With reference to what you said about cash, I forgot to say that actually everybody on this call and everybody watching the videos later
should ask their banks for a paper statement because a lot of people go along with this nonsense of actually looking online for their statements.
So I demand a paper statement. They have to send it to me and they do.
Yes, I demand a paper statement. Very good, Stephen. That's good.
But they don't like it. They don't like it. So we need to force them to do this. All of us anyway.
And they charge an extra $2 a month to do so.
Not for me.
Okay, well done.
HSBC have to send a paper one to me for no charge.
Yep. All right, let's get this show on the road. Dagmar and Katja, welcome.
Not that I've got any money, Charles. But that's not the point.
All right, let's get this happening. So everybody, welcome to Medical Doctors for COVID Ethics International.
And in today's discussion, this group was founded by Dr. Stephen Frost during the darkest days of the COVID scam responses, which perhaps are getting dark, you know, we're having lockdowns at least.
They started this with a desire to pursue truth, ethics, justice, freedom and health.
Stephen has stood up against government and power over the years and has been a whistleblower and activist. His medical specialty is radiology.
I'm Charles Covets, the moderator of this group. I'm Australasian passion provocateur.
And my jacket is red because red is the color of passion. And there's plenty of passion in this room.
Virtual room. I practiced law for 20 years before changing career 30 years ago.
And over the last 13 years, I've helped parents and lawyers to strategize remedies for vaccine damage and damage from bad medical advice.
I can tell you that I have not found a doctor who says that any vaccine has been properly tested for safety or efficacy.
You find me one. We'll bring him on to this call to discuss whether any, any vaccine ever has been properly tested for safety and efficacy.
I'm also the CEO of an industrial hemp company. We comprise lots of professions here and we're from all around the world.
Many of us thought that vaccines were OK. Now, many of us proudly say we're passionate anti-vaxxers.
And still you'll see in the media if you are labeled as an anti-vaxxer, then you're considered a conspiracy theorist.
Well, I urge you to think about whether you're proud to be a conspiracy theorist and don't be scared of that label.
If this is your first time here, welcome and feel free to introduce yourself in the chat and where you're from.
If you publish a newsletter or podcast or you have a radio or TV show or you've written a book, put the links into the chat so we can follow you, promote you and find you.
Most of us understand we're in the middle of World War Three and that there are various battle lines as part of this war.
One of those 12 battle lines is the is the legal battle line.
And we're going to be talking about that today.
Most of us understand the development of science and the science is never settled.
Some of us believe in viruses. Some do not. Some are on the fence.
The meeting runs for two and a half hours after which for those with the time, Tom Rodman runs a video telegram meeting.
Tom puts the links into the chat if you're able to join.
We will listen to Dagmar Schoenen and Katja Vollmer for as long as they wish to speak.
And then we will have question and answer.
Stephen Frost, by long established tradition, asked the first questions for 15 minutes.
There's no censorship. It's a free speech environment.
Free speech is crucially important in our fight to preserve our human freedoms.
If you're offended by anything, be offended.
We are genuinely not interested.
We reject the offence industry that requires nobody to say anything that may offend another.
And think about this. What on earth makes you think that you shouldn't be offended?
What a ridiculous proposition.
Exactly.
We come with an attitude and perspective of love, not fear.
Fear is the opposite of love. Fear squashes you. Love, on the other hand, expands you.
These twice weekly meetings are not just talkfests.
An extraordinary range of actions and initiatives have been generated from linkages made by attendees in these meetings,
including people working to raise money for Tim Ballard to produce his sequel to Sound of Freedom.
If you have a solution or a product or links or resources, or you want to throw money to us, to Stephen,
that was a joke. But anyway, put the details into the chat.
The meeting is recorded, is uploaded onto the Rumble channel.
And now welcome to our guest presenters, attorneys for Dr Ryan Oformick, Kaccha Schoen and,
sorry, Kaccha Wollmer and Dagmar Schoen.
And we thank both of you for giving us your time and wisdom and being available to
see if we can help Ryan In the wonderful work that he's been done.
And for those of you who don't know, Ryan has presented twice to this group previously,
and many of us know him personally.
And thank you again, Stephen Frost, for creating this group and for organizing Dagmar and Kaccha to speak to us today.
Dagmar and Kaccha, over to you or Dagmar, whoever is going to take the lead.
You're in charge. Lawyers can take in charge.
By the way, Dagmar has got the most extraordinary background spending four and a half years in India
before you commence your legal career, Dagmar.
I think that's spectacular. I love that story.
It was the beginning of the spiritual movement, the same like the last dance of the other side, you know.
It started all at the same time in the late 70s.
So I talked with Ryan today for half an hour and he gave me talked yesterday and I said,
why don't you write something and I could read it to the audience.
But then I had the idea I could even because he read it to me and I recorded it and I said I could even I could only play it.
And then they could hear your voice.
And he agreed. So in this piece, it's a bit funny because he was dictating it like like his writing.
So he mentions some commas and some, you know, but I think it's much nicer when you hear his voice
and then you can see and feel how he really is.
So I start I started now. It's about six minutes.
Okay.
Your friend. This is just a source message.
But let everyone know that I'm okay.
And then I will continue with our international legal work.
And you have probably heard I was kidnapped from Mexico by the German authorities.
They did not have an international arrest warrant and therefore had to manipulate the Mexican authorities.
For my wife and me to Tijuana where under the guise of problems with our passports, which in reality didn't exist.
My wife and I were trapped and held captive for the sole purpose of delivering to the German authorities.
My wife was released immediately after the same cooler.
There are no problems with our passport.
Here's a result of the criminal complaint filed by two former members of the Corona Investigative Committee,
who no one has ever heard of and who no one has ever taken notice of.
We know that from the top of the district attorney's files,
which were finally out for more than a year of secret investigation available to my attorney.
Secret investigation violated my right to a fair hearing.
Two former members of the Corona Investigative Committee had first joined forces with my former co-host.
And then on September the 2nd, 2022, filed a criminal complaint,
which as even my former co-host admits in a brief file by her lawyer on December the 5th, 1923,
was written un-manturately and is simply a pack of latent lies full of hateful emotions.
The man who started all this not only lied to get in his office to manipulate the Mexican authorities,
but actively helped lure me and my wife into flying to Tijuana for alleged visa problems.
It is now clear from the content of the file that this man has always been trying to get all of the doughnuts
that Mr. Lincoln has never given to the Corona Investigative Committee from a flex my own money,
from a flex my client's money, and he has now turned against his former ally,
from my former co-host, from a two-fold, threatening to sue her, from a two-fold.
He and his very small office of lawyers, of totally inexperienced lawyers,
are already a projection of roughly 1.5 million euros of the Corona Committee's money, my money, and my client's money.
If the authorities continue to help them, they will gain a total of roughly 5 million euros, money for nothing,
as the song by Dire Trace says.
They never did anything for the Corona Investigative Committee.
Their only intention, right from the start, as we now know, was to get the full instance of the Corona Investigative Committee,
as even the armistice has explained, in her lawyer's brief for the prosecution, on December 5, 2023.
However, this thing slows us down, but it cannot stop us.
So, our international group of lawyers and ICIC will continue to be exposed,
and we will ensure that all the evidence that has come to light already, and will continue to come to light,
will be used in new financial and legal proceedings to hold everyone accountable,
from every person and every organization that are responsible for the economic and physical crimes against humanity committed during the pandemic.
We will ensure that the freeze and justice will prevail.
There is no other way, as Archbishop Vigano correctly pointed out, that the pandemic was just a trial,
but we need to see if the majority of the people would be manipulated through panism,
or by the human politics, and tend to destroy their own economies at large.
If we let this go, things will get far worse.
Therefore, there is no alternative to justice, and we will make sure that justice is served.
I'm sure that my friend and colleague, Dr. Dexter Rheinefeld, will be happy to tell you more.
Wish us all luck. Best of luck.
So, that was his statement. Did you enjoy it?
Yes. Yes, excellent, Agmah. That was wonderful.
That was wonderful to hear his voice and to say that he is okay.
Okay, and the information that Celia Farber shared, and Celia is a wonderful investigative journalist, as many of us know,
said that he was in fact being treated very harshly in German prison, and you, I think, told us on Monday, Agmah, that he's being treated okay physically.
What's the situation with his treatment?
Well, yeah, I mean, the treatment in a prison is never good, you know.
You get bad food, and you have a very small room, and you have only, and even the situation for pre-trial detention is much worse
than when you are sentenced already and are a normal prisoner, yeah.
So, as long as you are considered innocent, you are treated worse than when you are sentenced, yeah.
That's discussed already for decades, you know, in the legal community, but it doesn't change, yeah.
And the thing that bothered him most is that he has not really the possibilities to work on his case, you know.
They don't give him an electric typewriter. He still has to write everything by hand, and we can hardly read it, you know.
Or he calls us and dictates something, and then we can write it.
But this situation is the most pressing for him, and that he doesn't have the addresses, and they don't give him his computer, so he can look at the documents.
But he also told me today that he's now the lawyer of all the other prisoners, you know.
He's doing everything. Everybody who needs something comes now to him, and he says there are really poor guys.
I mean, he said also there are, of course, also some dangerous people in this prison.
And this prison, like in Göttingen and Rostov, it's a high-security prison, yeah.
That's really strange. And the worst thing is also like when he has to go somewhere, then he gets really handcuffed.
And that's where he said, like, how they do that. That is almost like torture, because they bind his arms and ankles so tight that it's really harmful.
And when we had the hearing for the pretrial detention, you know, whether the court is now letting him go or not, of course they didn't.
But what he told us then afterwards, that even when he is out, and I mean, he's not for one second alone, you know,
when he comes back, he has to drop again, like all clothes, he has to undress completely and his body searched, you know.
I mean, this is really a scandal where you can see that they really want to demolish the dignity of the people.
That is psychological torture. So together with other doctors about Julian Assange, about the solitary confinement, that is also torture.
And so we've listed all these forms of torture with Julian Assange on two huge letters in the Lancet of All.
And those were published in February and June of 2020. I recommend you as the lawyer and catcher read those two letters because it's all documented.
And we accused four governments of psychologically torturing Julian Assange and not one of those governments defended themselves.
The governments for the record were Australia, the United Kingdom, the United States and Sweden.
Yeah. And I also say, because I look at this topic since I studied law, and I always found that the whole situation in the prisons is a violation of the first paragraph of our Constitution, you know.
That the dignity of the human beings cannot be touched. It is touched every day massively.
So and what you said the other day, that you can really see the quality of a country, how the prisons are. Yeah.
That's also a thesis of mine, definitely.
It's not the disgrace of Germany, isn't it? But look at Sweden. Anyway.
Yeah. Is Sweden, is it better in Sweden? I don't think so.
Oh, no, I meant the way they treated Julian Assange, the way they took care of the United States and United Kingdom in particular, but also Australia not saying anything about one of their citizens.
So it's all documented in these two huge letters, 28 pages each, I think from memory, February 2020 and June 2020.
I was amazed that the Lancet took them. Yeah, that's amazing.
And the real criminals, they don't sit in the prisons anyway, you know, they sit in.
Yeah, they sit somewhere else.
But like, like compared to a prison in India or in Spain or, you know, of course, a German prison is much better.
Yeah. But still, of course, it's it's terrible. Yeah.
Katja, would you agree? Would you agree? Absolutely.
Absolutely. So Dagmar, the view, there's been the chat, what you've been talking and Katja, you know, you're a human rights lawyer and what you've done there is most in we've all seen your CV is wonderful to read that, as I said at the start.
And there is no doubt that many people in this room, having heard what you've said, and what Stephen said, Rainer is being tortured.
And it is no stretch of the language to say that he's being tortured psychologically, psychologically, solitary confinement is torture.
