The last thirty minutes seem to be heavily focused on spiritual awakening, which is the same lie that Satan told Eve – ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil. I was delivered from new-age religion many years ago. It is a false light. The only true light is Jesus Christ. The world will get worse, as the current god of this world is Satan. Satan has his satanic angels influencing the world leaders, and we hate them and would never think of praying for them. I am guilty of this myself, but that’s because it’s carnal thinking.

The problem is sin, that’s why Jesus came to die in our place because sin is our separation before a Holy God. See the video: Are you sure of heaven?

We should all awaken up from our slumber believing that we can fix any of what has happened this past two years. The solution can only come from God’s Word. Reading the Word of God, fellowship, praying for leaders, and also prayer and fasting are powerful against the spiritual warfare, Ephesians 6:12. Faith is what moves God.

However, I will still provide the full transcription recording, but please know that God loves you, and wants to free you from the bondage of trying to fix this world through good works. Change in this world can only come when more people see their need for Jesus and trust in Him through faith.

SPEAKERS

Rui Fonsca E Castro, Eleonore Pauwels, Franklin D Kramer, Mary Lee, Patrick M. Wood, Klaus Schwab, Virginie De Araujo Recchia, Nita Farahany, N. Ana Garner, Viviane Fischer, Bjorn Pirrwitz, Project Veritas, Christian Kreiss, Benita Black, Leslie Manookian, Reiner Fuellmich, Khalilah Mitchell, Interviewer, Covid-19 Vaccine Victim, Chris Cole, Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt

Rui Fonsca E Castro 0:14
Good evening. Summary of day four of the Grand Jury investigation of the court of public opinion, February 2020. Several experts took yesterday the opportunity to talk about so called vaccines. More precisely, Dr (inaudible), Dr. Vanessa Schmidt-Kruger, Dr. Deanna McLeod’s. Dr Sucharit Bhakti, Dr. Mike Yeadon, Dr. Antionietta Gatti, Professor Arne Burkhardt mentioned the following – the unprecedented adverse reaction numbers with these injections and the increasing of illness in injected people. If Wuhan variant was extinct without the vaccine, why are they checking people for something that is not around anymore? It was not by mistake that for two years the sole answer to COVID-19 has been repeatedly the vaccine. There was no assessment of epidemic dynamics, the injection campaigns have been followed by an increase of deaths from COVID-19. Spike protein not only is a hotspot for mutations, but also extremely toxic.

The repeated boosting is destroying people’s immunity system, knowing from us who are vaccine can be effective against a respiratory virus, (inaudible) they have their own immunity system. No mRNA vaccines were before used in humans. The Pfizer trial should have been quite an invalid since they were full of manipulation and irregularities. There were also, in the trial, several adverse events which should have been reason [enough] to stop them. Not only the spike protein, but also the lipids in the substance are highly toxic. The spike protein doesn’t stay in the muscle but spreads through the entire body and to the bloodstream. These injection effects which are toxic by design, aren’t a mistake but intentional. There is the high probability that the content in the vials are different between them. The analysis of some vials shows the presence of technological developed nano entities. Autopsies performed on dead people showed a high probability that they died from the effects of the spike protein in the body.

And then Meredith Miller and Ariane Bilheran talked about the mental health issues of people that comply to tyranny, and how the cognitive dissonance and Stockholm syndrome toi increase it by confinements play a role in the Organising submission we have seen during the past two years. This was the summary of day four of the grand jury. Thank you.

Reiner Fuellmich 3:24
Good evening. Good morning, good day, tonight’s session of the Grand Jury model proceeding will deal with finances and economics. The question is why of course? Well, Corona is a distraction, a diversionary tactic, with the help of Corona people are brought into panic mode, so that they will focus only on Corona and will not be able to see anything else. Well, what is this anything else? The other side, the Davos clique or Mr. Global’s megalomaniac desire to gain full control over humanity? One of the means to gain full control over the people is are the measures. In particular, of course, the so called vaccinations, which we looked into last night? Why is this being rolled out now. We know it’s not about health. Why is this whole Corona scare being rolled out now? Well, that seems to have to do with the financial system being about to collapse after the other side has been looting and plundered it for decades, maybe longer.

