The trial against Reiner Fuellmich is ongoing at Göttingen in Germany. Whilst many questions are unanswered, some should also go towards Reiner Fuellmich. And urge us to exercise restraint.
Uwe, my comment was based on my direct experience of the system. My former best friend at a magazine (SPIN, 1987-1997) was weaponized against me after we took on HIV Inc. After I started investigative reporting. I was describing patterns I know because I have lived them. If you can call this living.
I don't have evidence of Trojan horses around Reiner, but I can't imagine they would fail to install ANY.
That would only be believed by somebody NEW to this war. Back at aforementioned magazine, they placed plants and spies even in the copy editing department, and one such saboteur CUT text from galleys with an exact knife. The passages he cut pertained to the toxicity of AZT—this was in the late 80s. Place was crawling with spies, informers, and saboteurs and they did eventually land the publisher, and myself, in court. On charges that were trumped up—Title 7 stuff.
I should be allowed to speak of patterns I've seen in almost 4 decades of this war, without being held up as Exhibit A for Reiner-philic naiveté.
Who are the "three Berlin lawyers?"
Maybe you could correct the spelling of my name. Not a big deal.
I have the utmost respect for your personal experience and work!
Of course my use of the quote was not intended in the way you may think I used it. But it is a very deep and meaningful quote. I chose the illustration because Substack created one the moment I copied the line. I thought it was a good way of crediting and directing traffic your way as well. I am offering to remove it if you prefer.
Sorry for the typo.
The naivete is directed at all of us! Including myself. I just think it is extremely important we find a way of sanely questioning our perception whilst preserving vigilance as well as compassion. It is a tragedy what happens to Reiner Fuellmich, and his family, as it is one which happens to Viviane Fischer and hers.
Uwe, if I over-reacted, and I think I did, I apologize.
I "believe" Reiner is "innocent" (as charged) and I included this belief in the interest of transparency. I do not get a sense Vivian is malicious. I do get a sense there is a sleeper agent in all this, or likely, more than one.
we all know Reiner Fuellmich, in 2023/2024, is about the LAST person who belongs behind bars. Yet he is, behind bars. This is kind of like seeing it through the opposite end of the telescope.
Reiner Fuellmich is in prison.
HUH?
Why? Was this really necessary? Sounds to me like he has a strong case for the soundness of the loans—let's see what unfolds.
Thank you to this article I started to follow you @Celia Farber.
I really loved the beautiful exchange between you and Uwe Alschner. Polite, clear, respectful. We need a lot of this. And I hope that the horrible thing that is happening to Reiner Fuellmich will be cleared up as soon as possible. It is clearly a trap for the freedom fighters, so the money thing has to be clarified asap.
So embezzling $750k of DONATIONS should not be an imprisonable offense so long as the perp seems like a good guy and was warning people not to murder themselves with vaccines? What kind of logic is that? You are dangerously naive and lack sound judgment.
And Uwe you don't need courage to present me with facts. You've been perfectly cordial and there is no "daring" here. I reject all this kind of trauma talk, with due respect. We're journalists.
I don't become angry like a zoo tiger, when presented with facts; if they ARE gold backed facts, I become grateful and even happy.
Such facts are vanishingly rare in Reiner's case.
I question, respectfully, your title: "Dangerous Naiveté." What you are publishing are many questions that are open ended. Journalism is supposed to answer questions. Pin facts down. Not just bask in how good it can feel to be the person who HAS all the right questions.
So help us answer the questions Uwe!
I asked YOU as many clear questions as you asked me.
I do not think my naiveté is dangerous. I do think mistrust is dangerous. Isn't it JUST AS "dangerous" to "blindly" trust Reiner's accusers?
As I have said in another answer to a comment, the dangerous naivete is not directed towards you. It is a programmatic call to all of us. But I can tell you that there is a lot of romanticising involved as far as Reiner Fuellmich is concerned. And I do not mean this to apply to you personally, but to the "movement" collectively.
Journalism in my view is to report what is happening. And to hold people responsible in matters of public concern. If questions can be answered factually, they should be reported as such. But if questions remain, then they should be taken for what they are: open questions. Jumping to conclusions is quite dangerous.
The case of the CIC money is of more concern than the case of Reiner Fuellmich, I would say, because it pertains to the integrity of the opposition. As such, it is perfectly in line with the logic of the perpetrators to cause internal fighting. In this respect, I must insist, it has been Reiner Fuellmich who levelled the charges of personal impropriety and indecency against others. And a lot of people have taken it for granted - without any facts provided by him.
