GERMAN WHISTLEBLOWER EXPOSE'

Expose' of German Covid Scam

First below is a reader’s report on a German video, then the link to the video. And below the video I got an English translation of the transcript, though some parts were difficult, where I had to cut out a few sentences or words. You may want to see the video to see some of the graphs.

GERMANY UNCOVERS COVID SCAM

A massive leak of internal e-mails and memos from Germany’s Robert Koch Institute (federal agency and research institute for controlling infectious disease) reveals that the institute's scientists understood that virtually every aspect of the COVID-19 pandemic response was NOT guided by science, but by political machinations to spread fear, control the population, and promote the experimental vaccines. On November 2, 2024, Professor Stefan Homburg gave a presentation on the leaked documents in the German Parliament. Since the beginning of the pandemic, I have suspected that governments throughout the world were committing the greatest organized fraud in history, but I still found Professor Homburg's presentation to be absolutely breathtaking in the sheer ruthlessness of the lies and manipulation revealed in these leaked documents. Perhaps the most perfidious is a memo from September 28, 2020. Translation: 28.09.2020: FDA approval [of COVID-19 vaccines] before the US Elections is not desired, also not by European authorities. In other words, both U.S. and European public health authorities were afraid the COVID-19 vaccines—which had been heralded as the forthcoming saviors of mankind—could help to get Donald Trump {re-}elected if they were approved before the election. And so they found it expedient to withhold approval until after the election, even though they claimed the vaccines could save millions of lives. I strongly encourage everyone to watch the video presentation (in German with English subtitles) and to share it far and wide.

ENGLISH TRANSCRIPT OF GERMAN VIDEO

Thank you for the invitation. This is now my second lecture in this circle, and compared to last year, we have made significant progress, one must say, because we were fortunate in Germany to have a whistleblower who provided us with data that the whole world envies us for. This data includes not only the redacted protocols but also 10 gigabytes of unredacted protocols and additional material such as letters, for example, a letter from President Macron to Germany, requesting coordinated action on lockdowns, Excel sheets, emails, PowerPoint presentations, etc.

The significance of the RK leaks {RK likely refers to the RK Termin System, an appointment booking system used by German government offices} does not lie in revealing something entirely new from the perspective of critics, but in the fact that these documents are evidential and have now been admitted and processed by a court as evidence. This means that if someone writes on Facebook that this or that is not true, it has little effect. Even a scientific paper is often dismissed and refuted by opposing papers, but if the RK internally writes that this and that is so, it can be used as evidence in court.

Because the lockdowns and the entire Corona policy were internationally coordinated, what we found here in Germany is of importance to all countries, not just Germany. The most important question we had all these years was whether the RK, whose statements were authoritative and even binding on the courts, worked politically independently or was politically influenced. Our Federal Minister of Health made a crystal-clear statement on this in March. He read out that the media speculated that the RK had worked on political orders and not scientifically independently. This is false. Employees were redacted mainly to protect them from hate and agitation. This {is} typical perpetrator-victim reversal. At that time, {Karl} Lauterbach {Minister of Health} had released some protocols, none from his own term, and this remains the case to this day. The protocols were redacted {tampered with} to the point of being unusable, as you can see. These were not phone books, but protocols, and no one believes that only names were redacted.

With this deception, Mr. Lauterbach got away for months. It was reported as usual in all newspapers, from March this year until July 23, when the following happened: at 4:00 a.m., these 10 gigabytes were released on the net, at 6:00 a.m., a press conference was called in Berlin, attended by about 30 journalists. At 10:00 a.m., this press conference took place, and the journalists learned what we had found at a time when thousands had already downloaded the data. To avoid being arrested directly or having house searches, the authorities did nothing, because it was pointless. The moment these leaks came out, the unredacted protocols, the Federal Minister of Health changed his mind. Lauterbach admitted that experts were politically influenced. He maintained the lie for five months, then said the exact opposite of what he originally said, but as always, without any consequences for him.

Now, what was this political influence? I will give you some examples, and the following slides are structured so that you see the RK protocols on the left and what happened in the outside world simultaneously on the right. Let's start with political influence. On May 5, 2020, the RK wrote that if it did not comply with political demands, there was a risk that political decision-makers would develop their own indicators and/or no longer involve the RK in similar tasks. These are verbatim quotes, including typos and comma errors, that I show you here. Interesting why an authority would think either we comply with what is given to us, or the politicians will sideline us.