And so the point is, all of us, you know, the issue of Rainer's ability to defend himself in Germany is extraordinary that he's being hampered by not having access to a computer.
Like, like, so, so I just want you to be you and Katja to be comfortable.
Because there can be a lot of people who watch this recording that it is my view that all of us should be contacting the German Embassy in each one of our countries in each one of the states that we are in and complaining about his treatments, because, because silence on
Rainer's treatment is unacceptable in my view. What do you and Katja say?
Yes, it's unacceptable. If he is silenced. That's right. But the treatment and how he is feeling all other prisoners are used to in the same way.
And I think that's a global problem. The jail here in Germany is very modern. This is high tech, but it is very, very secure jail.
This very high.
Yes, a very high status to get people closed up. And I think the situation of all people all over the world in prisons is very, very poor. And perhaps Rainer.
I don't want to say that is a good situation for him. I don't want that at all. But he's a very intelligent man and he's very strong, I think very strong from his intellect and from his emotions, etc.
And he's helping.
There's a great number of other prisoners there where he is as a lawyer and he's helping perhaps as a little.
Yes, a little thing to talk over. He gets his room there in the prison to two brothers who were not able to speak to each other because one of them sits at the other end of the prison and the other on the other hand.
And they didn't have any ability to speak to each other. And he is so friendly and he allowed them to join together and to talk in his room.
That was not allowed and there was some problems, but he's so friendly that he's helping the people there also. And I think that is very high quality.
I just wanted to say about the torture. When you say just he gets tortured there, then I think everybody thinks, oh God, there's waterboarding or something like that.
And that's just why I said I would not prefer just to if you explain that the whole situation in prisons is a kind of torture, then it's something different.
But usually when you say something gets tortured, then we think Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo and that's definitely not in getting and happening.
So it's psychological torture which is more damaging in the long run and that's what we wrote about with Julian Assange. They were deliberately psychologically torturing them.
And the thesis is there, it's never been answered in both those letters.
And Stephen, that's a very good point you make. And I think what Dagmar and Katja are making clear to us is that Reiner is being treated no differently to other prisoners in this particular prison. Is that correct?
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
And Dagmar, very importantly, the people who wrote about this psychological torture of Julian Assange by four governments, which the accusations were never answered, were medical doctors.
So they knew what they were talking about. Many of them were psychiatrists and psychotherapists.
Yeah, Assange is, of course, is a state enemy number one, you know, that's for sure.
In my opinion, the fact that they have kidnapped Reiner across international borders with false statements, that tells me that they were desperate to get him and they do exactly the same with him as they did with Julian Assange and put him in a high security prison, a very high security prison, very modern, but heartless, deliberately heartless.
And we've written that.
But all the prisons are heartless, you know, I was working on a retrial case for six years from 2013 to 2019. And this man, this poor man, he was completely innocent. He was sentenced by a Munich court twice as murder.
Yeah.
And there had not even been a homicide, a homicide. It was just a deadly household accident from an old woman. And he was sitting for 13 years in a prison close to Munich as murder.
And so I worked with a colleague. I worked with this case for six years. And then he was, luckily, we succeeded, which was like a miracle because nobody, they don't get free, you know, and like he was really acquitted.
And there was again, the whole case was opened again. And on 7th of July last year, he was acquitted to proven innocence, you know.
And this was a great stagma. I agree with you. So if I were lawyers like you, I would make a lot of noise. But the trouble is it might damage, it might damage Reiner's interests if you make the noise. But you can maybe get other lawyers to speak out.
Because it's the problem that innocent people who haven't had a trial, as you said, treated worse than those who have been convicted.
And it's not out of kindness to those who've been convicted, I think. I think that they have to treat them reasonably well because they know very well that psychological torture would lead to death in the end.
Now, I would also like to ask the people here that they try to find an international lawyer who really analyzes what has happened to Reiner through this kidnapping from Mexico.
I mean, the state attorney from Göttingen, they worked for months together with the immigration authorities in Mexico. We can see this in the file now and try to get him, you know.
And because they only had a European warrant, like Mexico doesn't belong to the EU. And the other international would have taken too long, you know. He would have been imprisoned in Mexico, probably.
So they tried to deal with these immigration officers. And I mean, that's highly illegal. And it would be really great if some people of you can find an international, highly qualified lawyer who does an analysis of this.
I can put you in touch with Niels Meltzer, who was the United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture. And he was the reason that doctors, I formed the Doctors for Assange group.
And we managed to get a lot of doctors to take up the banner, which Niels Meltzer had highlighted in an official report from the United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture.
So I know, I know I followed Niels Meltzer up and I know that he investigated and visited Assange in the prison and said he's being tortured. But the other thing like this kidnapping of Reiner, that's also not so seldom happening, you know.
So it would be really good if we would have a really high qualified international lawyer who really analysis this whole happening there and that we could could publish this.
And the German government and say this is unacceptable.
Well, there are a quick, Stephen, Stephen, the request is clear. We need Niels Meltzer or someone like him to help Dagmar and Katja on properly analyzing the unlawful and illegal activities of the German government in kidnapping Reiner.
That's the request, correct Dagmar? That's how we...
Right. Yeah, that would be wonderful, you know, I had already this request when I had this Zoom with Elsa Schieder on 28th of October.
I asked, but nothing came, you know, and I think there must be somewhere, you know, international lawyer who is interested to look at this. Yeah, that's ridiculous.
Through the June Assange case, I know a lot of them, but I can't remember the names now. I remember, but there were many others and many other doctors who are very, very interested in this.
And we've got all their names, so we can share all that with you.
I knew it was going to be useful one day.
Well done, Stephen. All right, so let's... So Dagmar and Katja, if you... We're happy to do Q&A, so we'll do this in a structured way.
So people, because lots of people have different questions or suggestions, and then the suggestions that they might make to you might then trigger other, in useful ways, other insights.
So Dagmar and Katja, do you want to say anything else or should we go to Q&A in a structured way?
No, I would suggest that maybe Katja gives an overview. I could also do it, but she could also do it, like about the legal situation where we are now, you know, what is the accused of? What did they drop? Katja, would you like to do that?
Yes, and while Katja is doing that, yes, please, everybody, please understand where we are talking. And this is a good understanding from human rights perspective of what happens to people.
What happens to people, you can be charged by the system, and we're talking about the appropriate conditions and treatment of Reiner and prisoners generally while they're awaiting trials.
So it doesn't matter whether a person is guilty or innocent, the treatment should be the same. That's the point.
I just want to highlight that someone put in the chat, I contacted, I don't know what it was about, I contacted the embassy in Canada and it did nothing. The fact that they did nothing is not the point.
The point is that this person has hopefully written to the embassy in Canada and then it's on the record so that that can be used in the future because from the moment she pointed this out in Canada, that can be, they can be held accountable for knowing what, but actually, arguably you need to.
But the best way to do it is to publish everything you send to the German embassy, for example. I think that was Canada, in Canada.
Yes it was.
But the point is that it's not, so a lot of people think, oh, it's no use doing it because they did nothing, you know, that's not the point. The point is to actually make your voice heard and record it for history, for people later.
Yeah, that's what I think anyway.
All right, Katja.
She has to unmute herself.
Sorry, no, I didn't want to speak when other people spoke at the moment. So, yes, we have a little text here for that questions too.
And the situation at the moment is that the court already has recognized that some accusations which are held to Reiner only remained for the prosecution.
And Reiner, at the moment, there were two things from the prosecutor, but only one.
The important thing at the moment, and Reiner and his co-host in the Corona Committee, in the Corona Investigation Committee, Viviana, has two up three loan agreements.
But this had some reasons. Reiner received a loan for 500,000 and one for 200,000 euros to secure liquidity.
And the co-host Viviana Fischer received a loan for 100 euros.
In addition, they bought physical gold for one million euros. And this is held in a secure place also at the moment.
These two loans were released from Reiner and Viviana Fischer and signatures by those two.
Yes, the reason for those loans were that there were some things happened at the situation.
It's a little bit difficult. The name, the MFWDFG, was another committee to discuss the Corona.
At the moment it's a little bit difficult for me. Dagmar?
Yeah, I can continue because I have to text to...
As we don't have so many English speaking clients, we had it written down. Because we are not so firm in the legal terms.
Reiner is accused of having misappropriated funds from the Corona Investigation Committee in breach of trust as managing director of the company.
During the period when the accounts of many critics were frozen and seized in Germany, that was the reason why they tried to secure the money, the donations.
They came in a flood to the Corona Committee. Nobody had thought of them that this committee will be such a success. That was totally surprising for everybody.
Suddenly they had these huge amounts of money lying on their bank accounts. Then the news came that the state just took the bank accounts from people who criticized the Corona measures.
A very famous professor, a very renowned professor, they finished him completely. Within weeks he had nothing anymore. He went to Switzerland with no money at all.
He described it publicly. Also many doctors, their bank accounts were frozen. Reiner and Viviani thought we had to secure our donations for our donators.
We cannot have it lying around just on bank accounts. That's why they did this with these loan agreements. Reiner thought it's best if I put it in my house in Göttingen.
Then when the time is easier and the state is no more so furious, then I can just sell the house and get it out again. But they cannot grab the house.
That was the reason why he put it in the house. 700,000. They did a whole huge garden with a pool. They improved the value of the house.
Then after half a year or was it even one year, he started talking that he wants to sell the house and he talked publicly about it. With SpittlTV he said I'm going to sell the house.
It's worth over 1 million so he can easily pay these loans back to the committee. It was a good plan. He found buyers.
On October 3rd they signed a notary, they signed a selling agreement. It was around 1.4 million.
Of course in the agreement was a bank account from his wife because even his accounts were closed down. Then a really strange thing happened.
Honestly when we tell this, nobody believes us that this was possible. One of these young guys who also put the criminal complaint about him, one of these guys convinced the notary that the buyers should pay the money on his private account.
That's how it happened. Not the whole amount, but 1.15 million. It was over a million euro.
Was the one who convinced the notary to do that? Was he an agent of the notary?
It wasn't young. Because he was writing himself about it. He's one of the haven anwälte. We have documents about it.
I wonder whether they maybe set Reiner up. They knew exactly. It was a big plan. They chose young guys to implement it.
That's the conclusion. That's the conclusion one can draw. But the actual facts are that this... and he was even bragging about.
Nobody believes that the notary just advises buyers of a house to transmit the money not on the bank account which is in the agreement, but to somebody else.
The notary was working for the government.
We don't know yet. The funny thing is we don't know whether he was in good or bad faith. But the strange thing is that the state attorney didn't really investigate this.
They didn't even get to talk to him.
So until proved otherwise, Reiner was set up. In my opinion, you need to get lawyers or you yourself should make an official complaint about Reiner's kidnap from Mexico. From the German embassy. Incredible.
But we first have to deal now with the court that they don't sentence him too quickly. It's really strange how the whole investigation is done because they didn't talk to this notary and to these guys.
They are even now already listed as witnesses for the hearing. But they haven't even talked with them yet.
So we will do something about that.
Failure to investigate properly, which this is an example of, is criminal. That is criminal. So failure to investigate what the notary did, I'm sorry to say, is criminal. And that's the giveaway.
So failure to investigate is often crime. They did that with my case in the Ministry of Defence. I told them they needed a police investigation. They didn't want a police investigation, so they got rid of me.
By text, with no reason given.
Yeah, but you have a formal procedure in these whole things. And you have to deal with that. I mean Katja and I, we are not the only ones who are working on this case. We have in the background, we have really very good people.
Very good people.
Someone has said the imagination or the experience to suspect.
Haven, you're not a lawyer. Please. Come on, let's listen to Dagmar and Katja.
I'm just trying to help.
Yes you are.