This is not to condone the methods applied to Reiner Fuellmich in arresting and indicting him. However, the initial questions remain open. Maybe Reiner Fuellmich could help in answering them, which might be helpful in people regaining lost confidence.
You write: "what I have reported is what Reiner has said." Exactly. This should not be taken as fact. What he says should be taken as what it is. Statements.
Thank you Uwe. I think we are all pretty stressed and prone to hyper-reactivity. I do appreciate your decency and lack of rancor. I already got a few of the questions you listed answered—more soon.
Uwe do you mean before or after Vivian made her initial video calling out Reiner? Who did Reiner accuse, of what—and when? I am taking notes, I am not challenging your statement, just trying to get a time line.
On Sep 2 Viviane made a first statement, which is linked in the article above. She did not call him out. On Sep 8 Reiner responded with allegations against her and Wodarg that are incorrect and misleading . Followed by more personal attacks on Roger Bittel’s channel. These led to Viviane explaining/calling out Reiner Fuellmich in terms of sums of money missing etc.
There was, I would say, a great effort by Fischer/Wodarg/Holzeisen/Kämmerer to limit the fallout. Escalation was coming from Reiner Fuellmich, as far as all evidence between Sep 2 and Sep 21 seems to indicate.
I too appreciate Celia Farber's brave and important work on the AIDS hoax and even bought her book (Serious Adverse Events) for my parents a few months ago. But I appreciate Dr. Uwe Alschner's perspective here. Hundreds of millions if not billions of people have now fallen for an even bigger hoax than AIDS, so it shouldn't surprise us if we discover that groups of astroturfed opposition groups were planned by the evildoers to be part of their big production, with opportunists spontaneously partaking in it (or recruited to participate in it) and chasing the inevitable mountains of donation money that were guaranteed to follow. Füllmich has to date hosted many people, including Ms. Farber herself between his time at Corona Auschuss (CA) and at ICIC. He is quite charming during his shows and he flatters his guests, so I can easily imagine he makes a very positive impression on them (he impressed me). That he would participate in anything unscrupulous is the furthest thing from their mind. So it will be important for Ms. Farber to separate her reporting from her experience as a guest on his show. And I think she must make it explicitly clear in her reporting on Füllmich that she has no conflict of interest (or she must disclose them), e.g. that she received no gifts from him in return for her participation on his show. I highly doubt she did, but she needs to nip that idea in the bud. I would love to see Ms. Farber interview Dr. Wodarg, as I could easily imagine the evildoers wanting him to be well-controlled during the operation, given his background. Yet I wonder how willing the former CA associates will be willing to be interviewed at this point. It still isn't clear to me how CA was established and how and why the initial lawyers in particular were assembled/chosen. And after watching the 1999 ZDF video that Dr. Alschner has pointed out, it dawns on me that I honestly don't know the history of any of the lawyers involved. Given the "court of public opinion" circus that has transpired over the last year regarding CA, it seems that all the lawyers involved are very unprofessional, dilettantes even, and I would never trust any of them with my own needs, much less the prosecution of global crimes against humanity.
After having read the three excellent articles you have published on the Fuellmich - Fisher saga (thank you for your work!) I think that Dangerous Naïveté is one of my problems. Because I found myself with a question beyond the actual accuses to Fuellmich: Why do they needed such a great amount of money? And they kept on asking for donations? The expenses of the committee were not that high, they were starting no trials...so why did they need millions of euros?
When you write this statement ¨Why were the 1.3 million going to the people (Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffman) who had left the CIC almost a year earlier? And why did nobody learn of this before Reiner Fuellmich was apprehended in Mexico. When money from house sales get paid out by a notary the seller must get notified. This would have been long before the 2023 arrest, no?¨
Well this is not true. It is know and explained by Reiner Fuellmich long time ago, more then a year.
I have to tell you that I am sick and tire to read your attack on everybody around.
And whilst I understand some frustration, it has not been explained by Reiner Fuellmich long ago. That is the problem. If I should have overlooked that, please provide a link. Nobody forces you to read these lines, though.
On the first day of his trial, Reinhard Fuellmich vigorously denies embezzlement, claims that his accusers want NOT justice, but to "line their pockets" with the money
From the start, when Fuellmich was seized in Mexico by agents of the German government, this case had a very fishy smell
I will try to find the link. It's not because you don't know something that you have to extrapolite that it doesn't not exist.
I am fighting the cabal and what you are writing now influence others to believe false information so don't tell me those kind of remark that I don't have to read you.
Uwe, my comment was based on my direct experience of the system. My former best friend at a magazine (SPIN, 1987-1997) was weaponized against me after we took on HIV Inc. After I started investigative reporting. I was describing patterns I know because I have lived them. If you can call this living.
