What should it be about this week? The chances of the URT, the Outbreak Repair Team, led by Khadija Arib with members such as Wybren and Pepijn, which supports the members of the parliamentary committee of inquiry? Because who has to do that now... All corona dossier knowledge has disappeared from the House of Representatives.
Or a comparison between the EMA's letter to Engel et al., which shows that the governments have made up their own narrative, and Steve Kirsch's futile attempts to get the FDA and CDC to look at verified, other data than their own studies? In any case, the government institutes have in common that they only test their advice against their own excellent and therefore unapproachable expertise.
Or a more playful piece that explains why the term 'theoretically trained' should be replaced by 'impractically trained'... That might attract the attention of Marianne Zwagerman. But yes, a few days ago I happened to speak to Stan Baggen and he didn't know about my article, about his piece in Trouw. I had thought that it would end up with him.
So here is a slightly more detailed report of my introduction to the youth programme of the Anne Frank House.
The good works of the Anne Frank House
I attended a presentation afternoon of the Anne Frank House. Head of the Education Department · Anne Frank House, Norbert Winterleitner, explained the purpose of the youth programme, whose participants were going to present their projects. The aim of this programme is to make young people aware of universal rights so that they can guard against the signals that started in the 1930s. He specifically mentioned:
- Exclusion of groups of people
- violation of human rights
- Restrictions on freedom of expression
- A government that decides where you belong
"OK, now we're going to get it" I thought for a moment.
During various talks, there were sporadic hints at the dark times in which we live, but this was referring to the results of the recently held democratic elections.
Not a word about the past four years, not a word. I mentioned that to this and that in the after-drink, but I was then told that it was really 'something completely different' and that 'the intentions were really good'. That confirmed the problem for me. Not naming it, not wanting to see what is happening because 'the intentions are good' and 'they have our best interests at heart'. Because it's in the paper. And there we have that damned trust again. The credulity that keeps everything superficial.
This is precisely the behaviour that I had expected the Anne Frank House to be keen on. But they are in the middle of it themselves, they march along in the narrative. Their own key points are being violated and they just don't see it.
I was also cautiously told that the subject was actually not very suitable to discuss here, which caused bad blood, which in turn raised questions for me about how freely we can still speak. When they also excused it with 'yes and afterwards it's easy to talk, they had to do something, they didn't know, nothing was known yet', then I couldn't help but think of 'wir haben es nicht gewusst'. I didn't say that out loud.
In retrospect, I realized that I had missed the Nuremberg Code. It seemed quite relevant to me, but it was not mentioned. I think they think that is a 'too far-from-my-bed-show' for the enthusiastic young people, among whom I suspect a high vaccination rate. But it was an instructive visit. It has always been powerful to address the most committed young people at an early stage and to put them right in the right direction in youth groups.
What an intriguing rollercoaster it was again, this week. And to think that people go on holiday to experience something.
Enough about that. I spent most of my writing time on something else: the Dutch subtitles for a German lecture by emeritus Professor Sucharit Bhakdi.
An intense lecture by Sucharit Bhakdi
When it became known a few months ago that the vaccines were contaminated and that the production method and the composition of the vaccines rolled out was different from the production method and the composition of the approved vaccines, governments and their failing institutes could have retraced their steps. After all, these were actually new facts of which they could have said: "we didn't know that, that could explain everything". Steve Kirsch said that right away, Campbell I think too, later.
Watch the video below with Sucharit Bhakdi and realize that despite the pile of available and unrefuted scientific evidence about the dangers of the vaccines, neither governments nor their institutions have made a U-turn. So they let this moment pass. Bhakdi says at the end of the video that they can still pull their heads out of the noose, but it is already clear that they are not going to do that. There are misdeeds that are so serious that you know that your head will have to go back into that noose. There's no turning back now. Every wrongdoing is now committed knowingly, with premeditation.
The evidence that the study reports and thus the approval of the vaccines related to a different product than the vaccines rolled out should have been sufficient for withdrawal. Despite this, there is a lot of stubbornness. We should have known: the WPG with its 'toolbox' full of social coercive instruments is also being honoured, while it is clear how nonsensical and even harmful the measures are that the pharma minister so desperately wanted to have in his hands.
Does Sucharit Bhakdi know what he's talking about?
From 1972 onwards, Bhakdi conducted research into the functioning of the body's non-specific defence mechanisms at the Max Planck Institute for Immunobiology in Freiburg. He contributed to a better understanding of the mechanisms by which molecules in the blood render foreign substances harmless. In 1978, Bhakdi discovered a protein that attacks and damages cells by sinking into the cell membrane. This was the 'maintenance molecule', which is formed on the surface of foreign cells as a result of a chain reaction involving the immune system. This was followed by the discovery that bacteria, in turn, can produce similar proteins. In 1984, the Royal Society in London invited Bhakdi to present his concept of cell membrane damage. From then on, Bhakdi focused on research on this topic.