Yeah, you can have lots of fantasies, but you have to apply also to the procedure that is happening, because otherwise you look around and he's sentenced.
You know, I mean, this we have to avoid and to stop. Yeah. And there you have to, fantasy doesn't help you very much, you know. So you have to really act. You have to find angles where you can grab their balls, so to say, you know.
Your eyeballs or the testicles.
Either, all four.
That's what we are trying.
But it's crumbling down because this whole paragraph, you know, it's the 266 in the criminal code.
It's a very strange paragraph, you know, which is discussed already for decades in the legal community, because for a criminal code, it has to be very precise.
The description of the deed, you know.
And with this paragraph, it's not precise, you know. You can put anything under it, you know. And that's why many lawyers and law professors, you know, there's a huge decade long discussion going on about this paragraph, you know.
Even when the company Mannesmann was sold, there was afterwards a big case based on this paragraph.
And Ackermann, who was then the CEO of Deutsche Bank, you know.
There was a big case with even the CEO of the Deutsche Bank.
And there was this famous picture before the court hearing.
He made to the press like this, you know, the victory sign.
Yeah. And then he went in.
And of course, they didn't get sentenced.
It was about the selling of this big company Mannesmann.
And some people, they got tons of millions of dollars or pounds.
I don't know what. I'm not interested in money at all.
But and then was also there. Is this a case of this 266?
Yeah. And this is always pulled out.
If somebody gets got money, if money is involved and it's not very clear.
And of course, it's also an attack from inside the company.
Like when the outsider takes the money from the company, it's either a theft or something.
You know, that's the attack from outside.
But the 266 is an attack from inside the company.
You know, if inside a company or institution grabs money, then it's the 266.
It's called untreue. Yeah.
Infidelity, but not in the only in the financial sense.
It's infidelity.
And so we think that we have a good chance to really smash this accusation.
But still, it's a lot of work, you know, and we have long briefs, you know, and we try to get him out.
But of course, you know, if they do this whole thing that they kidnap him from Mexico, even,
they of course won't let him go like this.
Yeah, that's clear. Absolutely.
So is there a precedent for this?
I've never heard of any lawyer being taken across international borders when he's been kidnapped.
I don't think there's a precedent for this.
If that's what torture, I'm a Dutchman.
I talked.
Yes, I just wanted to pronounce one thing.
Perhaps it's a little bit lucky than unlucky that he is now in prison in Germany.
I think the prisons in Mexico are not quite as beautiful or not so secure.
I don't think it's nice in prison, but I think the prisons in Germany are much better than the prisons in Mexico.
And perhaps of that, Rainer is a little bit lucky at this point.
I talked now recently to a law professor.
I mean, he's already also 80 and he is just defending someone in the Cum-Ex scandal, in the Cum-Ex case.
Did you hear about it, the Cum-Ex case?
That's the biggest financial fraud in Germany.
With tax things, they stole from the state billions, billions.
Some people got billions out of the state.
And that's just a case happening in Bonn.
And this professor, even if he's 80, he's defending one of the guys there.
But I know him and I contacted him and I told him about the story about the kidnapping.
And then he said, oh, years ago, I wrote an article about these cases.
And I asked him to, but he's very busy now.
He didn't send it yet.
But that's interesting.
He has written a case, a longer article for a book about these cases.
So there must be more cases.
Yes.
Remember to ask him for those, Dagmar, for that story.
No, no, I mean, the best thing would be if we really would have a good,
a good brief from a highly well-known lawyer of international law, you know.
That would be the best what we could get.
That's why I think that's the clear request.
Sorry, Katja?
He is an expert on consultant on this international case.
Very good.
All right. So are you ready for questions from others now, Dagmar and Katja?
Or is there more you want to tell us about the story?
Because remember, whether or not, you know, so we've got, so Rainer has been charged.
How many different offenses, Dagmar, just so that we're clear?
Yeah, it's now only, only these two, they are the leftovers.
These two loan contracts.
That's the two offenses.
Yeah. And they're creaming.
They even like this state attorney, they had also accused him because his office did the whole work for the Corona Committee, you know, for two years.
And they had to answer about three hundred forty thousand emails.
Can you imagine that?
So this one woman, she said she was always sitting already at five o'clock at the desk, you know, and sorting out the emails.
And so this was the whole law office was busy with the Corona thing.
And of course, they were doing work for the Corona Committee.
So Rainer made an invoice to the Corona Committee about the costs of his law office.
And that's the normal thing.
You know, they could have also engaged an outsider, which would not be very intelligent because an outsider doesn't know about this whole thing.
So but the state attorney first, they put this in the accusations.
And there the law said, now the court said, no, this is not valid.
You know, they took this out.
And this was about an amount of more than three hundred thousand euro.
Yeah. Good.
Do any of the players around Rainer in those years, you know, with the Corona Committee, do any of them have you investigated whether any of them have any links at all with the intelligence services?
We don't know yet.
We are looking.
Let's go to other questions.
You know, some people some people call us.
I mean, there are also always strange cases amongst, you know, you have to be very careful because people want to be important.
And they say, we know something and, you know, you have to have to be careful.
But of course, I mean, nobody of them is accused and investigated in.
Of course, I mean, this thing's, you know, from here to the North Pole.
Yeah, that's very clear.
Yeah. So but you have to prove it.
You have to prove it.
And this we can't.
Well, he was kidnapped.
He was kidnapped.
So that's very, very strange in my eyes.
He was not really kidnapped.
Just the Mexican authorities said we don't want this man without a visa here.
So and when he was in the airplane, you know, he was accompanied by two Mexican guys and the one guy he said spoke English.
And then he asked him, who is actually paying for your flights?
You know?
And then they said, yeah, Germany is paying for the flights.
Yeah.
So he was kidnapped.
Well, Ryan, I said he was kidnapped.
He was clearly kidnapped.
Yeah. All right.
Let's go to questions.
We've got lots of hands up and lots of people and we'll get new insights and suggestions.
So Peter Kearney, good to see you.
Hi. Thank you very much for inviting me always.
I'm not a lawyer.
I'm an economist, but I've been on your show too before.
I'm also a friend of Reiner's and of Doug Marrs and been interviewed by Reiner several times.
Now, my point or my question, not being a lawyer, but from what I understand is that there is a law, at least in the European Union.
I think it's an international law that for at least in Switzerland, it's also valid.
That for financial, so-called financial crimes or suspected crimes, you cannot go outside of the country to arrest somebody.
In other words, yes, it is a kidnapping.
What happened in Mexico?
And it is a kidnapping not only done by just somebody, but as it was just said, by the German state, because they paid actually for the trip.
So wouldn't that be a case for a counter case to be launched simultaneously with the defense of Reiner?
Absolutely.
It's actually something absolutely illegal from my point of view, from what I know about European Union laws and even in middle countries within the European Union.
Yeah, absolutely.
I agree with you, Peter.
So in a sense, the fact he's been kidnapped negates any chance of the state to find him guilty of a criminal offense.
That's that, Stephen, you've become a lawyer now.
Well, no, you have to use your imagination.
Dagmar, Peter's asking, making a suggestion to Katja and Dagmar.
Sure.
That doesn't mean to say I'm wrong, Charles.
No, absolutely not.
So let's just try to help.
We're all trying to help.
Dagmar, Katja, any comment on what Peter suggested?
You're muted, Dagmar.
Dagmar, you're muted.
Yeah, the court in Göttingen, he doesn't care how he got here, you know, and they're just doing their thing and they want to sentence him quickly.
And we have to stop this.
We have to stop them, you know, going to Den Haag or something.
That doesn't help Reiner, you know, we have to stop the court in Göttingen.
Yeah.
And then and we have to squash their accusations.
And so we get him out.
Yeah.
My point is not necessarily that you would not, would you stop defending him?
No, you continue.
But in parallel, you launch a lawsuit against the German government for kidnapping him illegally.
And at least that during the time that he is under under what you call it, pre-trial arrest, that he will be left out of prison during that period, maybe at home, home arrest or being surveilled or something, but not having to be in prison.
While that other accusation against the state would run.
That is my suggestion that you have actually a counterweight against his case.
Yeah, but you know, I mean, at the moment, I don't know whether this would bring.
I mean, we don't have the manpower at the moment.
We are busy with trying to fight against the court in Göttingen.
And and I think that's the very important thing.
They have to let him out.
You know, I mean, a German judge is close to God.
This you have to know if the court in Göttingen sentences him, there is we have no legal thing, really a legal procedure that that views the court.
That that views a court decision from from such a court.
You you you don't have a second.
We have only one one possibility.
It's called revision.
And this just proves where the looks, whether the legal stuff was done rightly from a court.
It doesn't look at the at the evidence anymore.
The evidence is finished after the sentence from a from a long reach from this court in Göttingen.
You have no possibility to look at the evidence again.
You can just go to the to the big and and then they look whether they did some legal mistakes and actually about whether he gets this little overview.
Besides one one judge, one man, when you're sentenced also for lifelong prison term, one man in this Senate in the B.H.G.
decides whether you get a legal overview over your case.
And nobody knows this.
Nobody knows we don't have really like a possibility to check courts decisions.
And so we don't have a state.
This is called Rechtsstaat.
Peter, what's what's what's the legal English legal expression for Rechtsstaat?
I would call it the state of right.
A state like Rechtsstaat that it functions according to to law, you know, like we always say, oh, Germany is such a fantastic Rechtsstaat.
No, it's it's not at all a Rechtsstaat.
And there was even one judge in the appeal court in this BGH in the criminal section.
And he had a whole rule of law.
It's called rule of law.
And and and this judge, he wrote a whole series in this newspaper, Die Zeit, a few years ago.
And and he was he was a judge in the appeal court.
And he wrote this in the in the in this famous newspaper.
And and then I asked him once at a meeting, you know, at a conference, because I mean, that's a scandal.
You know, you're sentenced for lifelong prison and only one one guy decides whether you get a revision.
Yeah. I mean, that's ridiculous.
And I asked him what what kind of response he got on on his article.
And he said from from his colleague or from the legal community.
And he said none, except that I was called Nespich, Mutsa Peter.
How do you translate this next fish, Mutsa?
Like like like the the birds who sit in their own nest, you know, like he said, nobody was government, I guess, would be the closest legal translation.
Nobody was nobody was interested in this topic.
No one. Even even when when a state judge, you know, one from the highest court writes about this in a famous newspaper, nobody is interested in that.
Well, they should be because they might be in that position.
Yeah, of course. But that's why that's why we have it.
And I mean, we can we can watch this everywhere.
The bigger the crime, the more secure are the people who who commit them because nobody can believe it that this is really happening.
Yeah. Because people are so Dagmar and Katja.
This is the same situation in many common in many courts on the English system that once the trial at first instance is held, you can't revisit the facts.
Same in Australia. So you have to present the facts properly because it's only on matters of law that there can be an appeal similar to the German system.
And that's ridiculous.
Can I say something? Sorry. Can I add something here?
At this point, we have the revision as Dagmar said, and the revision is only a theoretical instance here in Germany.
And when the revision is successful, we can go back to court and we have have another court file there that is possible.
But the revision must be successful. And that is very.
Yes, that is not so easy.
Well, you've told us that you've told us the judge is God in Germany.
So that's an interesting proposition.
Perhaps, yes, a little bit like like a man of medicine, God in white and he's a God in black.
Yes. Thank you.
Thank you. It's only it's only five percent of the of the appeal tried.
Antrigues are successful.
Only five percent.
Yeah, they must be God. Thank you, Peter.
People in jail, Dagmar.
I've worked with ex-prisoners and I got I formed the and I've also worked in prisons as a doctor.
And what I kept I was listening very carefully to what was said by everyone.
And I heard many times that there were people who I saw as a patient who were not they had always maintained their innocence.
And they get a much easier life if they accept that they're guilty.
