I'll be very surprised if any of the courts they've filed in take this up. As near as I can tell, all the stuff in the ICC complaint has already been examined by several courts that found no cause to proceed. I couldn't find any links to the assumed filing in other courts on two continents. I'm pretty sure that filing a complaint doesn't guarantee a court date,
The ICC has taken a little flak in recent years over prosecuting mostly cases against black warlords, so who knows? Maybe they'll take this just to counter that narrative, but I'm pretty sure they would just dismiss all of these charges.
Unless of course Dr. Fuellmich has some evidence to back up all the things he says he believes. That would be great to see, but I'm not getting my hopes up. Much of what he says is just leading and loaded with trigger words, and reads (to me) like a publicity stunt.
Reiner Fuellmich has carefully documented on video almost the entirety of his investigation. A quick search on Odysee will provide you dozens of videos of his interrogations and reveal the testimony and data he has amassed. If you doubt any of his claims, and I do not, because I have seen much of the evidence that supports his charges, you should really have a look.
Regardless of whether the ICC or any courts remain available for us to redress our grievances, not one of Fuellmich's claims are empty or overstated. If anything I would add many names to the list, and charges to the levy. If we have no just courts left we have recourse to, we have always the final remedy at law, which the will of the people effected by their own hands.
Frankly, the courts would surely be more merciful than will we injured by the harms Fuellmich has carefully documented, and that documentation is just as available for our use as it is for just courts.
I'll be surprised if you do inform yourself with the available information. If you were the kind of person to inform yourself before judging, you would have long known of the availability of this information, and would have seen it. If you get your information from your would be masters, you have been disinformed. Fuellmich's investigation is a completely sufficient cure for that problem. You might recall Mark Twain's comment regarding information, to the effect that if you read the papers you're misinformed, but it you don't you're uninformed.
If you want to be informed, look at what Reiner Fuellmich has published on Odysee.
That's on you. Here's the latest I could find:
https://odysee.com/@FTC-NL-CORONA-ACTIVISME:c/Reiner-F%C3%BCllmich-21-01-2022---FTC-NL:b
What I have seen (and that poorly translated 5 hour video was no different) is that he has some proof that very few people suffered adverse reactions, up to and including death, after receiving the vaccine. What he does not have is proof that those adverse reactions were an intentional result of the vaccine. He has proof that a bad batch of vaccines led to an abnormally high number of adverse reactions. He does not have proof that the batch of vaccines was intentionally tampered with. His belief that the distribution of different levels of vaccine components was to test the mortality threshold of the vaccine is not proof: dosage experimentation is part of the testing process for every new medication.
Let's be clear, I'm not saying that any part of this pandemic was handled well, or that all the handling was above-board. I'm saying that all of his evidence (or any of the substantiated evidence I've seen) only proves a standard level of incompetence, it doesn't come anywhere NEAR proving a depopulation agenda. HIS OWN NUMBERS do not support (in my opinion) such an agenda. If the early mortality rate of people who've received the vaccine gets over 15%, he might have a leg to stand on. Since there is no evidence yet that early mortality rate among the vaccinated is on an upward trend, I think it's unlikely to happen.
I did watch many of the videos, before your suggestion. If you had bothered to comprehend my initial comment, or look at any one of my posts outside of the d.buzz community, you could have easily surmised that. I don't just watch them, I use the LBRY desktop app and actually host them. I won't watch all of them, because I figure it's a waste of my time. They all just harp on the same evidence that several courts have already said is insufficient, and they are right!. If he presents smoking gun evidence in one, I'm sure people like yourself will make sure that it does not go unnoticed, and I'll give it a look.
If you want to know what REAL tyranny looked like during a pandemic, look back at history. Just 100 years ago, in both the US and the UK, state forces would round up whole communities, force people into isolation, and forcibly give people shots of a 'vaccine' that sometimes had a mortality rate as high as 40%. Here is just one exaple:
https://www.npr.org/2011/04/05/135121451/how-the-pox-epidemic-changed-vaccination-rules
I'll leave you with this: You're never going to be 'informed' by taking all your information from just one source (as you've suggested I do here, placing all your 'knowledge' at the feet of Dr. Fullmich), you're only going to be indoctrinated. The counter-narrative that you're adhering so devoutly to is still part of the official narrative. It's rule #1 of being in control... own both sides of the debate. Just because you're on the other side, doesn't mean you aren't being controlled.
I very much appreciate the unexpected courtesy and substance of your reply. I am very happy you undertake to pay some attention to the information. I will point out a slight misunderstanding you have regarding the 'hot lots' of jabs. It is not one bad lot, but several, and split amongst manufacturers.
As you note, were it just one bad batch, that could certainly be a manufacturing problem. It's not.
Here's an article that provides specifics which seem to nominally show intent and deliberate harm. I note that folks who are dependent on their support for the jab agenda for the suppression of their inchoate anxiety will find facts that show that agenda is a crime against humanity will find such facts an intolerable threat to their felicity. Your comment I originally replied to indicated to me you were amongst that number, but this one indicates I may have misinterpreted your situation. I do hope I was wrong, and that you remain capable of being right rather than dependent on defending your position at all costs.
While we seem to write rather similarly, I note we seem to come to different conclusions. I think that's fine. I'm happy about it. If you only agree with me on everything you will never teach me anything I don't know, and that would be tragic. You have already taught me things I didn't know, and I am grateful. I hope I return the favor, and you are benefited thereby.
Thanks!
Thank you for that article link, which had everything I'm typically looking for (except links to the studies themselves) in a publication that claims to be news.
The information here wouldn't be enough for a conviction in my opinion, but it should be enough to get warrants. A good angle for them to use (which even the article didn't mention) is how 'conveniently' the bad batches end up in poor communities, even when it presents a significant logistical hurdle to deployment of that batch. It is likely that somebody sorted batches that were outside (or barely within) spec to areas where there would be less blowback from higher than average adverse reactions. If they could find some proof that this happened, they could probably get some state AGs to take up criminal charges. AG James here in NY seems to have a real hard-on for big pharma.
Unfortunately, what I think is most likely to happen is that at best, there will be some civil liability suits, they'll settle out with NDAs, and some of the victim's families will recieve small checks.
I can't thank you enough for your well written reply. So far, everyone I've had these kind of discussions with has muted me. It's normal for reasonable people to see the same things through the same fileters and STILL come to different conclusions. Everybody has to weigh their knowledge against their experience and their desires, to come to their conclusions. Even people who see facts the same way will have different experiences, and desires, and won't necessarily agree on how they react to those facts. The important thing is to remember that we don't have to agree on everything to get along, we just have to agree to respect each other's decisions.
Thank you for your comment! We completely agree - it's a long shot, but at least someone is taking it :-)
I don't begrudge the guy trying, I just think that if he was really sincere he would be striking at the policies that allow this shit to happen, not a bunch of people who've already proven immune to prosecution under the current system. Rules need to be changed to hold people visible and accountable, we've known this for decades. If he manages to get any of his current filings heard, or decides to pursue the laws that protect the powerful (not just from prosecution, but scrutiny), I'll give him more attention. For now, to me, my intuition says this looks like bread and circuses.
But maybe it's just that I'm old enough to be more jaded than most.
I hear ya!!