Twenty-two days later, testing, testing, testing is essentially an implicit strategy supplement dictated by politics. Overall, it was delicate, because the politicians made the guidelines. By May, it was already evident that there were no medical risks, and only by increasing PCR numbers did they maintain the illusion of a pandemic. The key was Minister Spahn's directive to test at all costs, not the sick, but healthy people, which had never been done before. And the Ärzte Zeitung {medical newspaper} writes that the legally insured have to pay for these billions of burdens to this day.

Second example of political influence: March 5, 2020, it would be good to put the Federal Ministry of Health's oral instruction in writing. This is how a clever civil servant proceeds, when he receives illegal instructions and fears being held disciplinarily or criminally responsible afterward. If he has a written instruction from the ministry, he is largely off the hook. Conversely, we see from the material that the ministry was always reluctant to issue written instructions.

May 26, 2020, how should the RK deal with substantive interventions by politics, for example, the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Labor? It was not only the Federal Ministry of Health that made guidelines, but essentially all ministries interfered with the work of the RK. And now the best sentence from the entire RK leak: September 28, 2020, the approval of the mRNA vaccine by the FDA before the US elections is not desired, nor by the European authority. This shows how political this whole event was. Outwardly, they pretended to want to save as many people as possible through vaccination, but more important was that Biden win the US election. Trump had tied his personal fate to an approval before the US election with the Warp Speed project. He wanted to start before the US election on November 1, and the political forces behind Corona prevented that.

We then read on CNN that after the votes were counted and uncertainties were cleared up, the FDA granted emergency approval for Pfizer-BioNTech in December 2020. The second important question is whether there was a medical emergency, and we find remarkable points directly in March 2020. The first is that the AGI, which means Working Group Influenza, follows infectious diseases and has statistics that go back years and decades, unlike these new PCR statistics. AGI Sentinel results suggest that SARS-CoV-2 was not yet circulating. This is the second day of the first lockdown. One day later, these trends should better not be formulated or communicated, because it might be difficult to justify further measures. Yes, this shows the RK's mindset that runs through all protocols. They subordinated themselves to politics and always thought from the measures' perspective. The measures were more important, and they concocted justifications to legitimize them, including the number of free beds, occupied beds about equal, i.e., 50% vacancy in the clinics, with the addition that normally {there is} less than 10% vacancy. And then comes a red sentence because it was removed from the official protocols. But in the additional material, we also found such a remnant, the original version of the protocol that was forgotten. This protocol from March 25 was last edited in 2023 by a legal department employee who did not participate in the meeting and was responsible for rejecting requests under the Freedom of Information Act. She said she had not changed the file but only saved it by mistake. But since there is no registration system at the RK, it would comply with the BMI's {Ministry of the Interior's} guidelines, so it cannot be proven or disproven. It states that it is risky to establish causality between measures and the decline of the wave. We are generally at the end of the flu season. And to this, ladies and gentlemen, the RK had the following graphic. This is, for me, the most important graphic of the entire Corona crisis. It is not well received because it is somewhat complex. Therefore, I will explain it. It is not something made retrospectively, so no hindsight bias, but at the beginning of the lockdown, the RKI saw the following: You see here plotted below, the calendar weeks from mid-year to mid-year. On the ordinate, the so-called Heli, which are colds with fever, so somewhat stronger colds. Each curve represents a specific year, and you see the same pattern every year. Initially, there are few cases in the summer. It then gradually increases until winter, and in January and February, these colds explode, then return to the original value. That is why people talk about cold or flu waves.

Now, the interesting part is the black curve. It belongs to the year 2020. You see first that the number of febrile colds, including SARS, so non-specific or dependent on the virus causing them, was abnormally low for the season. More importantly, it started to decline from February. You see the peak of the black curve in February. In February, it was still said that Corona was harmless, a conspiracy of the right, and thirdly, one should now calmly celebrate Carnival or Fasching {like Mardi Gras celebrated before Christian Lent}, which was done until the end of February. Only in the first week of March did the political mood change for reasons still unclear, and at that time, the colds were already in free fall {rapid decline}. This means that even these excuses, yes, yes, it went down before the lockdown, but {saying} the school closures worked, or the cancellation of large events, {is} not compatible with the data. All these measures come from the 10th calendar week, and as you can see in the graphic, it {Covid} went down from the 6th calendar week {4 weeks before lockdowns}.