Memberships & Features
- Member of the Collaborative Research Centres of the German Research Foundation "Proteins as Tools in Biology" at the University of Giessen (1987-1990),
- Deputy Spokesman of the Immunopathogenesis Research Centre (1990-1999)
- Spokesperson for the Collaborative Research Center "490 Infection and Persistence in Infections" in Mainz (2000-2011).
- Co-founder and board member of the Association of Physicians and Scientists for Health, Freedom and Democracy, which was founded in May 2020 and lost its non-profit status in October 2020. The aim of the association is to take action against the measures taken by the German government to contain the corona pandemic.
In the autumn of 2020, he was one of the first signatories of the "Call for Free Debate Spaces" (Appell für freie Debattenräume [de], a German adaptation of the project "A Letter on Justice and Open Debate" by the American Thomas C. Williams, previously launched in the US).
He was editor-in-chief of Medical Microbiology and Immunology from 1990 to 2012.
Bhakdi has been retired for some time. All the medical institutes mentioned above have cancelled him. Read on Wikipedia how he is dismissed as an anti-Semite. Hello Anne Frank House...? They play your trump cards. Good intentions or not, you shouldn't have let this happen.
Watch the video of Sucharit Bhakdi with English subtitles. There are some mistakes in it, but it is easy to follow. The original (without Dutch subtitles) is on YouTube, including the text of this article, also as a Dutch version.
An updated transcript can be found here here, including the text of this article, also as a Dutch version.
The 2nd Corona Symposium of the AfD parliamentary group in the German Bundestag took place on 11 and 12 November 2023. For two days, renowned experts such as Prof Dr Sucharit Bhakdi, Prof Dr Stefan Homburg, Prof Dr Andreas Sönnichsen, Dr Ronald Weikl, Dr Gunter Frank, data analyst Tom Lausen, Prof Dr Paul Cullen and pathologist Prof Dr Walter Lang made the event an unforgettable experience for all involved thanks to their high level of expertise.
The statements made during the symposium reflect the opinion of the speaker in question.
Via the official YT channel of the AfD parliamentary group in the German Bundestag
Thanks again for this article again Herman.
By the way, the video has already been removed. Maybe replace it with a version of Rumble?
It's Anton this time, not Herman. But thanks anyway, Arnoud.
The video does it again!
Hahaha. Sorry. 😉 Thnx. 🙂
Again a good article Anton. And thanks for the translation. Thanks in part to you, I keep up to date with the vaccination genocide. Please keep going.
When exactly was this lecture of Bhakdi given and who were the people present in the room?
Good question! I've added that at the bottom of the article, just above the video.
I read in this, in a nutshell, that there may be at least two very harmful effects of the vaccines
1: creating too long a period of continuous reactions of the immune system (which eventually weakens the immune system itself)
2: foreign DNA can enter the body that will reside in the cell nucleus and go along with cell division. The cells are then eventually seen as foreign and therefore attacked by the immune system.
Is this a bit true?
Sure, and there's a few more to come, but at the heart of it all, you've completely understood!
If you've had those, the damage will continue permanently, won't it? I am very worried, look forward to your reply.
What I wonder is: whether this will be a very slow process or whether this process can play out differently for different people. Of course, the vaccine has only been around for almost 3 years. It is an extraordinarily complicated event that only makes me dizzy as a layman. That's how many questions I have. By the way, also the disease itself in addition to the vaccine. What part does the disease itself have, as side effects because I don't find it at all implausible that the virus has been tinkered with and it has escaped from a lab. So two double misery.
Well, there is now also a lot of reporting about the reasons why so many people voted for the PVV. It is clear that the Rutte cabinets have caused a lot of dissatisfaction. Many reasons are mentioned, but I have not yet seen the technocratic, hateful and discriminatory model practices of Hugo, Rutte and co. And yet, millions are still angry about it. I hope Pieter Omtzigt still has it on his list.
That Bhakdi clearly has no idea what he's talking about. The scientific insights of lightweights like Hugo carry more weight. 'We don't know exactly what's in a frikandel either'. In Germany, of course, you have the same idiots, such as Lauterbach.
Yesterday I went to Apeldoorn at BLCKBX. It's fun and admirable what Flavio and his team do. With admiration we looked at the team of the Doctors Collective, with whom a valuable panel discussion was held about healthcare. What worries me is that they are still seen as anti-vaxxers and obstructionists. Hannah Visser cannot become chairman because otherwise she will lose her job. Berufsverbot, and then we're back to your first topic. A few 100 kindred spirits, 'awake' as Flavio calls them.
Strange times, Anton.
Yes, but they (the Government) had to do something and they didn't know it. How is it possible that a very ordinary citizen without superintelligence knew in no time that there had already been studies by doctors and scientists and not the least that showed us what was really going on and completely different from what our Government told us. They must have known. I would have liked to have told the people of that foundation, but I stopped. I'm not really allowed to say it, because it can come across as arrogant, but I can't see it any other way than: they're stupid. Oil-stupid. That's what I've kept from the corona period.