I don't have evidence of Trojan horses around Reiner, but I can't imagine they would fail to install ANY.
That would only be believed by somebody NEW to this war. Back at aforementioned magazine, they placed plants and spies even in the copy editing department, and one such saboteur CUT text from galleys with an exact knife. The passages he cut pertained to the toxicity of AZT—this was in the late 80s. Place was crawling with spies, informers, and saboteurs and they did eventually land the publisher, and myself, in court. On charges that were trumped up—Title 7 stuff.
I should be allowed to speak of patterns I've seen in almost 4 decades of this war, without being held up as Exhibit A for Reiner-philic naiveté.
Who are the "three Berlin lawyers?"
Maybe you could correct the spelling of my name. Not a big deal.
I have the utmost respect for your personal experience and work!
Of course my use of the quote was not intended in the way you may think I used it. But it is a very deep and meaningful quote. I chose the illustration because Substack created one the moment I copied the line. I thought it was a good way of crediting and directing traffic your way as well. I am offering to remove it if you prefer.
Sorry for the typo.
The naivete is directed at all of us! Including myself. I just think it is extremely important we find a way of sanely questioning our perception whilst preserving vigilance as well as compassion. It is a tragedy what happens to Reiner Fuellmich, and his family, as it is one which happens to Viviane Fischer and hers.
Uwe, if I over-reacted, and I think I did, I apologize.
I "believe" Reiner is "innocent" (as charged) and I included this belief in the interest of transparency. I do not get a sense Vivian is malicious. I do get a sense there is a sleeper agent in all this, or likely, more than one.
we all know Reiner Fuellmich, in 2023/2024, is about the LAST person who belongs behind bars. Yet he is, behind bars. This is kind of like seeing it through the opposite end of the telescope.
Reiner Fuellmich is in prison.
HUH?
Why? Was this really necessary? Sounds to me like he has a strong case for the soundness of the loans—let's see what unfolds.
Thank you to this article I started to follow you @Celia Farber.
I really loved the beautiful exchange between you and Uwe Alschner. Polite, clear, respectful. We need a lot of this. And I hope that the horrible thing that is happening to Reiner Fuellmich will be cleared up as soon as possible. It is clearly a trap for the freedom fighters, so the money thing has to be clarified asap.
Seconded & AMEN.
So embezzling $750k of DONATIONS should not be an imprisonable offense so long as the perp seems like a good guy and was warning people not to murder themselves with vaccines? What kind of logic is that? You are dangerously naive and lack sound judgment.
And Uwe you don't need courage to present me with facts. You've been perfectly cordial and there is no "daring" here. I reject all this kind of trauma talk, with due respect. We're journalists.
I don't become angry like a zoo tiger, when presented with facts; if they ARE gold backed facts, I become grateful and even happy.
Such facts are vanishingly rare in Reiner's case.
I question, respectfully, your title: "Dangerous Naiveté." What you are publishing are many questions that are open ended. Journalism is supposed to answer questions. Pin facts down. Not just bask in how good it can feel to be the person who HAS all the right questions.
So help us answer the questions Uwe!
I asked YOU as many clear questions as you asked me.
I do not think my naiveté is dangerous. I do think mistrust is dangerous. Isn't it JUST AS "dangerous" to "blindly" trust Reiner's accusers?
As I have said in another answer to a comment, the dangerous naivete is not directed towards you. It is a programmatic call to all of us. But I can tell you that there is a lot of romanticising involved as far as Reiner Fuellmich is concerned. And I do not mean this to apply to you personally, but to the "movement" collectively.
Journalism in my view is to report what is happening. And to hold people responsible in matters of public concern. If questions can be answered factually, they should be reported as such. But if questions remain, then they should be taken for what they are: open questions. Jumping to conclusions is quite dangerous.
The case of the CIC money is of more concern than the case of Reiner Fuellmich, I would say, because it pertains to the integrity of the opposition. As such, it is perfectly in line with the logic of the perpetrators to cause internal fighting. In this respect, I must insist, it has been Reiner Fuellmich who levelled the charges of personal impropriety and indecency against others. And a lot of people have taken it for granted - without any facts provided by him.
This is not to condone the methods applied to Reiner Fuellmich in arresting and indicting him. However, the initial questions remain open. Maybe Reiner Fuellmich could help in answering them, which might be helpful in people regaining lost confidence.
You write: "what I have reported is what Reiner has said." Exactly. This should not be taken as fact. What he says should be taken as what it is. Statements.
Thank you Uwe. I think we are all pretty stressed and prone to hyper-reactivity. I do appreciate your decency and lack of rancor. I already got a few of the questions you listed answered—more soon.
