Lawyers Dr. Reiner Fuellmich and Viviane Fischer conducted an extra parliamentary process where numerous lawyers and experts from around the world were called to discuss the sudden loss of human rights in their nations and what they are going to do to fight for real democracy and justice.
Today, we are considering the testimony of Lawyer Michael Verstraeten. This lawyer discusses how politically correct indoctrination tricks people into accepting and supporting measures that actually are quite murderous, especially regarding what has been occurring in nursing homes.
Mr. Michael Verstraeten discusses how he has created an absurd situation. Because governments will not implement laws based on court’s rulings because they are saying the rulings only concern the parties involved, Mr. Verstraeten is suing to be freed from these draconian measures personally in court. He hopes to create the ridiculous situation of being the only person officially free of the measures because he feels he can prove the measures have no legal basis. He’s hoping that this might finally shake some people out of the mass hypnosis which is afflicting the public because of the fear programming that’s being drilled into them.
We are all trying to reach those who mistakenly still believe that the media behaves ethically. As a group, they do not at all.
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Abusers can not perpetually abuse, exploit and harm without it returning to them.
To expose the origins of the not so hidden sneaky dictatorship attacking us, allow me to suggest listening to REAL HISTORY. To watch this lawyer of courage, Michael Verstraeten, speak, start the video at around 1:43:00. I transcribed a summary of the dialogue below. There’s a lot more information available if you want to watch the video and it is well worth your time.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: We’ve been hearing horror stories from Belgium. Is it as bad as it sounds? Or is it better now?
Michael Verstraeten: We are the country with the most sheep in the world. We are very sheepy. We have about eighty percent following what the government wants to do. I’m an attorney of 30 years from Belgium. I also have an MBA from business school. Before the crisis started, I was writing a doctorate on the way that companies and organizations fail. The failing of organizations. In that doctorate, I’m working out six scenarios. Suddenly, I saw one of my failing strategies deploying before my eyes. Namely, in the Covid crisis. It is a scenario that is very similar to the banking crisis. In the way of behavior. To make this very short, organizations fail when they used standardized, simplified methods in a very complex environment. That’s what the banks did. They were in a very complex economic situation. They took the idea that housing prices would always go up. Interest rates would go down. Suddenly, we were in a situation where the opposite was true. That made a big collapse in the system which caused the financial crisis afterwards. In things like Fukushima, the people in Japan didn’t take into account that something like a Tsunami would destroy the Fukushima nuclear installations. BP in the gulf was using very simple techniques to control the oil rig and the leak. The same system is there. The same behavioral disorganization that we see in companies. It’s the same behavioral disorganization that we see here too. In the very complex environment of the virus. People think they can control this virus by very simple means: standardized procedure, which are all of the rules. The idea of advising. Which was also a big problem we saw in the banking crisis. The consultants and advisors of international organizations but also individual countries are also, in effect, very centralized. With a few people who are introducing these consultants. And these consultants are supported by people like Bill Gates who give money to support this kind of consultancy. This kind of inquiry and studies. It can effect all of the world and the system, as with the banking crisis. I was falling into this and I said, “Okay, this is my subject. I will study what is happening here. In March, 2020, I created my own mathematical system to see how this would play out and immediately. Then I saw in a few weeks in the mathematical models we were making, they are completely useless. When something happens that you don’t take into account, you can throw away your mathematical system. In these kind of environments, there are techniques on what to do to deal with certain situations. You always have to have a plan B. Now I invite you to look at all of these countries who are vaccinated. What is the plan B of these countries? They don’t have any plan B. You also need to listen to people who are acting against what you are doing. Your opposite. Because it’s very important. If one’s system is failing, one should listen to their opposition because perhaps their opposition is saying some correct things. One needs to listen to these people and to take into account that one’s models are not working. That’s exactly what we didn’t do. So I started doing some procedures against the Belgian government. Which is quite difficult because our magistrates and not willing to deal with the subjects of science and to see what scientists are writing. We have discussions about the constitutionality and also the problem with the article eight eleven and other articles of the European Convention regarding human rights which demands that regulations should be predictable and to be clear enough to be applied in this matter which is not in effect in Belgium. There are some other issues but I will not go into them because of time. Eight months ago, I went to the European Court of Human Rights with this case and I was dismissed immediately. I even made it to the great chamber. I showed them three thousand pages and all kinds of argumentation and they immediately dismissed me. For them, it is very clear that this thing that they do is not against European human rights. It’s perfectly okay because they are protecting lives. So that’s what we are facing. If you think we will win the case in the European Court of Human Rights, no, we will lose it.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: I’ve heard this before and I think you’re probably right. That’s what we’ve been hearing not just concerning the European Court of Human Rights but also concerning the International Criminal Court. Basically all of the global courts. Because there is, I think they are all biased because people with lots of money including George Soros, including Bill Gates have stacked these courts with their own people. Of course not a hundred percent of the judges who are in there are sponsored by George Soros and Bill Gates. By our pretty accurate estimates, we’re seeing that twenty percent are being sponsored and that is quite a lot. Maybe that explains why your case was dismissed immediately. It is so obvious that what they said is wrong but our friend Michael Swinwood said, “This is what’s happening all over the world. The precautionary principle is being used to stand everything on its head and to argue, yeah, maybe you’re right, maybe the PCR Test can’t tell you anything about infections but the situation is dangerous.” That’s the precautionary principle. They have to use something even though it doesn’t make sense.