But so the people who maintain their innocence, they maintain the harsh treatment.
Yeah, yeah, because because they they are not how you say they are not open to admit their guilt, you know.
So they have to be treated harshly.
This was also the case with the guy who was now freed from prison.
You know, he had you really are in a diverse position if you are innocent and are in the prison.
You know, correct. But a lot of people actually say they they were guilty or go along with it because they know that they will get an easier time in prison.
And this is wrong. That's coercion as well.
And we go on we go.
That's when you're not guilty.
Thank you, Peter.
Peter Tessa.
By the way, before we go to Tessa Dagmar, the question was asked, is Christine Anderson supportive of Reiner or not?
Celia has heard that Christine Anderson is not supportive.
I only know that Reiner tried to get an interview with her, but this was not successful.
And I don't know that that she that we have contact to her.
I don't I didn't hear anything about that.
I think, Stephen, that that is worth asking the question, Stephen.
Celia.
Yeah, I made a note.
Right. Well done.
Remind me, Charles, because I may forget.
And it's very important that.
Yeah.
Because Christine maybe hasn't understood.
Yeah.
So the point is, whether.
So many questions, Dagmar.
So are you saying that they're going to sentence him in January?
No, no, we don't know.
I mean, we we try to like to question them.
The legality of of of these judges, you know, that's the next thing we will do.
You know, and because they made they made things, it's impossible.
And so if if if we go through with that, then now they want to start in thirty first of January.
It's scheduled, you know.
But that's the trial.
But that's the time we are playing on time at the moment.
We are hoping to start later.
Perhaps in March or in April, because we must write.
Yes, some good, some good statements.
And perhaps then we can avoid some days of trial, et cetera.
And yes, here's some.
So before.
Witnesses.
Witnesses. Yes.
So you should play all the tricks to to.
Yeah, so including so he is not being allowed to prepare for his own trial by the sound of it.
That means he can't brief you properly.
And and that would mean if he's not prepared, able to prepare for his trial, that is likely to make him ill.
And so a doctor can say he's not fit for trial.
And that would be difficult to argue against.
But anyway, just a suggestion.
But one question I have wanted to say in Germany, do you have a jury or not?
No, no.
Why have we have we have we have we have like three real judges, you know, one head judge and two side judges.
And then two normal people called chef and like lay lay judges, you know, you you're you're asked by the by the state to take this job for a few years.
I mean, that's a dark chapter to, you know, because they pay them, of course.
And it's a it's a good earner for them.
And they don't want to upset the state by going against the chief judge.
But they could do.
No, no, no, no, it's it.
That's not the problem.
The problem is that they don't have access to the files.
They only know what is said in them in the hearings.
And often the judges, they don't take them seriously.
They hardly talk to them.
You know, I mean, you hear very strange things about this.
Well, that's interesting.
But so I'm not criticizing the German people.
But when I was in Germany for a year working for the military, I did observe that it's rather top down Germany.
So the people in positions of power like doctors and lawyers take themselves very seriously.
And the people conversely have a higher regard for these lawyers and doctors than perhaps it's healthy and certainly a lot higher regard than the people of Britain.
All right. Enough philosophizing.
No more philosophizing.
Tessa.
First of all, Dagmar Katsas, thank you very much.
I have three very brief things.
One, very specific.
If you have a strategy or recommendation about how to publicize Reiner's case and how to talk about it or write about it for his best legal benefit without harming him in any way legally, then I would greatly appreciate it.
And if you're in touch with Celia, I can ask Celia.
But I figured that many people can benefit from that who want to talk about it.
Second, I know that previously Reiner was talking a lot about his involvement with the indigenous people in Canada and support.
So I wonder if his family are in touch and whether they're helping in any way.
And three, I suggest that we maybe do a collective prayer for Reiner and for the most just resolution of this.
And that's regardless of denomination and theology, whatever we practice, because I think it's true it is a spiritual battle.
And I think the more help he gets, probably the better.
So that's all I have.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Tessa.
I tell you, so many people are praying for him.
We get so many letters and so many people do rituals for him and all areas, you know, from the Hindu to the South American.
And like I often say to them, like probably for Julian Assange, there was done the same for years, you know, and did it help him up to now?
No, no. Yeah.
So, Stephen, what do you say?
I think they would have gotten to the United States by now if they could have done and if there hadn't been such massive publicity.
So I think they haven't dared to do what they intended to do.
That's why.
No, no, no.
I mean, the spiritual people often think, you know, if you do original, this will get him free.
Yeah.
I think it's not so easy.
Yeah, it's not so easy.
So we have a collective prayers, a suggestion.
So someone wants to put their hand up to say the prayer, the most welcome.
So first question that Tessa raised, Dagmar and Katja, was how would you like this to be publicized?
Would you, you know, what do you want said so that all of us on this call who wish to take action can publicize Dagmar?
That's Tessa's question.
Yeah, thank you.
That's difficult, you know, we have to be careful.
And also, like I said, I said in the first interview on the 15th of October, I said something in this Internet interview,
and I immediately got a letter from one of the Hafen an Welte.
And now I have a case, you know, in Berlin, you know, and because I and what I said is fact, you know,
but still the court decided for him.
And I think it's very difficult if you if you are in can have a case in connection with the name for me.
You have already lost the case somehow.
You know, that's how it looks.
You know.
All right.
So it's difficult.
Are there ways to talk about it that are most definitely beneficial to him and things to not say because they are most definitely damaging?
I mean, it's good.
The more it becomes known, you know, and you can you can write that he was really kidnapped from Mexico.
And I mean, usually, you know, there are so many private companies in Germany.
And I think every day some of the associates are fighting about money if they always just state attorney get involved, you know.
I mean, all the state attorneys would be busy with these cases.
Yeah. So they did this radical steps.
It's a clear proof for me that it is a political case.
Yeah, sure. Yeah.
That's a good point. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
And then the indigenous angle that Tessa raised Dagmar and Katja because remember, Reiner told us he was working with the indigenous in New Zealand as well.
So are the indigenous supporters of Reiner aware of what's happening to him?
We presume so.
But that's the question Tessa asked.
I mean, Dexter is here in the in the he could say something.
Dexter.
I guess. Good day, each and everyone.
I am Dexter Rainofel and I am an attorney here in South Africa to the question posed by Tessa.
At the moment, we are not working with the Maori anymore with the initiative in New Zealand.
And specifically when it comes to the Canadian indigenous people, as far as I know, I actually under correction, as far as I know, there's actually also no work being done at the moment.
And the work that is currently being done and that is then in connection with ICIC.
And if you have now and we have actually all listened to the short voice note of Reiner where he actually then mentioned my name at the end.
And the work that we are currently busy with is an inquiry, a COVID-19 inquiry on the African continent.
And we are working with a set of lawyers hailing from the African continent where we want to keep accountable all the 54 countries on the African continent in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic.
So that is then in short as to how I can answer you in that respect. Thank you very much.
And then I also just want to mention you have opposed your first question and your first question was in respect as to how can we actually publicize the ordeal, Reiner's ordeal.
My suggestion will also then be that to me and that's basically to some of the other lawyers as well.
Also, it seems to us that this was not supposed to have been a criminal matter.
And DAPMA also pointed out, I mean, we are talking about thousands of companies in Germany and there is always internal disputes in companies.
But how this matter was supposed to have been dealt with was to the extent where we talk about civil, civil, it's a civil matter, not a criminal matter, whereby respective parties basically then present the case before court.
And then the court is going to have to then resolve that civil dispute.
So I think there is a point that you can reiterate. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Thank you.
And I have to say that Dexter is really a good, very good friend of Reiner. He loves him very much. Reiner loves Dexter very much.
Thank you very much, DAPMA.
And he trusts him completely. Yeah.
And yeah, I mean, there you can see it's a political case.
And that's why we always suggested to Reiner to stay in Mexico, because we have these cases in Germany.
We always told him, don't come back. So, yeah, of course.
I mean, he was one of the most important voices internationally, you know.
Yes, he was. Absolutely. Tessa, have we answered the suggestions and queries you had?
Yes. Thank you.
Well done. Well done, Dexter. We will talk.
One of the issues we have access to, Dexter and Dagmar and Katja, TNT Radio is very keen to publicise,
and there are other media that are keen to publicise this.
So I think, I think, Dexter, you know, having you as well, there are ways to, you know,
shutting up about the case is not an option, as Dagmar has said.
We don't want to shut up. We don't want to cause harm. And so we just have to be wise.
And so each one of us, we might make mistakes, but it's better to take action than to shut up and do nothing.
Thank you, Dexter.
Very interesting about the African continent inquiry of 54 nations.
I think that's wonderful that that's happening to hold the politicians to account,
which is what we've been talking about in this group, ad nauseam, Stephen, haven't we?
Hold these bastards to account.
Well, apparently there's a lot of movements in Africa. And so that gives me a lot of hope.
And they're pretty exercised about this. And you would know that, Dexter, I imagine.
Absolutely. No, that is so true.
And what I've mentioned is that so we're not working with lay people here on the African continent
who will actually be conducting the African inquiry.
It is going to be people of influence within the traditional sphere.
And we are doing it in conjunction with ICIC.
And I believe and I trust that whatever recommendation actually then comes from it,
it is going to be cogent to the extinct way.
The countries on the African continent, that's the 54 countries can be accountable.
Very good. And the website for ICIC, Dexter, is ICIC.com, is it not?
I am not quite sure.
No, I see, I see, I see no.
No.
Thank you.
No. And you can still, you still can find very interesting interviews there.
We speak the clinic, we did, I think it was one of the most important interviews we ever did
about the derivate, you know, about the derivates.
I mean, this is mind blowing when you listen to this interview.
Very good.
And I had, I gave, I had one in the beginning of ICIC, this was in February 23.
I talked one hour about the legal system in Germany, you know, so.
Very good.
Dexter, will they investigate in Africa the death or the murder in my view of,
or at least the suspected murder of Tanzanian president?
And there were other African states, I believe.
Was it, I'm not quite sure which one, was Rwanda one of them?
They lost their president in 2020. Is that right?
No, that's not to wonder. I think, and I'm talking under correction, I think you are talking about Parindi.
And then you are talking about Makafule, that's the president that died, that was in 2020, I believe, yes, yeah.
Obviously, I mean, one of the evidence, and I'm thinking to myself, especially in light,
and that has made quite a lot of uproar worldwide as to what president, the late president, Makafule actually stated.
I mean, you can take a pawpaw, you can take a goat, you can take motor oil as well also.
When that was sent off to be tested and using the PCR test, it actually came back as being positive.
So obviously, that's going to be one of the aspects, I believe, that we are definitely going to look at.
When it comes to surrounding the death of the late Makafule, that is an inquiry completely in its own.
And so if it is that the African or the lawyers would like to actually institute an inquiry to that extent,
I believe, obviously, bring all the right minds together, that can be done.
But for now, we will only just be focusing on the inquiry concerning the COVID-19 with my legal colleagues here on the African continent.
Yeah, but actually, you could talk about the pawpaw and the oil, was it, which gave a positive test result.
Absolutely.
So it's a bit odd that the guy who was publicising that, the president of Tanzania, was first of all, he disappeared, as I heard, and then he was brought back dead.
Yep. All right. On we go. Maric, Lord.
Thank you, Steven.
Thanks, Dexter. Maric, Lord, you're good now.
Hi. I'm Maric Lord. I'm from Canada.
I'm I am not a rational lawyer.
I'm a right brain emotional artist.
I hear you talk and it's like it's going crazy in my head.
Like, yeah, I'm from Canada where they arrest journalists now.
And I'm the one who contacted the embassy in Canada with the help of Elsa Shida.
And I did that.
Hi. We wrote a letter, sent it to the embassy, German embassy in Ottawa.