Uwe do you mean before or after Vivian made her initial video calling out Reiner? Who did Reiner accuse, of what—and when? I am taking notes, I am not challenging your statement, just trying to get a time line.
On Sep 2 Viviane made a first statement, which is linked in the article above. She did not call him out. On Sep 8 Reiner responded with allegations against her and Wodarg that are incorrect and misleading . Followed by more personal attacks on Roger Bittel’s channel. These led to Viviane explaining/calling out Reiner Fuellmich in terms of sums of money missing etc.
There was, I would say, a great effort by Fischer/Wodarg/Holzeisen/Kämmerer to limit the fallout. Escalation was coming from Reiner Fuellmich, as far as all evidence between Sep 2 and Sep 21 seems to indicate.
Thank you Uwe. I will review. Much appreciated.
I too appreciate Celia Farber's brave and important work on the AIDS hoax and even bought her book (Serious Adverse Events) for my parents a few months ago. But I appreciate Dr. Uwe Alschner's perspective here. Hundreds of millions if not billions of people have now fallen for an even bigger hoax than AIDS, so it shouldn't surprise us if we discover that groups of astroturfed opposition groups were planned by the evildoers to be part of their big production, with opportunists spontaneously partaking in it (or recruited to participate in it) and chasing the inevitable mountains of donation money that were guaranteed to follow. Füllmich has to date hosted many people, including Ms. Farber herself between his time at Corona Auschuss (CA) and at ICIC. He is quite charming during his shows and he flatters his guests, so I can easily imagine he makes a very positive impression on them (he impressed me). That he would participate in anything unscrupulous is the furthest thing from their mind. So it will be important for Ms. Farber to separate her reporting from her experience as a guest on his show. And I think she must make it explicitly clear in her reporting on Füllmich that she has no conflict of interest (or she must disclose them), e.g. that she received no gifts from him in return for her participation on his show. I highly doubt she did, but she needs to nip that idea in the bud. I would love to see Ms. Farber interview Dr. Wodarg, as I could easily imagine the evildoers wanting him to be well-controlled during the operation, given his background. Yet I wonder how willing the former CA associates will be willing to be interviewed at this point. It still isn't clear to me how CA was established and how and why the initial lawyers in particular were assembled/chosen. And after watching the 1999 ZDF video that Dr. Alschner has pointed out, it dawns on me that I honestly don't know the history of any of the lawyers involved. Given the "court of public opinion" circus that has transpired over the last year regarding CA, it seems that all the lawyers involved are very unprofessional, dilettantes even, and I would never trust any of them with my own needs, much less the prosecution of global crimes against humanity.
After having read the three excellent articles you have published on the Fuellmich - Fisher saga (thank you for your work!) I think that Dangerous Naïveté is one of my problems. Because I found myself with a question beyond the actual accuses to Fuellmich: Why do they needed such a great amount of money? And they kept on asking for donations? The expenses of the committee were not that high, they were starting no trials...so why did they need millions of euros?
Hello there
When you write this statement ¨Why were the 1.3 million going to the people (Antonia Fischer and Justus Hoffman) who had left the CIC almost a year earlier? And why did nobody learn of this before Reiner Fuellmich was apprehended in Mexico. When money from house sales get paid out by a notary the seller must get notified. This would have been long before the 2023 arrest, no?¨
Well this is not true. It is know and explained by Reiner Fuellmich long time ago, more then a year.
I have to tell you that I am sick and tire to read your attack on everybody around.
Mario, I am not attacking everybody around.
And whilst I understand some frustration, it has not been explained by Reiner Fuellmich long ago. That is the problem. If I should have overlooked that, please provide a link. Nobody forces you to read these lines, though.
On the first day of his trial, Reinhard Fuellmich vigorously denies embezzlement, claims that his accusers want NOT justice, but to "line their pockets" with the money
From the start, when Fuellmich was seized in Mexico by agents of the German government, this case had a very fishy smell
MARK CRISPIN MILLER
2 FÉVR. 2024
https://markcrispinmiller.substack.com/p/on-the-first-day-of-his-trial-reinhard
You will find a lot of infortion on Elsa Substack
REINER SPEAKS. In his own words. February 2, 2024 ELSA
2 FÉVR. 2024
https://truthsummit.substack.com/p/reiner-speaks-february-2-2024
Yes. That is not facts, it is statements. Understand this, please.
I don't understand your point. What do you consider as facts?
I will try to find the link. It's not because you don't know something that you have to extrapolite that it doesn't not exist.
I am fighting the cabal and what you are writing now influence others to believe false information so don't tell me those kind of remark that I don't have to read you.