Michael Verstraeten: Exactly what you’re saying. I had no idea about the payments to the people in the European Court of Human Rights. I don’t have any information about that. I’m just telling you my experience about this matter. What you said about the PCR Test is correct which is why I don’t put much effort into this PCR Test. From April, 2020 already I was sent documents that these PCR Tests have big flaws. Sometimes there are seventy percent false positives. Even though they have such a big rate of failure, they say this is the best thing we can use.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: That’s how they dismissed the case in New York. It was exactly that argument. “We don’t have anything else, it’s the best we have.” Well, if it doesn’t tell you anything about infection, then what is there about this thing that makes it the best we have? It’s obviously misleading. But what route do you take? If you don’t attack this?
Michael Verstraeten on the left.
Michael Verstraeten: In fact, it’s even worse. In April 2020, already last year, I wrote to the president of one of the parties who is in the government of Belgium who I knew a bit. I say knew because he won’t talk to me anymore. I wrote him an email and I asked, “Is it possible that you are separating people in elderly homes based on PCR Tests, we know that these PCR Tests are not working. It means that you put patients who are in fact ill, with patients who are not ill because you don’t know that they are ill because the PCR Test doesn’t not work. So you are killing people in elderly homes.” I told him he is the world champion at killing old people in Belgium. We have double the infections. We have double the infection in elderly homes than in all the rest of society. Two thirds of the people who died in Belgium, died in elderly homes. More than 12,000. That’s the general idea. So these people were killed there. They were killed because they were sitting there all together with the windows closed. We had the idea that we had to close all windows and doors because otherwise the virus could come crawl through the . . . yes, that’s the idea. So these people are killed there. They are one percent of the population but it’s one percent of the population but it’s two thirds of the deaths in Belgium. We really killed these people. We even have reports from Amnesty International and international NGOs, Doctors Without Frontiers which made reports on the cruel behaviors in the elderly homes. It’s really too horrible to imagine. People are just in their rooms and they are injected with morphine to be killed in a way where they won’t need any food or treatment. We have reports. If you want we can send them to you. They are very detailed about the crimes that occurred in the elderly homes in Belgium. This is a terrible situation. How can we stop this idiocy? That’s quite difficult so in June 2020, I set up a local NGO Viruswaanzin. Meanwhile, we created a new political party in Belgium. We have at the moment about 11,000 members in our NGO. It’s only been in operation for one month and its growing. But there’s a big nervosity with the other parties because they see us coming. We know that when a certain law was being voted in the parliament, these members of parliament got more than 50 emails per hour from people who were sending emails to protest against the law regarding the pandemic on which they were voting. There was a very big fuss that people were very much against this. A lot of people are now supporting us more and more. Judges are turning. We know that. We’ve had some good judgements but the government doesn’t execute the judgments. They are saying that judgments are not usable regarding parties outside of the judgment, they cannot be used to say that things are illegal. That means that people cannot use these judgments to say that actions are illegal. Because of the fact that they are not a party in the procedure.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: Same here in Germany by the way.
Michael Verstraeten: This procedure is now in appeal. It’s based on the idea that this league of human rights can make decisions based on the collective interest. But the effect of the judgment is limited to the parties. I intervened in this procedure myself. Not for a client, me, myself and I. It is a French procedure and I asked a friend who specializes in this matter to be my lawyer and he did it. So we intervened. The league and the government are both very angry because if this judgment is confirmed, I will be the only Belgian free of the measures. Because I will be a party in the procedure. It’s a big Belgian joke. We are specialists in absurd situations. I will be the only Belgian free of the rules.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: But still it will set a precedent.
Michael Verstraeten: Of course it will set a precedent. It will also show how ridiculous this is. It will be a decision which will show to the league of human rights, there is no legal grounds for these measures. That’s a decision that is in the common interests of everyone. But then there would be only one man, me, who will be free from these measures. So this will be so ridiculous that I hope in this way we can awaken the press because we have a very big problem to get our voice heard in the press. They’re still completely in this indoctrination but I must say it’s changing. Next week, we expect that there will be a very big article about us by one of the guys working against the measures in Belgium in one of the premium newspapers of Belgium. There are even a few journalists who are even turning at the moment. So if I’m the only Belgian who will be free of these measures, it will be news. I cannot be that this is not news.