They didn't want to have anything to do with us, really.
And then I contacted the consulates.
So, yeah, so my question is, you know, I'm we try to do a lot to help.
Like I said, I am emotional in this more than rational because I'm one of those people.
I always say that Reiner saved my life because, yeah, it was terrible here.
And anything we can do to help will do.
My question is, like, I'm really upset to hear that he's like tortured.
For me, it's very hard. You have to understand that some people in this are more like emotional because we love him so much.
And I talk on behalf of a lot of people who feel like me. So this is really hard.
I know you're working hell like so much.
Thank you very much. And thank you very much because Dr. Reiner-Folmesch is gold for me and many people.
So I hear that it's very difficult.
Do I understand that they're made up charges that they've been planning for such a long time?
I think it's stronger than what the defense can bring.
Are there chances for Dr. Reiner?
I want to be hopeful, but I am listening to all your legal stuff and I'm getting more nervous.
I know you don't have a crystal ball.
But what are the chances? And can you be freed on bail?
Or is there because they say so?
So why hasn't there been an application for bail?
Dagmar.
But you don't have to answer that Dagmar if you think it might damage the case.
Can the farmers help?
So Marie-Claude, I think it would be very helpful to the lawyers if you write a statement for them and you can send it to Charles or you can send it to me and I'll pass it on to Dagmar.
Or maybe you've got Dagmar's email address yourself.
What do you mean?
Well, you need to explain.
I'm a French Canadian by the way. I do my best in English, but I'm a French Canadian from Quebec.
So I was just listening to you speak. You have a certain weight, you know, with your emotion.
My blood pressure is close to 200. I'm really believing this. It's very hard and I'm not ashamed of saying it.
I understand. But it would be very helpful to the lawyers if they had your statements as to why Reiner Fulmich was very important to you and to Canadian citizens.
He was very important to me as well because he gave me hope.
He saved my life. He literally saved my life.
That would be very important. Yes, that is a very important information from you and we are feeling with you.
But it would help at court when you can write a statement with this.
The personal statements from the people who saw Reiner in the Corona Committee should be very helpful.
They can be very helpful and perhaps we can read them at the court, at the trials and show that the people are standing behind Reiner Fulmich.
And he was a great, great help for them in the difficult times in the Corona pandemic.
So Kertje, we can get people on this call now, but also previous guests who were interviewed by Reiner.
I'm sure, you know, this is just a matter of publicising and we've got a professor of chemistry with his hand up there from Cornell.
I'm sure he would like to write a statement as well if we ask him nicely.
That would be very nice.
If I could quickly just get in here and specifically as to what you have said, Marie Claude, I think it is so important and it's for the viewers as well also, is that we're going to have to keep hope alive.
We are all fearful. We are all thinking about the worst case scenario and that is all negative energy.
And what we need to do is that we need to send positive energy to Dagmar and to Kertje.
And there is then positive energy as well also that will be felt by Reiner.
So instead of actually feeling trepidatious or feeling that this scenario doesn't actually have any light, I just want to mention to you what Dagmar actually said earlier.
And I think this is of extreme importance to all the viewers.
And that is that when the question was posed as to what is the current state of Reiner's legal stance at the moment, Dagmar clarified to us all that when it came to the charges in respect to his legal office,
having actually claimed for the work that they have done, the court actually said, no, no, no, no, we are not going to entertain that.
And henceforth, the charges actually then fell to the crack.
And for me, that is a positivity.
And that is the positivity that we need to hold on to.
And what Dagmar also made very clear is that we are now only talking about two charges that is currently still being dealt with by the court system in Dagmar Katia.
You can just assist me by just seeing light as to what you have said, Dagmar.
And my main purpose is basically just to highlight that there is hope.
And we are only talking about the loan agreement.
And it's the two loan agreements that is actually currently before the court.
I mean, we're talking about the 500,000 euro and we are talking about the 200,000 euro as well.
Also, in light as to how I see it, I need to actually also then clarify that I am not actually part of Reiner's legal team.
But if this would have been my client and I can give you my take on it itself, yeah, I will actually say that the evidence from me is actually then quite clear cut.
And what Dagmar also mentioned, and it is in the public domain as well, also, she basically just reiterated it, is that that loan agreement was entered into between Vivian Fisher.
And it was entered into what I mean, between Vivian Fisher and Reiner.
And there is documentary proof to get extended.
So when we talk about a loan agreement, we cannot actually talk about fraud.
We cannot talk about theft. It would have been otherwise if Reiner said, and that is basically it's almost like if it would have been his case to say, yes, we are talking about this loan agreement of 700,000 euro.
However, there's no one, there's no documentary proof, or Vivian Fisher actually denies that she has actually entered into any of that loan agreements.
But that is not the case. So in light of that, I will then actually say that we need to remain hopeful.
And from my assessment as to where I am, I am hopeful for the fact that we are talking about a clear cut evidence where we don't even and the court doesn't even have to speculate as to whether indeed it was a loan agreement or was it actually money that was just taken by Reiner without the consent of his partner.
And at the moment, that's the co-host that is then Vivian Fisher itself.
So I want to encourage each and everyone that we have to remain hopeful.
I am hopeful. And let's continue to actually then think that a positive energy to Katia and Dachma.
And I also want to thank Katia and Dachma for all the work that you have done in being the soundboard for Reiner and also then being his eyes and his ears on the outside.
So that he can actually also then gauge the temperature outside itself.
So thank you so much. And thank you for each and every one of you who is wholeheartedly standing behind Reiner.
And I believe that as we actually combine our positive energies, we are going to see positive results coming from it. Thank you.
Thank you.
I also want to want to share something positive, Dexter.
We had this pre-trial detention hearing on the 19th of December.
And we saw the court for the first time, you know, these three judges, this one, one judge, one man and one woman.
And when they came in, you could see the contempt in their faces, in their eyes, you know, especially this guy, this one judge, he was sitting close to me.
I mean, out of every poor, you could see his contempt for discreetly, for me, you know, who took all the money.
You know, this contempt was pouring out of him.
And then after a while, I gave a little speech, you know, about 10 or 15 minutes.
And I talked about myself and I explained to them.
I mean, I'm now 75 and I told them I was never interested in money my whole life.
I was just not interested in money. And I told them, you won't believe it.
There are even lawyers who are not interested in money.
There are not so many, you know, there are not so many lawyers who are not interested, but there are there are some.
And and I know that most colleagues, they want to make high invoices and so.
And and then I told them, I told them a few different other things.
Then I told them, but this is exactly what connects me with this man, Rainer Filmich, because he's also not interested in money.
And I can tell you, I would not invest five minutes of my life for a man who is after money.
And I tell you, even Rainer said it afterwards.
After my speech, something reached him.
This guy next to me, something different was coming out of his eyes.
The contempt was gone.
Yeah. And that's exactly what happened to Rainer.
So to Julian Assange, the judge in his extradition hearing was simply awful.
It was like she was on a stage in the West End of London and she was playing the witch, you know.
And I think it was all about a play for the public.
And they didn't care about how she appeared and she didn't care.
And it was all about humiliating Julian Assange.
And it's a political trial. And I'm sure this is a political trial.
Absolutely sure on what I've heard tonight.
All right. So thank you.
But something I reached them, you know.
I put some truth in their beings.
I see what you mean. Yes. Very interesting.
Yeah. Because I was credible for them, you know.
And no lawyer talks to them like that usually, you know.
No, exactly. It's very rare to find a lawyer.
Because we have cases.
I also told them, I talked about the lawyer community in Germany.
We had some really heavy human rights cases like Kornatz, this guy who was for five years in Guantanamo.
And then one other guy, El Masri.
He was, that was a mistake.
The Americans abducted him because there was a mistake in name.
And they flew him out and tortured him for half a year.
And then they threw him out in Armenia.
And he was actually a German citizen with another origin.
And, you know, nobody gave a fucking shit of the whole legal society, community in Germany.
And I told them, I have been in Berlin.
There was from the Lawyers Society, there was the first conference about human rights.
This was a few years ago.
And I told them I went to Berlin.
And in the discussion, I stand up and said to them, I feel really ashamed to belong to the German lawyers community.
I really feel ashamed that none of the German lawyers raise their voice if we have so heavy human rights cases here.
So that's how I talk to them, you know, and that did something to them.
The contempt was gone out of their faces.
And I think also Reino said this was really good what you did.
So because you have to get them somehow, you know, that they change their attitude also.
Thank you. All right, we're going to keep moving.
We're running out of time. We've only got 45 minutes left.
And we've got hands up Dagmar and Kaccha.
But Mari-Claude, I think a wonderful point you made, and Stephen, you reinforced that.
Letters to Dagmar and Kaccha for presenting to court, but also writing to Reino himself are all valuable positive energy.
Well, I write to him once or twice a week.
But where do I send this letter I would write?
I don't you mean I don't have like a...
Kaccha, if you can put your email address that all of us can send you suggestions, Dagmar and Kaccha, that would be helpful so that people can send letters.
I put my website address on this invitation of your invitation.
Yes, you did. So you can find my address on my website.
Excellent. Thank you. All right. Anna, who's also a lawyer and a first time visitor here.
Hi, thank you, Charles. Thank you for conducting this Dagmar and Kaccha.
Kaccha, really appreciate the work that you've done for our friend, our dear friend Reiner.
I'm an American attorney and I don't know German procedures, but for someone charged in America for a financial type of crime, a nonviolent crime, they would be able to be released on bail waiting for their trial.
They also might even be released on their own recognizance, meaning without bail.
And so I'm wondering, why has this not been available for our friend Reiner?
Why, you know, I'm sure you mentioned that you had the pre-detention hearing and that it was denied.
But are there other opportunities to present this in front of the judges again so that he doesn't have to sit in jail while he is waiting trial?
We're very concerned about him and I am hopeful as well. And I know he has good representation.
I am hopeful because we did read recently read that Bhakti Sukharet who has been Sukharet Bhakti, who was charged with some various crimes under German law, was finally, I guess, acquitted of those charges.
But it took a very long time. So I'm just concerned because they could take Reiner's passport.
He's done a flight risk. So what what can be done about this?
Dagmar?
Bhakti, say something.
Yes. To reach the passport again or what do you mean?
No, the bail.
No, bail.
The bail, yes, we ask.
We try to discuss a bail. But at the moment, this is not a realistic alternative because yes, that's one point Reiner was in Mexico.
He was, yes, sent to Germany.
And they think only when Reiner is here in Germany, they can clear the case.
And yes, in German laws, every time.
Yes, they are not secure if he's going back to Mexico or to another country.
And perhaps of this and his family is not here in Germany, they're saying a bail is not a secure alternative to get him out of jail.
I understand that.
But they would take the passport if they took his passport away.
I don't understand.
So I think Anna is trying to suggest that there's no argument for having him in jail in the first place awaiting trial.
He's not a flight risk.
Well, they haven't proven that he is.
But of course, they said that about Julian Assange.
The reason that they couldn't let him out of prison, allegedly, was because he was a flight risk.
That's why they take the passport away.
They don't want to let him go.
I understand.
This is just a fact.
And that's their prey, that they have him finally.
And only when we really can attack the legal thing with this 266, that this crumbles, that they really cannot argue anymore, that this will...
Then they let him go before they don't just let him go.
And I tell you, they have the power.
Why they do it?
Because they can do it.
Yes, but you put them under pressure by being...
Come on, come on, come on.
I mean, we have filed a complaint against this decision on the 19th.
That's just in the appeal now.
We will see what the higher court will decide.
We did an appeal against this decision.
And maybe, you know, we also hope always for a miracle, some Holy Spirit enters the head of a church.
You have answered the question on the bail.
Thank you for asking the question and well done for pursuing it.
We've got other hands up.