The next question concerns the vaccination. I have several slides, because the protocols were particularly heavily redacted {tampered with} here. We read first on April 15, 2020, when we learned from the newspapers that there was no vaccine at all, and there would be none for a long time, because development takes 10 years. And if it does come, it will be voluntary. Internally, we read the following: There is no experience with mRNA and DNA vaccines. Pfizer and others are considering skipping Phase 3 trials. Two weeks later, several vaccines will come, developed and tested in fast-track. Relevant data will only be collected post-marketing. This means we will first inject it into the entire population and then see if it helps or harms. That was the plan, and it was implemented. You know that the first vaccinations began on December 27, 2020, and then on January 8, 2021, in the early phase. The vaccine's effectiveness then was still unknown. The duration of protection was also unknown. They are essentially repeating what was in the EMA {European Medicines Agency} approval, namely that it is only known to protect against a positive PCR test. But everything else, such as protection against severe disease, protection against death, cannot be derived from these documents.

{FAST TRACKING COVID VAXES WAS DEVASTATING.} In March, we saw the first skepticism. It was still not apparent that fewer old people were dying due to the vaccination effect. On the right, I have shown you how a vaccine development usually looks like, from WDR {West German Broadcasting}. Research and development take 8 to 17 years; this time, it was done in a few months, and the result, as we now know, was devastating.

The second question about vaccination is whether it grants protection. This question is crucial, because the general vaccination mandate was based on the claim that a vaccinated person also protects others. If it was only about self-protection, a legal obligation could not be justified. What did the RKI {Robert Kock Institute, Germany's national health institute} think about the topic of protection? On February 8, 2021, it was expected but not certain, because it had been shown that vaccination can prevent severe courses, but not local virus replication. In August, the actual effect of 2G, i.e., exclusion of unvaccinated people from social life, was not greater protection of others, but greater self-protection.

And then looking back in 22 there are no signs that vaccinations change anything in excretions, no evidence, change like that, that is, you had a crystal-clear and consistent position internally, which also fit with everything that was in the literature, especially with the approval study, which had never claimed to protect others.

And then, retrospectively in 2022, there were no signs that vaccinations change excretion {contagion?}, no evidence of change. This means that internally, there was a clear and consistent position that matched everything in the literature, especially the approval study, which never claimed protection of others. And what does this mean for the external presentation? In the external presentation, this whole thing was about holding these people, the unvaccinated, hostage. Karl Lauterbach hurled this at the other members of Parliament, when it came to introducing a general vaccination mandate, which, as we know today, narrowly failed. If we are honest, it only failed because they blocked each other with their proposals. It was a very close thing, but you can see here in this slide very clearly that what was communicated externally contradicts what was known internally, diametrically.

The last content slide about vaccination is whether it is safe. Now it gets serious. Those with weak nerves should step out for a moment. March 19, 2021, so there had been vaccinations for almost three months. AstraZeneca caused a lot of excitement, re 12 cases of sinus vein thrombosis, Paul Ehrlich Institute pharmacovigilance was not keeping up well. Then sinus thromboses also in men, a 20-fold higher incidence, meaning if you were vaccinated with AstraZeneca, you had a 20-fold higher risk than an unvaccinated person of developing a sinus vein thrombosis, or really severe and life-threatening disease. May 7, side effect reports, Paul Ehrlich Institute had 45,000 in recent weeks, myocarditis in young men, sinus vein thromboses, etc. In the only hearing so far in the Brandenburg investigation committee, the head of safety at the Paul Ehrlich Institute, Dr. Keller Stanislawski, said there were people who only dealt with deaths and people who only dealt with myocarditis. We had much more work than ever before, just because of this vaccine.

The most shocking thing is the next slide. Look here again at the date. In March, April, May, it becomes clear how devastating the AstraZeneca vaccine was. And even ordinary citizens who did not have access to scientific findings became suspicious, because they said, based on unreliable but still existing information from their surroundings, what was happening here. How did Germany's leading politicians react to these warnings? As follows: Federal President Steinmeier with AstraZeneca, Chancellor Merkel and Vice-Chancellor Scholz vaccinated with AstraZeneca, Karl Lauterbach vaccinated with AstraZeneca, and in May, as the last one, Spahn vaccinated with AstraZeneca. Never before have we heard that politicians post online which treatments they are undergoing. With Mrs. Merkel, the highlight is even the vaccination certificate. So, in my interpretation, they simply wanted to avoid AstraZeneca being left on the shelf and then being held accountable for wasting taxpayers' money. They feared that at the time. By 2021, it had become customary to spend billions on vaccine doses every year. But back then, they were still afraid. Whether they really got vaccinated, everyone can decide for themselves. With an IQ of 90, you can only come to one conclusion.

