Coronavirus Pandemic: Apocalypse Now! Or exaggerated scare story?

[Laurs]

The Covid legal saga against among others the Dutch state, Mark Rutte, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla and Bill Gates before the Courts in The Netherlands continues, see my posts on page 1968 of this thread.

Peter Stassen, the lawyer who took over from Arno van Kessel, yesterday pleaded before the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam regarding the District Court's denial on 20th August 2025 of the hearing of expert witnesses like Catherine Austin Fitts (Former U.S. Government Chief Officer), Dr. Mike Yeadon (former top scientist at Pfizer), Alexandra Latypova (former pharmaceutical), researcher Katherine Watt and Dr. Joseph Sansone (psychotherapist specializing in clinical hypnosis).

Stassen appealed before the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam about the procedural question: can these experts be heard? According to the plaintiffs, these experts from different disciplines – science, law, psychology and policy – can shed light on decision-making around COVID measures and vaccination.

During the hearing, lawyer Peter Stassen, who represents the plaintiffs, made a very fierce plea. He argued that Gates is part of an elite network with a “satanic ideology.”

In addition, Stassen accused the Dutch state of lying. He argued that the judiciary is being misled by incorrect information.

Stassen also referred to the Epstein case and the Epstein files. He said no one is being prosecuted in connection with these documents because engaged elites adhere to a “mafia-like silence code.”

Meanwhile, it is precisely the people who act in the current trial as claimants – people who have been damaged by COVID vaccines or have lost loved ones – that are dismissed as liars or as dangerous.

Stassen said during the hearing: “Give me the facts and I will give you the law.”

The lawyer stressed to the judges that it is necessary that the court also consider alternative statements or facts. The truth can never be revealed otherwise.

He argued that there is “the greatest crime against humanity,” and that the persons charged in this case are those responsible for that crime.

Stassen told the judges that they must ultimately decide who in the courtroom are the “children of God,” and who are “children of the devil.”

After the hearing, Stassen told the press that the released Epstein documents show that there is a powerful elite acting against the interests of humanity. These documents undermine governments' argument that such ideas would be mere conspiracy theories.

Stassen went on to say that he thinks his side in this case is getting stronger and stronger and that there is a kind of “information war” going on. For more and more people, it becomes clear what really happened during the pandemic.

Finally, Stassen described the case not only as a legal battle, but also as a psychological and spiritual struggle. “It is ultimately about a struggle for truth and justice.”

He called for continuing to fight for that truth and not give up.

The Court's ruling on the appeal is expected on April 9.

See also this post on X:

https://twitter.com/x/status/2030946367632257447

Let's keep our fingers crossed and hope that, even if they are ultimately not successful, this case WILL lead to more awareness around what is going on in a broader sense, and that the 47-51% number the C's mentioned keeps growing and growing!

 

[Deliverance]

Thank you Laurs for letting us follow this "legal saga", and keep a little hope for the truth to be heard (when Dr. Reiner Fuellmich is now isolated in prison).

 

[XPan]

Self-replicating modRNA for pets
being injected by veterinarians across the US

Via Dr Roger Hodkinsons telegram channel, one entry shows a video from the Children's Health Defense, narrated by Nicolas Hulscher, MPH - telling a worrisome story unfolding:

“Veterinarians across the country are currently injecting self-amplifying mRNA into our pets.”

The USDA quietly approved mRNA injections for your cats and dogs and they’re already being rolled out. Meaning your pet and possibly even you could be being harmed.

“The USDA last year approved self-amplifying mRNA injections for our cats and our dogs for rabies and a few other things.”
“It’s possible… they are either shedding the self-amplifying RNA or the antigen products… onto the owners through bodily fluids.”
“None of this was tested, by the way.” “They just authorized it anyways.”
“Veterinarians across the country are currently injecting self-amplifying mRNA into our pets.”

Dr Roger Hodkinson

“Veterinarians across the country are currently injecting self-amplifying mRNA into our pets.” The USDA quietly approved mRNA injections for your cats and dogs and they’re already being rolled out. Meaning your pet and possibly even you could be being harmed. “The USDA last year approved...

t.me

 

[Laurs]

Well, not unexpectedly imo, the Amsterdam Court of Appeals ruled on Thursday (April 9th) that the testimony of the expert witnesses (see my last post on this page) is inadmissible. The Appeals Court bases its decision on a procedural law article that determines that against decisions like hearing witnesses, no appeal is possible unless the Court explicitly authorises such appeal.

The Court of Appeals holds that plaintiffs have not asked for such permission, and so they didn’t get it. In case of a fundamental violation of due process, then this exception to this rule can be granted, though in this case, the Appeals Court says, that doesn’t fly.

