources of the world
will last longer for those who will survive this.
That in my opinion is one of the goals maybe the basic goal.
- Controlling population huh?
- Yeah. I think so--
- Sort of managed reduction, huh?
- I think so yeah. - Yeah.
- Because you can read this it's there...
They're not doing this in hiding it's out there.
I mean, I think their last week's was it Newsweek's article.
I think their cover shows this eerie ghostly person
Klaus Schwab, who is one of the people who is behind this.
- And how, what do you say to people that are new to this
are skeptical of this.
Having read this, all this material (chuckles)
- It depends, It depends on who you talk to.
Like when we met out there, I was speaking to a cab driver.
This guy is intelligent,
intelligence I think has nothing to do with
if you have a law degree or a degree in medicine.
But this guy is intelligent because he's asking questions.
He wasn't wearing a mask, which was to me
an invitation to talk to him, get a conversation going.
And we drove, he drove me here
and took us about 10 minutes.
But within these 10 minutes, he began to ask me questions
sort of like what you're doing right now?
And he was open-minded, but he was open-minded
because he had already begun to ask himself questions.
Some of the things that are going
on don't make any sense to him he says.
And so I think maybe I got him...
I got him interested in looking a little deeper
in getting more information from the internet
because you can't get them from the mainstream media.
As I said, they have been influenced in much the same way
by these investors Bill Gates and others money
as the pharmaceutical and the tech industries.
- And the last question and I'm from Washington DC you know
there's this so-called expert intellectual cost States
seem to be some of the dumbest in situations like this.
What do you think that is?
- What again?
- They fall for these things more like people--
- - Intellectuals, yeah because they think
they're much smarter than they are.
I mean, some of the people who I went to law school with
are know everything about the law, because
they have learnt many of the regulations by heart, many
of the decisions by heart, but that's not all.
There is another, another layer of intelligence,
which many of these people don't have.
You have to have,
you have to be able to follow your gut instinct.
You have to be able to put the dots together.
You have to be able to, I guess what this is called
is social intelligence.
You have to understand what's going on.
Not just have a knowledge of certain individual aspects
of the law in this case, but you have
to be able to see the entire wood and not just one tree.
- All right street-smarts.
- Street-smart, that comes into play,
it doesn't in addition, you need...
You need to have the factual knowledge.
If you're a lawyer, you have to know about the law
but that alone doesn't get you very far.
You have to under...
Street-smart is probably a good, yeah (chuckles)
- Yeah cause in DC it's like a 100% when I see them.
But you going to the Midwest and the South
a lot of people are more skeptical you know.
- Yeah In California, most out where we live out there
in Northern California, most people don't really care.
I mean, they do put on their mask if they have to
if they go to like in Reno, that's the closest city
closest larger city to us.
If you go to a Walmart or,
or any of the hardware stores.
Yeah you put on your mask
but in those smaller towns, people don't care.
Neither the shop owners or the employees, they don't care.
They don't wear masks.
- Do you think some of the changes in demographics
of the cities in the countryside that's a part of this plan
or a result of it?
- I can't tel, I don't know.
It could be, it could be a part of this plan.
Not a result of it not yet.
- Such a big shift, isn't it?
- Yeah.
- You really have to change your own evaluation
where you wanna live.
- Yeah that's one of the reasons that I decided I wanted
to be away from big cities but this is not new.
I've always been like this.
I didn't, I could, I always felt like...
I'm being crowded in, in big cities.
I don't like it when too many people are around me
when it's too noisy I can't stand that.
I love to be out in the country
where there's only horses and cows and a couple of bears
and rattlesnakes and my dogs.
- Yeah do you have any other comments you'd like to make.
- Nope, I think I said it all (chuckles).
- Okay, great well thank you.
- Oh yeah you're welcome.