Children: On March 11, 2020, we read in the protocol that school closures in areas not particularly affected were not recommended. Five days later, all German schools and, more seriously, kindergartens were closed. On the same day, by the way, on March 11, 2020, another crisis team met and had already decided this, and on the 16th, the schools were closed. RKI {went} back and forth. On May 21, 2021, pediatric associations, such as pediatricians, were cautious about vaccinating children. The politics were prepared in factions. A little later, almost pleadingly, children had a lower risk of severe disease compared to other age groups. What is the internal clear resistance that was never communicated externally? And then at the end of 2021, a booster vaccination for children was also being considered from the ministerial side, although there was no recommendation and partly no approval. The health minister tweeted that for children aged 12 to 15, BioNTech was 100% effective against Covid without side effects. So again, with this side-effect-free, everything spoke for vaccinating children. If you then clicked on the source in his tweet, if you were not blocked like me, you saw that it was a blog that reproduces a press release from Pfizer and BioNTech. So, the minister was essentially just guessing.

Children have a low risk of severe disease compared to other evening mix diseases What is the internal clear resistance, but it is never communicated to the outside world? And then at the end of 21 at the moment, a booster vaccination of children is also being considered from the ministerial side: Although there is no recommendation for this and in some cases no approval for this, the Minister of Health tweets: In children aged 12 to 15, Biotec was 100% effective against Covid without side effects. So again these side effect-free. Everything speaks in favor of vaccinating children If you then in his tweet, if you are not blocked there, like I did When you click on the source in his tweet, then you see, this is a blog that reproduces a press release from Pfizer and Bion tec Yes, so the minister is basically pure treasure not I come to the end with this

I now come to the conclusion. The last slide is the most complex, divided into three parts, and it is also the most important from my point of view. It first shows the so-called RKI risk assessment, which has shaped our lives for three years. Green means we lived as humans have for millennia with viruses. Yellow and especially red meant lockdowns, school and kindergarten closures, curfews, 15-kilometer radius, mask mandates, and direct and indirect vaccination mandates. You see, in March, the risk suddenly increased. March 2020, on the left, it goes from green to yellow. Then it stayed that way until early 2023 and then went back to green.

Now let's take a look at the intensive care bed occupancy from RKI and the Federal Ministry of Health for comparison. The green line below is the recommended normal occupancy rate of the German intensive care units. You can see the following there in 2020 we have a clear underutilization, so completely abnormal. This is what the RK also stated in the Stirring Protocol for the entire hospital landscape, billions of euros in subsidies had to be set up to save the clinics from insolvency. Then in 2020 you see 22, 23, the total occupancy of the intensive care unit hardly fluctuates any more and that no longer has to do with any special actions. The most interesting thing in this graph is the dotted line at the bottom. These are the PCR. These are both people who were sick with Covid and people who were admitted after a traffic accident, for example, and then, as was mandatory at the time, take a PCR test upon admission. You can see below this PCR sample, which is very enormous, it fluctuates enormously, without that having any influence on the upper total occupancy. And the crux of the matter is that the media basically only showed the population in the lower curve for 3 years, with exponential growth and the way they did it. If you compare the two now, would you say it is completely incomprehensible why the upper graph shows such a high risk? While the graph below indicates complete normality? You don't understand it, no, you understand it, but by the RKI League and this is now on the left, the declaration 16.3.2020 {16 March 2020} at the weekend a new risk assessment was prepared, and, as it came out in the court proceedings, outside the ministry, so there was no scientific assessment. It is to be scaled up this week. One day later in the AKI report came high risk. And then it just went into lockdown. In June 2020 were not only the colds so low, typical of the season, but even these PCR numbers were in the basement and approaching the zero line.

... The whole thing was where from start to finish? In the RKI we see a basic problem of the rule of law. Actually, according to Montesquieu's teachings, the courts are supposed to control the executive. But if the courts mainly believe authorities, or only authorities, it basically didn't matter in all trials, whether it was about compulsory vaccination or lockdowns or school closures. The RKI and PI always appeared as witnesses, saying that everything is perfectly fine. And then, because the authorities are bound by instructions, the government basically confirms itself. And the separation of powers has been abolished. You have to be lucky and a well-intentioned whistleblower to come to the following conclusion.

I am now quoting a sentence from a recent ruling. This assessment in favor of compulsory vaccination, which is based on the recommendations of the Robert Koch Institute, is shaken by the minutes of the institute that have now been published. What does the Osnabrück Administrative Court mean in a lawsuit that dealt with the vaccination of a path employee has said that I have actually refuted the previous justifications and has referred the whole matter to the Federal Constitutional Court for a new decision. Same problem. In my opinion, we also have other authorities such as the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and the Federal Environment Agency. ... Thank you, Professor Homburg.