Furthermore, the plaintiffs argued that the hearing before the District Court had not been public and that the principle of hearing both sides had been violated. The Court of Appeals rejected these arguments.

According to the judges, the hearing did indeed take place in public. The fact that not everyone could be physically present due to the limited capacity of the courtroom does not, in the Court’s view, alter this. Furthermore, the Court holds that restricting recordings to accredited press is in line with applicable guidelines and does not constitute a violation of the right to a fair trial.

In addition, the Court ruled that decisions regarding order during a hearing—such as whether or not to allow recordings—fall outside the scope of the principle of hearing both sides.

So, no verdict was given on the merits of the case. This means that no ruling was given on the role of the proposed experts or on the statements of the plaintiffs regarding the nature and safety of Covid-19 shots, namely that they are biological weapons.

The Appeals Court also stressed that the importance or social impact of a case does not constitute a reason to break the legal prohibition of appeal.

This ruling has no bearing on the procedure on the merits before the District Court of Leeuwarden, in which the same parties face each other. According to a previously announced schedule, an oral hearing is scheduled for October 22 and is expected to last five hours.

In a press release following the ruling, lawyer Peter Stassen states that the case constitutes a “legal marker” and that further evidence will be inserted in the procedure on the merits. He also reiterates his clients' views on the nature of the Covid-19 injections (i.e. bio-weapons). The Appeals Court has not commented on these substantive issues. The judgment is limited only to the question whether the appeal was procedurally permissible.

And so this case drags on. To my knowledge this matter only gets traction in the alternative media, and of course current world events take center stage and people have to deal with higher prices, inflation, etc. etc. Still, it seems more and more people are beginning to open their eyes and start questioning things. In the past week, 3 male friends of mine in their forties and fifties, seemingly healthy but injected with several clot shots, had heart issues ranging from heart attacks to severe arrhythmia, but for all three it’s not possible yet to connect the dots. I feel very sad for them.

 

[Debra]

This little essay comes from a post I stumbled upon on Facebook.
I don’t have the authors name.

“Someone put this diagram together and it deserves to be read slowly.

Three of the most disturbing psychological experiments in modern history placed in a Venn diagram with COVID policy sitting precisely at their intersection.

They were not wrong.

Most people know the Milgram experiment. Ordinary people administering what they believed were lethal electric shocks to strangers because an authority figure in a white coat told them to continue. We wrote about this. COVID replicated it at planetary scale, the doctors, the neighbours, the employers, the family members who enforced mandates with a zeal that had nothing to do with science and everything to do with institutional obedience.

But the other two are equally important and far less discussed.

The Asch Conformity Experiment demonstrated something even more fundamental. Solomon Asch showed in the 1950s that a significant majority of people will deny the evidence of their own eyes will give an answer they know to be factually wrong, simply because everyone else in the room is giving that answer. Not because they were threatened. Not because they were paid. Because the social pressure of the group was sufficient to override direct sensory experience.

This is what masking a healthy population, cancelling Christmas, and demanding that people treat their neighbours as biological threats actually accomplished. It was not about any of those things specifically. It was about training an entire population to override their own perception and defer to the group consensus, however absurd that consensus became.

And then the Stanford Prison Experiment.

Philip Zimbardo’s 1971 study abandoned early because it spiralled so rapidly out of control, showed that ordinary people assigned roles of authority over other ordinary people will, within days, begin to abuse that authority in ways they would have found unthinkable before the role was assigned. The guards became cruel not because they were cruel people but because the structure gave them permission and the institution backed them up.

We watched this happen in real time.

The COVID marshals. The border agents turning families away. The hospital administrators barring visitors from dying patients. The teachers reporting parents. The neighbours calling police on children playing in parks. The HR departments gleefully processing terminations for the unvaccinated. Ordinary people, handed a role and a uniform of institutional approval, discovering capacities for cruelty that their pre-2020 selves would not have recognised.

Now go deeper.

Because the institution at the centre of this, the one that has connected these threads across decades is not an accident of history.

Stanford sits at the intersection of centralised medicine, defence research, and the surveillance architecture that has been constructed around human attention and behaviour for the better part of a century. The Stanford Research Institute. The connections to MKUltra the CIA’s mind control programme that ran from the early 1950s and included everything from Mexican mescaline experiments to the weaponisation of LSD on unwitting subjects, overseen by figures who moved seamlessly between military intelligence and the medical establishment.

From General Groves who oversaw the Manhattan Project and the deliberate suppression of radiation health data to Sidney Gottlieb, the CIA chemist who ran MKUltra’s most extreme programmes. The through-line is not conspiracy. It is institutional continuity. The same networks. The same funding streams. The same willingness to use human beings as experimental subjects in the service of power dressed as science."