The financial system, it appears, is the US dollar and the euro currency. Both are on the verge of collapsing. And that is because the people who are responsible for Corona have been responsible for looting and plundering and therefore bringing the financial system close to a collapse. Apart from the introduction of the digital passport, which is one major means of gaining full control over the people, there is the issue of digital currency. That’s why even those of us who have never been interested in finance and economics should now take a closer look. After all, it’s about pension funds being completely broke, and healthcare systems being so expensive that only rich people can afford them. That’s why it’s justified to take a closer look into the finances into the devastation that has been caused by those who now need Corona to divert our attention from this. We will start tonight with hearing Patrick Wood who will explain the basics, the geopolitical or historical backdrop of what we’re dealing with. Patrick.

Patrick M. Wood 6:13
Okay, coming on here. Thank you. We got all the technology straightened out here. I’m going to share my screen with you if that’s okay.

Reiner Fuellmich 6:22
Sure.

Patrick M. Wood 6:24
And hopefully it’s gonna work the first time. Here we go. All right. Hopefully everybody can see this just fine. I’ve got a lot of things to put into my presentation here to kind of kick this off today. I’m very pleased to be presenting this information with so many great colleagues, you all have given me new reading assignments. Your collective works will be next on my list, I’m afraid. I am Patrick Wood. I’m the editor and producer of Technocracy.News, a website that is dedicated to the critical analysis of economic affairs as it relates to technocracy. And I want to start out, we’re asking the question. Is capitalism in general on the world stage under fire? Is it being targeted for death? Well, here’s a statement by a prominent member of the World Economic Forum. He is the chief executive officer of Salesforce, Marc Benioff. And he said on January 24 [2020], at the Davos meeting, “Capitalism as we have known it is dead”.

That’s a bold statement. That was followed up at the same meeting by a presentation by Angela Merkel. And she said that “capitalism is the worst of all possible economic systems”. You can see the pre disposition that exists within the World Economic Forum, at least, which is very closely tied to the United Nations, by the way, and all the topics surrounding sustainable development. We’re gonna go through some of those, and I’ll explain it to you. This is kind of a difficult thing to understand, I suppose lots of information. But I just want to say, it just may have been a coincidence that only four days later, January 30, 2020, World Health Organisation stepped up there to Public Health Emergency of International Concern. That’s when the pandemic really started to spin up. And of course, it was a few weeks after that, that they actually declared a pandemic condition. It was a multi step process to get to that point of total declaration, but this is where it started. It would appear that the people at the World Economic Forum welcomed this crisis this emergency, because if capitalism were not altogether dead at that point, it was about to be. The rest of it, the active murder was about to be taking place there.

I want to take you back in history to 1974 where to use a phrase that Klaus Schwab likes to use, we need to reimagine our world. Well, globalisation was reimagined in 1974. This was an important sea change I think many people missed but one of the original founding members and very prominent members of the Trilateral Commission Professor Richard Gardner, wrote an article that appeared in Foreign Affairs called “The Hard Road to World Order”. And in it he wrote this, in short, the “house of world order” will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great “booming buzzing confusion”. We can say amen to that today. But an end-run around national sovereignty eroding a piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old fashioned frontal assault. Now I want to say that I’m not going to go into any detail on this, you’ll have to read some of my books or others, whatever to pick up what were those frontal assaults that occurred before 1970, for instance?

Well, they didn’t work, whatever they were, we could talk about it, I’m not going to take time now. Those old fashioned frontal assaults were put on the shelf for a period of time to execute a strategy and a policy of an end run around national sovereignty. And it wasn’t just for America, it was for all the nations of the world. This plan has been underway ever since that time when when he wrote this, and this is a major change because they love the frontal assault approach and they just realised it wasn’t getting him anywhere. We have returned back to that old era now where the frontal assault is preferred over the end run assault, and we see this in our face now, everywhere you look.

So I want to talk about the genesis of modern globalisation in just a minute, even if this sounds a little bit redundant or boring, you’ll get it as we go along. And I’ve only got 20 minutes and I’ll be on it. 1970. So Zbigniew Brzezinski, the brilliant political scientist at Columbia University. Brilliant, I say didn’t agree a word he said, but he’s brilliant. He published a book Between Two Ages: America’s role in the Technetronic Era. I mentioned not the word Technetronic after this, but rather technocratic. But this was the book that set the stage for modern globalisation. In 1973, the Trilateral Commission was founded by David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski to create what they called, at the time a “new international economic order”. This was all over their literature, not my phrase. In 1974. what less than a year actually it’s only six months after the Trilateral Commission was founded. The United Nations steps up with General Resolution 3201, you can look it up if you want, called the Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order, exactly the same phrase.