Let's keep going rather than changing the system.
We know what the situation is.
Anders, and then Dave.
Hello.
Yep, we can hear you.
Hello.
So I'll just say very shortly that I know Rainer for about three years.
I have been in email correspondence with him much, especially the last half year.
I was supposed to meet him in Mexico in early November, and that didn't happen.
To this case, I have my own opinion of some issues here, and I would like to share it.
Number one, I would like to ask the current lawyers, Dagmar, to ask Rainer if he's willing to be a lawyer.
I would like to ask the current lawyers, Dagmar, to ask Rainer if he's willing to give a power of attorney to Dexter to lead an attack back about the kidnapping.
That's a direct question to Rainer.
If he will give a power of attorney to Dexter to lead an attack on the issue of the kidnapping.
That's number one.
Number two, I was reading this press release, which came in December.
I was sharing it widely.
And that was before this 19th of December meeting.
In this meantime, this case in which Viviana Fischer had accused him openly for more than 14 months of stealing, being a fraud, a fraud, and embezzling of money from the Corona Auslut Committee,
in which the Solmish law firm had made invoices.
That, in my opinion, was an attack which may have caused the claim of criminality.
And it was coming from Viviana Fischer.
And now she has lost that case.
And again, I think, Dexter, you might be a diplomat with Viviana Fischer because maybe everything would change because he was arrested on criminal fraud.
That fraud, in my opinion, was the claim from Viviana about these invoices, which she did not agree to.
But they were to managing director and he had done it and it was legal and the court had accepted it.
But Viviana Fischer had, she has been very outspoken to attack this.
And now she's lost this case.
And the second point is that now it's time for Viviana Fischer to come clean because she lost the case.
And she needs to come with a good afternoon that she has not a claim of criminality in that respect.
The other case about the two loans should be a non-case because there are two legal loan agreements.
And there is no criminal aspect as to those.
And the other side, Viviana Fischer, also has a loan agreement.
This is signed by, on one side, Fischer and the other side, Fulmish.
So how come they can claim that is a crime case?
I mean, most of all loan agreements have two parties and this is signed by both two parties.
So I think that is not the main problem.
Now you have a problem because of the case which was filed by Viviana Fischer about this money which the law firm had invoiced.
So these are my two points and I would like to hear your opinion on those two points.
Thank you.
The criminal complaint was not filed by Viviana.
It was filed by the three Hafenanwälte.
She only came to know afterwards.
And the invoices were not the main thing.
Did you ask Dexter whether he wants to have the power of attorney?
Dexter, did he ask you?
No, no.
That is about the case of kidnapping.
Yeah, I think what is important is that basically you're just making a proposition.
Obviously, there is a proposition that can be discussed with the attorneys, Dagmar and Katia and then ultimately with Rainer.
So at this moment, I am not going to say anything concerning that.
But I hear what you say and I believe that it is something based on the advice from Dagmar and Katia that can be taken up with the Rainer and then it can be taken from there.
Thank you.
Yeah. Interesting suggestion.
Well said. Thank you, Dagmar and Dexter and Anders.
Excellent. Excellent proposition on the kidnapping case.
All right, Dave.
Hi, I'm playing catch up. Can you hear me?
Yep.
I'm playing a little catch up. I've been picking up Rainer's story, not from here, but from other sources.
My question is actually, it sounds a little sketchy to me.
I hear the risk in the case and that says that he did something in good faith that might actually have crossed the dotted line.
Just a hunch.
My question is, in the US, rising authoritarianism is accompanied by the weaponization of the Department of Justice and it's so profound here.
And my question is, is this happening all over the world?
We have people from all over the world.
And I'm not just interested in the authoritarianism of COVID.
I am talking about the weaponization of the DOJ, such that we're starting, it's starting to look like the Stasi over here.
It's starting to look like the Stasi in Canada to me and in Australia, I think.
And so the question is, is this a global change?
Because it certainly is occurring in the United States.
Thank you.
Dagmar and Katja, you know, Rainer came on to this call here about a year ago and he said the courts are hopelessly corrupted.
That's what he, there is words.
The courts are hopelessly corrupted.
And I've been involved in the law for over 50 years and I said they're not hopelessly corrupted.
They're overwhelmingly corrupted, but not hopelessly.
Dagmar, what's your view on the weaponization of the justice system?
And let me add, I'm not interested just in whether they're a mess, but is it changing quickly?
Is it a new emergence?
I mean, usually in a state, the priority should be with the law.
During the COVID years, we could watch that the priority was with politics.
It was very clear.
And when you look deeper, I mean, I was writing on a book for many years and I saw this even before, all the decades before.
In all the cases where state interests were touched, the law was suddenly canceled.
You know, that's just a fact, always.
Yeah.
Then the law, it was as if there was no law at all.
It never existed.
It was always the power that had the predomination.
Yeah.
It's nothing new.
It became only more visible.
I mean, we had the whole thing.
I mean, I was in the first demonstration in 1966 against the Vietnam War.
So this long, I'm watching this whole show now, you know.
Then after, in the 70s, I became, I went on the spiritual path because I knew with politics, you cannot change anything.
This was clear to me when I was 30.
And it's the same.
It's just more visible and more people have to say it.
And they have to get out of their slumber and think if they have a holiday a year and a football game every week, then this is enough.
You know, it's not enough.
Yeah.
And obviously it needs some really pressure and pain that people are ready to change their insights and their life.
And so the whole world and earth becomes more divine because now we are under satanic principles.
That's my really my conviction.
Satanic principles.
Did I hear that right?
Satanic principles.
That's what I'm writing about.
And one young spiritual teacher, I talked with him.
He's very young.
He's only 30.
I talked with him about the legal system.
And then he said to me, this is the core of the satanic world order.
It's the legal system.
Yeah.
Very good.
So everybody, so Dave, can you put your year in review link into the chat, please?
Everybody, Dave's work on this is magnificent.
I'm keenly awaiting part three.
Parts one and two are about 200 pages long, but they're well worth reading, everybody.
So, Dave, don't be shy and put it in the chat, please.
Yes, sir.
And Dagmar, you make a point well that was reinforced by Archbishop Bigeno last week.
This is a satanic spiritual war.
And so, you know, that's why our prayers are of great value.
Peter, before we go to Graham Hood, did you want to say something specifically on that point just quickly?
Yes, exactly.
I just wanted to elaborate on that very quickly.
You know, we are actually, this is at the agenda 2030, and it's the great reset of the World Economic Forum,
which is going to next week hold its Davos meeting, its famous Davos meeting, and who knows what's coming out of that.
But definitely we are living what I would call in a debt cult.
We are being ruled by a debt cult and the executing agencies.
I mean, there are financial institutions behind it.
There is the pharmaceuticalists behind it.
There is the media, which is controlled by the financial institutions is behind it.
So there's a whole set of dark institutions and organizations that are using the World Economic Forum,
which is basically financed largely by BlackRock and by others.
Then WHO is actually not an international organization.
I work for them.
They are private organizations set up by the Rockefellers and then bought into the UN system.
And there is the current Washington government, which is nothing else but the tool for as an executing agencies for all these powers.
So what we have, what we are seeing actually is we are being ruled by a debt cult.
And the fact that they use the word cult means something very, very specifically.
And it has a very interesting meaning.
You may know from the Aboriginals in Australia, they have used cults for thousands of years in order to process whatever good and bad things.
But this is what we are doing.
We are living actually in a negative, in a black hole ruled by this debt cult.
And so Dave's question is very, very well taken.
You know, it's not just the case in Germany.
It's worldwide.
And that's what we have to recognize and wake up to.
What I'm doing with most of my life is writing articles about this stuff, which are being published a little bit everywhere.
And I think Charles and Stephen are usually copied on it.
But this is what we have to become aware of and wake up to, that this is not unique in Germany or in Europe.
This is particularly the Western world.
And once the Western world has been reduced to what they want, total population reduction, then the other countries will be on,
especially for exploration of natural resources.
It's going on already now, but not yet to the extent that that will be the peak of what they want to do.
Well said, Peter. Thank you.
And everybody watching this or on the call, you can look at Peter's presentations to us.
It's all in chronological order on the Rumble channel.
It was about a year ago.
So you'll find Peter Koenig's name without a problem.
So listen to Peter's philosophy and insights and economic and the work that he's done.
So we've got to keep moving. Dave, thank you for putting the link in there, everybody.
I urge you to read Dave Year in Review. It's masterful.
Graham Hood now, for those of you who don't know, is a former Qantas pilot who refused to take the bio weapons into his body.
Well done, Graham. And Hoodie has become famous in Australia and elsewhere for standing up for our rights like Stephen Frost.
Graham, welcome.
Yeah, thank you, Charles. And thank you, everybody.
I've only just seen the invitation to come on this. I'm really glad I jumped on in time.
I just wanted to respond to Dave's question about the judiciary.
He did mention Australia and we're doing a lot of interviews with a lot of prominent people involved in the fight.
And Dave, I can only respond around the COVID stuff.
I know you said, is there a trend around other issues as well?
But what we're seeing with the COVID issues in Australia is summed up by a former Federal Circuit Court judge, now retired,
who has been fighting out of retirement to try and get some justice for vaccine injured and to end mandates in this country.
He and I had several very lengthy conversations, one in which he said to me,
This will not be one in the courts. He said, I've realised now this will not be one in the courts.
He said, I have loved the law for 30 years. It has been my mistress.
And he said that I believe that my former brother and sister judges have become reptilian.
And this is borne out by the fact that many cases that have gone before the courts at state and federal level in Australia
have mounted incredible evidence to support the end of mandates, to support people getting their jobs back,
to support the cessation of vaccines in this country.
And incredible witnesses have been lined up to come before the courts, people like Dr Peter McCullough
and people of that ilk, Robert Malone.
And the judges are refusing to hear that evidence, to look at that evidence or hear those witnesses in the court.
And the most significant trial going forward at the moment in Australia is a trial by Dr Mel McCann.
It's a class action by the victims of vaccine injury, of the vaccine, a so-called vaccine.
And it had, according to everybody in judicial circles in this country, the best chance of success.
And they had about a week in court just before Christmas.
And I spoke to some of the witnesses privately and they said it was clear right at the outset
that the judge was not interested in what they had to say or the science.
So I agree with Dagmar and others. This is most definitely a spiritual battle.
This is a battle between good and evil.
And what we have to do around the world is get more and more people to decide which side they're going to be on.
Because if you can't make a decision which side to be on, you've already made it.
You're standing in the dark.
And we have to concentrate on staying in the light and being the light on the hill for others who need to see a way forward in this.
So I hope that helps Dave with his comment. And thanks, Charles, for allowing me to come on.
I'll get off now. Thank you.
What kind of planes do you fly?
I used to fly the Boeing 737. I was a captain for 32 years with Qantas.
I've been a pilot for 53 years. My sole jet experience is the Boeing 737.
I loved it. And it enabled me to stay home more often than be away from home.
So, yes, that's my experience.
I have a quick question. Is it remotely possible that Arabs flew those planes into the Twin Towers?
I think there's a 0% chance that that story is correct.
You are a pilot. I want to know if you could fly a 270 degree turn doing 540 knots in a jet and hit the Pentagon.
What do you say?
My view is no passenger aircraft hit the Pentagon. It's not possible.
It's not possible. And the debris and the damage done proves that it was not an airplane that did that.
No way in the world. There was no aircraft or debris.
It was a missile.
Okay, I just had to ask.
That's my view. I don't want to detract from Reiner at the moment by going into those things.
But my view is no, an airplane, a passenger aircraft did not fly into the Pentagon.
Very quickly, Graham. Is it possible?
So I met a Ryanair pilot in Spain.
And so his father owned a restaurant and he was helping out in the restaurant because he had flown too much as far as Ryanair.