Well, I think that's the key question: why do some people see it, and others (the majority) don't? Has only a limited amount to do with intelligence.
According to Mattias de Smet, around 80% of a population usually follows a narrative. Can also be 80-90, it doesn't really matter. Mass formation, often fueled by fear. This fear is deliberately created.
Like you, I've been skeptical from the start, and the more you see, the more you read, the more you experience, the firmer the conviction that it's no good. It goes from a feeling of distrust to a well-founded opinion. I can defend that opinion to anyone who believes in the government narrative. But I never get the opportunity.
I read Mattias' book and asked him exactly this question via email: what is the difference between these 10-20% skeptics and between the 80-90% followers? He doesn't know that either.
All I know is that from an early age I have been curious, have always wanted to understand things and have always been a bit cross. Perhaps the same is true for the other skeptics.
'We' see the madness so clearly, we don't have to convince each other of it anymore. It's maddening to see that so few people see through it, and then you start to think they're stupid indeed. No one knows exactly how that works. I'm glad that we can exchange ideas on sites like this one without being judged.
Ik heb vandaag nog eens het verhaal van de kleine prins, gehoord (deze keer, ipv gelezen), misschien is hier het verschil tussen die 80% en 20% uit te analyseren…
https://youtu.be/5wvgJePdZ7s?feature=shared
Hi Anton,
I'm participating in a study by the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), but only to know how they cheat.
And they do blood tests every year :-), useful to know if I have had Corona, not once according to the tests but I have had the flu twice, once heavy and 1 time mild, which were very different from before. My virus may have escaped from somewhere else.
Here are some links of info I get:
According to Vasco, the side effects are very rare, reliable research you think.
https://www.rivm.nl/corona/coronaprik/bijwerkingen
https://www.rivm.nl/vasco/resultaten
Curious would then perhaps be the answer why a small percentage does not follow the narrative. Not curious about what the neighbor does or says in his or her spare time, to name just one example, but curious about how things work. The how, what, where and the why. I do think that there is a head on that small percentage, including myself. Because it strikes me very much that people are not curious at all in the sense as I indicated. It could very well be that the majority of the people could live just fine in a dictatorship.
If you want to see how that feels, I recommend the movie Total Trust (at the suggestion of the fourth wave). Should actually see the law bown, because that's how it can very well end. Also here. There is more of a hierarchical culture in China than here, but a totalitarian system can also emerge here. And technology helps with that. The QR code that was introduced because of the covid 'pandemic' is used there to block people. Unfortunately, this is not a scary future, but a reality. I've mentioned this one before I think, but it doesn't hurt me:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBfoAn2WrX8&ab_channel=FilmMovement
This is just a hypothesis: you learn from your parents that the NOS news is reliable and brings the "facts". And you learn that the government does lie about some things, but that when it comes down to it, they have your best interests at heart, they don't want you dead... Then you grow up, you get a smartphone, you work your ass off, you have children, they have to go to ballet, football, etc. and as soon as all those things have happened, you plop down on the couch and watch the news, which you think, because your parents (and others) once told you, is reliable....
Oh, no... they won't lie...
At school you didn't learn to think for yourself, your smartphone does that for you...
Just some empathy with the people who think it is/was all true... Curiosity has been rammed out! It's all about "fitting in", and you don't want to stand out... So don't go against the majority and/or go along with any narrative...
Just like in WWII... Hitler came up with horrible things, the people (in Germany) worshipped him, because there were free bratwurst und bier parties...
I think it's curiosity combined with a healthy dose of suspicion and skepticism about the reliability of those above us that make us belong to the 10-20%. From the moment I saw the images of people falling over (it was always the same 2 people; one fell and one was already lying down) I knew; 'Oh, they want to sell a drug'. Then came the info that this is only one aspect of the power grab. I wonder what will happen if forced vaccinations, authorized and ordered by the WHO, take place. Exciting, 'more angry times' lie ahead.
It's so unpredictable that so many don't (want to) see it.
One of the things I keep doing is trying to "connect" and make them think.
So from now on I try to ask them a question instead of giving them an opinion.
That's the beauty of our brains: ask a question and "the system" automatically goes to work thinking.
I've also never had so many social media accounts and been active on them. Now I use it to post links to documentaries, interviews, etc etc every week, I know that friends/colleagues etc watch it every now and then, it does spread drop by drop.
If only one "wakes up", they will do the same thing again, i.e. try to make others think, etc.
It is spreading steadily.
In short, my tip / request: keep sharing / posting info.
If they don't want to see it through Corona, then maybe through the "climate crisis".
Sooner or later, more and more people start to think about all the absurdity that is happening in society.
Propaganda prikexperiment, oversterfte, oorlogen sponsoren, vluchtelingenstroom creëren, CO2 & klimaat nonsense, insects & fake lab food, schandaal na schandaal na schandaal.
** (leer te leggen = neer te leggen)