Viviane Fischer: When you do expect this ruling to come out?
Michael Verstraeten: Within a month.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: What is your line of attack. On what basis are you attacking here? There are two basis: the legislation is not clear enough and not predictable enough to be used as legal grounds according to article 8, the condition that you must have a law that is clear and predictable. Secondly, the proportionality, and the figures in Belgium are really stunning. We don’t have any excess mortality anymore since December, there is no excess death. We don’t have that anymore. By Belgian standards, we are under the epidemic line, there’s a number of people who need to go to the doctor when there’s an epidemic but we don’t have that anymore. We have hospital admissions which are one third of the year 2019. But still we are under measures. They are cherry picking and they are only communicating indicators which are not so good. We have a lot of people in intensive care, okay. In 2009, it was decided not to increase intensive care units but to concentrate more on preventing infections. They tried to control the virus in a cheap way. That’s funny because it’s now more costly than ever. Now in the hospitals, they believe in these crazy measures. We know the measures don’t work but still people are believing in them. That’s a very strange situation and doctors believe in it. The doctors are getting their information from the newspapers. They don’t read scientific articles. They just read the newspapers.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: Same here in Germany. This is a lockstep approach. They are using the same techniques everywhere. In some details maybe they adjust to an individual population. Basically, they’re using the same approach everywhere. I was going to ask you something. Do you think what the government is doing and what the medical community is doing is done in good faith?
Michael Verstraeten: Yes, I think so. I’m studying now the subject of how people fail and why people fail on a big scale. In my opinion, for a good part this is being done in good faith. I know some professors in the medical area, the directors of hospitals. These people are afraid. Now there is a mechanism which is like hypnosis. People get anxious and their perception is limited. They can’t see reality any more as a whole. They will only see what is fitting into their anxiousness.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: What do you think about this happening all over the world? Do you think they are all in mass hypnosis?
Michael Verstraeten: No, not all.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: What about the use of the mass media?
Michael Verstraeten: There are mechanisms that enforce it. There is a central advisory in all this. We had it in the banking crisis. Only three or four big consultancy offices, advise these banks. This is also what we see in this crisis. We get advice from the WHO, we get advice from the Imperial College in London with Neil Ferguson and his friends.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: This guy’s not even a doctor. We have come to the conclusion they are not acting in good faith. It might be different in Belgium. I kind of have my doubts, because this is a lockstep approach but I’m absolutely convinced this is being done in bad faith and that the object of this never had anything to do with health. Rather it’s the “Great Reset” that they are predicting or whatever you want to call it. I don’t see how this is in good faith. In particular if you look at how many people are dying from the measures.
Michael Verstraeten: I follow what you’re saying but also if you’re a lawyer, you have to prove that. We need to have an inquiry to seize all their computers to see what they say to each other. To prove what the main intention has been behind it.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: We’re going to need the Anglo-American law of evidence because ours is too weak. We need pretrial discovery. That’s what’s going to take us exactly where we need to go. We know what’s going on. We know what’s going on. We need the evidence to prove what’s going on.
Michael Verstraeten: I’m reading the Great Reset, this completely ridiculous book by Mr. Klaus Schwab. What he writes is the consequence of the Club of Rome. Which happened around 50 years ago when I was born. When I was seventeen, I was working with the Green Party with some members of Parliament, when I was seventeen, I discovered then the Club of Rome, we had two choices: To reduce growth, which is the main idea of this idiot Schwab or to develop technology. Now we have the biggest concentration of politically correct thinking that we have ever met in our history. That’s a very big problem. Politically correct thinking is thinking in reflection of a higher cause or a goal, which seems like a very nice goal. Here the higher goal is to help people not die from a virus. Then there is a system leading them to a solution to the goal. Anything not according to the system is treated like it’s not according to the aim. It’s contrary to the goal. So that everything which is not according to the goal how to cure covid is something against the people themselves. If you oppose the system, then you’re a murderer. That’s politically correct thinking. It has such a prevalence right now at this moment that we need to fight against it.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: I think it’s one of the tools they have been using. By introducing politically correct thinking, they introduce lies. Political correctness is just a euphemism for you know, but at any rate.
Michael Verstraeten: When people are hypnotized, we use different techniques to bring that down. We use humor, which is very important. We do reframing. We can initiate lawsuits all we want but if we cannot convince the population, we will lose.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: We know we can’t just win in the courts because they are totally corrupt, they have installed their people in certain strategically important positions. This happened here in Germany and in the Constitutional court. I think it will take a coordinated effort on several levels. Law, using humor of course, we have to keep educating the people to get more transparency into this and also the spiritual side.
Michael Verstraeten: I think we should create an international party in all countries. This is a very important step.