And he so he needed to have it was forced to take some time off.
And so he was serving in the restaurant and we found out that he was a Ryanair pilot.
And he said to me and my sons that it was impossible to fly at 500 miles an hour as a pilot into the Twin Towers.
Is that right or not?
And he was very fixed on this. And it really impressed my sons and even my wife.
No, look, I have to say that if somebody who had a basic aeronautical knowledge and then was trained extensively on how to operate the autopilot and the flight management control system in an aircraft like that, you could get the aircraft to within touching distances.
No doubt about that in my mind.
It could be manipulated and somebody could sit down at a computer screen and manipulate their skills to that degree.
So that's not out of the realms of possibility.
But my my look, I'm being honest. My theory is that 9-11 was a false flag operation.
Absolutely.
I did meet the pilot prior to 9-11.
I was over in the United States for about six weeks with the United Airlines on Saccumbent doing work on human factors.
And I did spend a couple of hours with the pilot who was killed in the crash in Pennsylvania where the passenger supposedly took over the aircraft and it nosedived into the ground.
I knew him personally.
I have not seen or heard from him since.
So there's a whole lot of skepticism out there about a lot of things.
And I think what the last three years has shown us all is that governments can't be trusted.
And I believe there's a lot of people mining for darkness.
It's like become a new a new a new industry.
But I also believe that conspiracy theories, as they call them, thrive when governments keep secrets, because when people are left to wonder what the government is up to, they're going to come up with a vast array of theories.
And sadly for the world, most of those theories are now proving to be correct and become conspiracy fact and credible people like Archbishop Vigano said in the program, Charles, he was he's a very credible witness to this.
And he's of the same opinion.
So when you've got people like Dr. Peter McCullough and others, some on this call who are all agreeing that there's something bad going on and they're talking about banning misinformation and increasing censorship around the world.
The best way to the best way to stop misinformation is for the government to stop misinformation and tell the truth.
Then you don't have any reason for people to come up with theories that that that are causing a whole lot of anxiety amongst societies all around the world.
And that's my biggest fear.
As we've toured this nation, 70,000 kilometers and spoken to 30,000 people in the last year.
The levels of anxiety in our in our communities is on the rise.
If Australia was a person, it is my opinion, it would be committed to a psych ward.
I've never seen such mental anguish and anxiety in my whole life.
And I'm 71 years of age in two days time.
So we've got a lot of work to do.
There's a lot of work to do to uncover the truth.
And we have to manage that properly because people are triggered at the slightest thing that the image behind me on this screen of the airplane, I was flying that airplane.
In that photo was taken on takeoff out of Brisbane one night by somebody who sent it to me.
Even that image triggers people who are afraid of airplanes today because of chemtrails and contrails and all the other things.
We have to manage all this stuff because I'm going to close with this.
The first stanza of the Serenity Press is God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference.
And we have to focus on what we can fix and the other stuff we have to let go to the keeper.
And so I hope that sort of irons out a few things for some people who have these questions.
Thanks, Charles.
Graham, would you like to, Graham, would you like to speak to us?
So not so we can't use it from memory.
We haven't had any airline pilots, so we haven't had any airline pilots speaking to us.
I think that's a fair point.
I've been trying to find an airline pilot, you're a very good speaker.
And I'm asking you, would you like to speak to us on this group week on Tuesday?
Yes, I think that'd be fine.
Yep, I'm happy to.
Can I ask you one more question real short?
I went so I've gone so far down the rabbit hole that I've actually looked at chemtrails.
Part studying directed energy weapons, which are very real.
Yes or no is the chemtrail story at that end or not, in your opinion?
Yeah, you can just give me yes or no.
Well, it's impossible to give a yes or no.
I can tell you that I'm going to do an interview in the next week, I think, with with Dane Wiginton from Geoscience.
That's the guy right there.
That's the man.
That's the guy.
I'm going to be I've agreed to do an interview with him because I've watched his documentary, The Dimming, and 50 percent of it I thought had holes in it that you could drive a truck through.
But the other 50 percent scared the daylights out of me.
So there's a lot of misrepresentation in that video, The Dimming.
And I'm just seeking truth.
That's all I want.
I want to if if you misrepresent a small thing in a presentation like that, it puts everything else in doubt.
I want to I want to talk to Dane and I've approached him and I said, Look, somewhere in the mix of all this stuff, there is a truth that we have to uncover.
I disagree with some of the things that you put forward because they just don't make sense.
And I'm making I'm making a little video presentation to talk about how condensation trials are made in the hope that that will alleviate some fear from some people.
But in the midst of all that stuff about chemtrails, there's a dark side of a global elite who want to manipulate and control the weather and the people under it.
And that's what we need to uncover.
I have I've stood firmly on the ground that I disagree that commercial airline aircraft are making chemtrails.
It just it there's so many ways it's impossible that it's laughable.
But I can't discount anything else.
I can't discount anything else.
All I know is what happened in my sphere of influence.
I've never turned on a chemtrail from the cockpit.
I don't know where they store the chemical.
I doubt very much it's a fuel additive because of the restrictions on fuel and the quality control that goes into it.
And I can explain why there are lingering trials in the sky because of new technologies.
But other than that, I don't want to take up Reiner's time because this is about him.
So so that's a great day when he speaks to us next week.
And Graham, if you can put your links, our people can follow your material.
But Graham has been a true warrior like this group is for truth, for freedom, for justice, for law.
And I think there's a salutary point that's come about from your conversation and what Dagmar and Katja and Reiner is dealing with that.
And what Reiner said, the courts are hopelessly corrupted.
And Graham, thank you for sharing that experience of that now retired Australian Federal Court judge, because that I've been in the law for 50 years.
And that's certainly my view that the judges have been corrupted.
And I like the use of the term reptilian.
But as soon as you say the word reptilian, people go, you're a nutcase.
So good. Everyone, we are all nutcases here because we don't listen to what the government says.
Dagmar, before we go to Jeremy, is there anything you or Katja want to say?
Because we've only got 10 minutes to go.
We've got Jeremy's hand up.
Stephen, a couple of closing questions. Dagmar?
No, it's OK. Go on.
Good. Go on. Yeah.
Very good. So thank you.
Thank you, everyone. I point out.
Thank you, Dave, for putting the link to your week in review.
Graham, have a look at that.
Everyone else, if you haven't seen Dave's masterful analysis of what's gone in the last 12 months, which is the 14th year in review.
You know, Dave puts himself out there, but he's doing proper research and thinking, as is Peter Koenig.
I'll put Peter Koenig's recording into the chat as well.
All right, Jeremy, our favorite dentist from the Channel Islands.
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. I just want to say I wish Ryan all the very best, Dagmar, and thank you very much for coming to talk to us.
I can't really add any more to what's been said other than that we're all thinking of him and it's awful what's happening.
But hopefully some good will come out of this and he'll come free.
But what I did want to ask is what just was wondering whether Dave could put any and Graham just then maybe you could you could touch on the chemtrails and all this stuff next time.
Or maybe we could set up a link with Dave because I'd love to know more about that because we're getting it over Jersey as well where we live.
And I don't know where to go find that information.
I'd love to know what Dave's view is on this and the resources that are available to listen to hear more about that and gain more information because it all ties in with so much of what we're seeing.
I'll just put it in as a quick comment. Thank you.
Thank you, Jeremy. That's great.
Is that an organ in the background?
Yes, my lazy organ. So he's practicing. Sorry. I just just ran off and shut the main door because it's much louder normally.
Beautiful.
Right, Jeremy. Great suggestion chemtrails on the on the agenda.
So when Graham's talking next week, if he can do that, then Dave will be here.
And I think it's an important conversation because we've had Nikki Florio from be heroic.com on this.
She's presented to us as well.
And, you know, the the what's the evidence that she's presented and geoengineering watch.
There's a lot of stuff happening.
Graham, you put that nicely. So Dean Wiginton.
And did you put Graham into the chat where people can follow you and your interviews?
Have you done that yet, Graham?
Yes, Charles, I just put up in the in the comments what our web address is for people to go there.
They're all up to date.
We're interviewing in action.
Yes, we're interviewing.
We're interviewing Dr. Angus Dalglish.
Oh, he's wonderful. He's a brilliant doctor.
So we're interviewing him in a few hours time.
So, yeah, we're very up to date with what's going on and keeping people informed.
Thanks, Charles. Well, Graham, you might also mention then from what we're talking about with Dagmar, what she said to us.
Seriously, the number one, the two things that have come out of this conversation is Dagmar and Katja and Rainer needs a high quality international lawyer on the kidnapping issue.
Number one.
Number two, letters of support sent to Katja and Dagmar about what people think of Rainer and his work, like Marie Claude has shared with us, is of value.
Number three, for people to write to Rainer and the address is in the chat where people can physically write letters to Rainer to keep his spirits up and at them.
So, but also Charles, I think Dagmar has said that there's so much to do that they're not able to do it.
And so maybe any help from any lawyers on the call.
I did notice one in Mendenhall and there are other lawyers.
Dexter was one of them, I think.
But I think there were other lawyers on the call.
And so it would be nice to think that there are lawyers in the world who might contact Dagmar and Katja and offer their services at least and their support, because that I think would mean a lot to the lawyers.
Has anyone reached out to Brett Weinstein?
I sent that interview to Charles and maybe yourself, Stephen.
I thought Brett Weinstein was amazing on Tucker Carlson the other day and I don't know if any of you know him or can reach out to him because he was touched on so many areas in such an articulate way.
Well, I'm not sure I do either what I've seen of him.
But anyway, Mark Dyer might take action on that.
But Brett Weinstein, good suggestion.
I'll take a note of that as well.
Thank you, Marie Claude, for that suggestion.
All right.
Here's what I can tell you about Brett.
Turns out that every time I communicate with him, he responds.
He must be so up to his ass and things, because for the first time ever, he did not respond.
I think he's getting emails from all over the world on that presentation.
Okay, very interesting.
All right, everybody.
Sorry.
Have a look at that interview.
We're going to be tight, Stephen.
Just moment we've got Warner here.
Which interview?
That's what I'm asking.
Which interview?
And Brett Weinstein.
Okay, right. Got it.
Yep.
All right, Warner.
And then we'll go to Stephen for final questions.
Warner, give us your insight.
You're doing great work as well.
Hey there.
Can you?
Oh, there we go.
Sorry.
I was getting my camera going.
Can you hear me okay?
Perfect.
Yeah.
I am happy.
I mean, we are absolutely buried, I think, as most of you know.
But we have set up a lawyer group called Freedom Council.
So, you know, I will be happy to, you know, put a suggestion out to the group.
I will just to update you guys, we now have approximately 240 attorneys involved.
So it's grown significantly from a handful of us.
We started with six of us.
Excellent, Warner.
And we are doing, you know, I'm not familiar with international law and kidnapping issues in international law.
But, you know, I certainly will put that out to our group and see if we have a wide range of different experiences.
So I'll put a suggestion out there for that.
Excellent, Warner.
So, Kaccha and Dagmar Warner is a wonderful lawyer who was with us in the darkest times of this COVID debacle.
And he was always positive.
And he's another one, actually, who helped me to get through this nonsense, you know.
He gave me hope, just as Rainer Fulmig did.
He was so kind of serene, I would say, is the word.
In America as well, in Ohio, of all places.
And he was talking to everybody in his hometown.
And he's a very, very nice guy and very, very he helped my son as well.
Sounds good. From which town is he from? From Ohio?
Dagmar.
I'm easy to find. Write my name down. You just, yeah.
Yeah.
And warnermendinhall.com is my website.
I am. Okay.
Freedomcouncil.org is the organization.
And we have applied for nonprofit status and we will be holding a conference in June in Denver, by the way.
The Freedom Council Conference will be in June in Denver.
That's not public yet, but we'll announce that soon.
And we held the first COVID litigation conference in March of 2023 with Steve Kirsch's organization.
We've kind of, they have something coming up in Vegas. I may or may not be at that one, but I'll definitely be in Denver.
So.
Very good.
And Dagmar, Warner is one of these people. All things are possible.
He's not afraid of anybody and he's the nice guy and kills you behind the scenes.
So relevant to what Graham was talking about and Dave, Warner, with the links that you've created, you told us a year ago that there were some, there were thousands of cases against the system and successful cases get settled so we don't find out about the cases.
What's your take on, you know, on the value of taking any legal steps when we're dealing with this evil, which we are.
Oh my God. I mean, first of all, I think people need to realize in the United States, millions of people sacrifice their jobs.
Millions.
It is astounding. And I, you know, I had a group of 200 nurses who lost their jobs local to me. And, you know, the litigation has been going on now for over two years.
And, you know, and I, we had a meeting in the fall, and I was kind of worried because I've been sitting here working away. We hadn't had any big meetings.
You know, and I thought, well, everybody's got to be tired of this by now. This is ridiculous. And the judges aren't very friendly.
But I showed up and we're on appeal right now, by the way, we ended up losing in district court.
And I thought, oh my gosh, everybody's going to be demoralized and bad shape, you know, upset, you know, with me and everything else. Instead, these 200 nurses brought all their family members, their friends.
It was the most amazing event. I mean, literally, I was in tears. I mean, it was like, you know, my expectation was I've got all these people we've kind of haven't succeeded in their particular case.
We've succeeded in some others. But the, you know, I've got to say the people who sacrificed for this, and I think this group understands this intuitively.
But the people, the average everyday citizen who may not know as much as everybody on this call knows, but that sacrifice their job over it, you know, they are locked in hardcore and they are learning and they are they they do see that we have to refound the nation.
They do see the threat to sovereignty that, you know, they understand this. And of course, you know, we're communicating this as well.
I cannot emphasize how hardcore they are at this point, given what they've sacrificed. This is not a few people. This is millions of people.
Every attorney that I know in our Freedom Council, I mean, they're all litigating, so they're filing several cases at this point. The rate of filing is several cases a week.
The amount of people represented just by the group of Freedom Council is probably close to half a million between individual lawsuits and class actions.
They represented by attorneys fighting their employers, fighting what happened in one way or another. We are in active discussions about the problems with the Prep Act, with the vaccines, with the Remdesivir, with the death by hospital.
We have a group, I'll give you another group that we have going on right now in Minnesota. 100 widows got together and they're comparing notes about the deaths of their husbands.
Minnesota is an important state because it has a long statute of limitations. So those cases are being filed. There's a young attorney out there named Andy Barnhart.
If you haven't heard of him, you will. CBS News actually covered this a little bit a couple of weeks ago.
But Andy is leading the fight out there and organizing, you know, helping to organize the legal battle. And we're going to come in.
We're trying to figure out how to come in with Freedom Council because there's so much to do. We've got to get more attorneys out in Minnesota.
So because of the long statute of limitations, we're trying to set up a system that operates very differently than normal.
I mean, I, you know, and I'd be happy to come on. I could go on and on for a day. So I'd be happy to come on and kind of explain.
I think Warner, it's time for you to do an update. So Stephen, get in touch with Warner and we'll get there as well.
I was going to ask whether Warner would do it. Speak to us. Would you, Warner?
Yeah, you wouldn't. Oh, yeah, of course. I'd like to. I'm very... You guys haven't seen me on because I've been so darn busy and I'm traveling a lot this month and next month.
But maybe the middle of February I could do it. I've got to go to California to argue against the University of California system, the Regents.
Then I'm going to go to the FLCCC conference and then I'm headed to Connecticut at the end of February. But right in the middle, I might have some time.
So is that all COVID, Warner? It's all COVID. All of it. So you were really ahead of the curve in America, weren't you, as a lawyer?
We have lawsuits in, I think, 13 or 14 states right now, and we represent through class actions ourselves about a quarter million people.
But what I'm trying to say, Warner, you had cases in Ohio when, as far as I could, in 2021, as I remember, when no American lawyer was doing any cases or maybe did one or something.
No, there's been a... No, I mean, a few of us stood up early. But yeah, we started in 2020 with the business shutdowns, the distancing, the right to association.
And that first case, the first several cases, I mean, some of them are still in existence. We won an appeal on one of our university cases.
So of the initial eight cases, four of them are still hanging around court somewhere. So it's just unbelievable.
So Warner, have you been surprised by what has happened in the last four years and how your fame has rocketed because of COVID?
Look, fame. Yeah, I wasn't looking for any fame. I'm a small town attorney.
I mean, I've had a complex practice through my history because I sued governments and corporations, but it was very quiet. We represent whistleblowers.
We've sued the biggest companies in the world, I mean, before this ever happened.
And we've sued the DOD, Department of Defense, Department of Energy on nuclear contamination in Ohio.
So we never trusted government. And I'm part of Taxpayers Against Fraud, which looks at the pharmaceutical companies as basically having fraud as a business model.
So all that was in my head before this happened. So I didn't have any trust that government was going to handle this properly or that pharmaceutical companies were good or that the DOD was going to do a good job with this prototype product that they created.
So all of that was in my head. So I was very skeptical at the beginning.
And then as soon as we heard from the good doctors that there was a way to treat this, initially with quercetin, zinc, vitamin C, and then later on that year, ivermectin and some other things, we reopened our office May 1st, 2020, despite the shutdowns.
I told everybody, come back, we got this solved. The doctors, you know, Paul Merrick, Pierre Cori figured it out. I thought the pandemic was over.
So, Walter, you've got you're a bit bashful tonight because you had the biggest case in the world, didn't you?
Well, it's still going on. I don't know if everybody's aware that, yeah, we have the biggest case in the world against Pfizer.
Brooke Jackson, wasn't it? Yeah, Brooke Jackson, yes. Wow.
And that case has had a weird history because we got dismissed. It went up on appeal. I notified the appellate court that I had some outstanding motions in the lower court that hadn't been ruled on and the appellate court sent it back down to get them ruled on.
And then the judge ruled in our favor.
How much was she suing for? It was $215 million. No, no, $3.6 trillion.
I remember that. It's the federal budget, basically, right? So,
Well, Pfizer doesn't have that money. We know that. But we would hope to bankrupt them. I mean, ideally, bankrupt them and sell off their IP and their properties and everything else. And they need to be, you know, they need capital punishment, corporate capital punishment.
All right, come on, guys. This will go forever. Poor Dagmar and Kutcher. It's now 11.30 for them. Warner, you'll speak to us mid-February.
Yes. But well done on the work that you're doing and everybody here. I prefer your Sunday timeframe, by the way, not that we have yet. Oh, that's absolutely fine. Yeah, I'll fix that, Warner.
So, we'll have Graham Hood next Tuesday night, Wednesday morning. Hoodie, that works for you at 7am Wednesday morning next week. Beautiful. We'll organise that. So, Dagmar and Kutcher.
While David's on, because we don't see that much of David. So, I would like you, David, to speak to us if you'd like to. And also Peter Koenig. We haven't heard from him for a while. So, we'll sort that out. I'll email you, David. Thank you so much.
Yep. All right, done. Okay. I just want to say thank you. It's been a long time since I've been on. I appreciate you guys keeping the ball rolling here. And for you guys helping out Ryan or Dagmar and Kutcher, it's so much, you know, I understand what you're going through to some extent. And I just want to say thank you to everybody. So nice to see everybody.
Warner, could you be able to help them as an advisor or something and not take the case over, obviously?
Well, like I said, I want to present, if what I'd like Dagmar, if you would like, if there could be a brief write up of kind of what you would need or ideally be looking for, I'll put that out on our Freedom Council group. And I would like you to join us.
It's just a hot group of attorneys. You can see what the discussion is in the United States on it. And any German attorneys that would like to join. Reiner was on our listserv. I'm sure he's not getting them now, but I'd love to put you on there as well. So you're up to speed with what we're doing.
Very good. All right.
So what we Dagmar, Reiner will watch this. So I would like to say personally that I wish him all the best and we are fighting for him. And now I'm convinced after this meeting that this is a political trial. It's just like doing Assange.
And the biggest mistake they did was to kidnap him from Mexico with a European arrest warrant. It's just nonsense, isn't it?
Yeah, yeah.
Just ridiculous.
Yeah, it's ridiculous. Yeah.
Okay, everybody. That's it. Thank you for being here. Thank you for sharing the connections, the suggestions, or the insights sent to Stephen or me. Any suggestions to pass on? You've got Dagmar and Katja's email addresses. Katja, I know it's late for you guys, but we're in a war so I forget sleep.
Sleep when the war is over, okay? That's what happens. And Warner has been sacrificing his sailboarding skills on the lake near his home because he's been too busy doing legal work. So there you are.
And Hoodie's been sacrificing his flying career because he didn't want to die. So that was a good thing. And Dexter as well. We should mention Dexter with the work you're doing in South Africa and helping Reiner. So well done on that.
And thank you everybody for being here. And you know, the fight goes on. And at the end of the day, we've got a spiritual battle here. So keep going back and download the statement of Archbishop Bigeno and share that because that is such powerful, clear message.
And in my show, I unpack what we do about this and every single one of us shining a light on what Archbishop says are the perverts and the pedophiles. I love that P and P. The perverts and the pedophiles. Let's shine a light on it. And Dave, call and finish part three because I want to read what you've got.
And the priests. The priests. They have also P.
You said the perverts, the pedophiles and the prelates and the priests. Correct.
All right.
And make sure that Reiner's not allowed books in prison because that's torture for him.
Yes. Yes, the Bigeno statement is on the rumble recording the full words of it.
We've put it, we've posted it there on the channel. So if you click on his 16 minute statement, all the words are there as well.
All right, everybody.
What about the books? Is he allowed books in prison, Reiner?
You can't send books to the prison.
No, but he's not allowed to read books.
Yeah, you know, he doesn't get it. So many people want to send him books and he says it doesn't come through.
I always copy a book if I want to send him something as a copy.
And then because I can send him a letter with which is not looked at, you know, like as a lawyer, the letters from lawyers are not checked.
But Dagmar, someone said that I'm not sure who it was, but someone said he wasn't allowed to.
He was kept in solitary confinement and he wasn't allowed to read books or he had nothing to do and nothing to read.
Is that true or not?
No, you can send books, but he told me recently that usually they don't get through because they are searched.
The books are searched, you know, whether there's something hidden.
But surely there's a library in the prison, don't they?
I think he's very busy, you know, he has so many clients now in the prison.
All is fine, Stephen.
All right.
And then he has a TV now.
And I just asked him today what channels he has.
So he has all the channels and what he's looking at.
You know, Beckenbauer died two days ago, you know, our big football hero here in Germany.
Wow.
Beckenbauer died.
What did he die of?
Huh?
What did he die of?
He was very sick for a long time, you know.
He didn't write about it, but he was only 78, you know.
Very young.
So there was just a documentary about him on the main TV station.
So he has seen that, you know.
That's what I came to know today.
All right.
Thanks, everybody.
Thanks.
Have a wonderful Tuesday night.
Thank you, Dagmar, Katja.
Thank you too for all your wonderful discussions.
Thank you, Stephen and Charles.
Thank you.
Yes, thank you, Dagmar.
Thank you, Katja.
Thank you so much.
Bye.
Thank you, Charles.
Thanks, Stephen.
And Peter, can you speak to us as well?
I did mention it.
Yes, sure.
Peter Koenig, yeah.
Okay.
I'll write to you, okay?
Okay.
Yeah.
Let me know about what?
Yes, okay.
Bye.
Thank you.
Bye.