Now, we know historically that the Rockefeller family and the United Nations have had a very cosy relationship. And it was not surprising that the United Nations would be the chosen tool to provide the contagion to take this doctrine around the world to all the other nations of the planet. So in 1978, just kind of have to bring this in passing through, China was brought onto the world economic stage by Zbigniew Brzezinski, who at the time by then was a national security adviser to President James Earl Carter. Carter also, and his Vice President Walter Mondale, were members of the same commission, their cabinet all but one member of the Carter’s cabinet were members of the Trilateral Commission. They drugged a whole lot of them into our government structure at that time. But it was Zbigniew Brzezinski, who brought Chairman Deng into the world stage again, on behalf of China.

Then we go into the maturing of modern globalisation. 1987, Trilateral Commission member, Gro Harlem Brundtland from Norway, published a book called Our Common Future. It was part of the final result of the so called Brundtland Commission, that the United Nations has sponsored. And she was the one since then who has been hailed for the creation of the Sustainable Development doctrine that has being pushed actually ever since then to the world through the United Nations. So when 1992 when the United Nations met in Rio de Janeiro, as the so called first Earth Summit, the Sustainable Development doctrine was adopted as Agenda 21. That’s what it was called. And you see these different synonyms coming in as a kind of go through here, sustainable development is equivocal to Agenda 21, and there’s some other phrases too. In the year 2000, the United Nations met in New York to create eight Millennium Goals, they called them, for sustainable development. In other words, how to implement sustainable development. That was a 15 year term that they were given. So naturally, in 2015, another meeting was held in Addis Ababa to create the 2030 agenda, which would rule for the next 30 years, which takes us to the year 2030 from 2015. And they created a 17 set of points of sustainable development goals. I’m not going to go into what all those goals are, they’re easily discovered on the internet and you can go find out what they are.

Then, the next person to appear on the stage in the same year 2015 was a lady by the name of Christiana Figueres who at the time was heading up the Paris Climate Change Agreement that made a big splash back in those days. And she was the one that drove the whole process. She was very energetic, I have to say, she was a master organiser. And she brought the nations of the world together to create the Global Paris Climate Accord. At the time, her title was Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. I don’t know how you would fit that on a business card, but that was quite a title. She gave a press conference in 2015, and here [is] what she said. And here is the threat to kill capitalism. This is important to establish motive, and also things like threats. She wrote, no sorry, she said, this was a press conference, a verbal press conference, it was transcribed. She said, this is the first time in the history of mankind, that we’re setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been raining for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution. Now, these are very pointy words, there’s no way to read these except that they had an intention. They had a motive. And they declared what that was, They didn’t, of course, give what the timetable was, but they had a timetable as well. I’m no criminal lawyer, but if I was, I would be highly suspicious of this whole statement, that they have just declared that there’s criminal intent here to you know, to kill, they got motive, they got intention, they have a timetable. Next question is, do they have the ability to do it. And of course, we kind of know now, if they don’t complete, they do have they did have the ability to do it, and they are doing it now.

So the 2030 Agenda document that was produced at that time, in paragraph 28, I just mention this in passing because this reinforces what she was saying. It said, we commit to making fundamental changes in the way that our societies produce and consume goods and services. This was a sea change for the economic system. Nobody really understood at the time, I don’t think what that was, but sustainable development was at the heart of it. And you will remember thinking back that for all of the emergencies we’ve had, for instance, global warming and climate change alarmism, etc, they have only offered one possible solution to the whole, whatever it was, the whole thing presenting [to] the world and that is sustainable development. It’s always there’s never a Plan B it’s always well we have this big problem. We have global warming, we have a pandemic. So what we need is sustainable development. That ought to be a tell right there that something’s wrong with this picture, because intelligent men and women will always discuss things through until there’s option A, B, and C at least, and maybe more. And then those are debated. So I want to just run through just for a second, what is sustainable development so that you can have some idea of what’s going on here.

The claim generally, I’m summarising I mean 1000s of pages of documents, I’m sure by the United Nations, but the claim is made that non renewable resources must be terminated, because after all they’re going to run out anyway so we might as well just let them run out early, while newly discovered renewable resources must be managed and allocated to society. So this is again a huge change in thinking about what the economic system is, and you’ll see some distinctives on the left column and right column in my table. First, the Sustainable Development column, which I argue in my books is actually warmed over technocracy from the 19th for the 20th century. Sustainable Development and or technocracy if you use either one interchangeably, proposes the scientific management of resources and consumption, whereas capitalism and free market economics posits a price based free market economy determined by supply and demand. This has been the way the world has run, by the way, throughout its entire history. There’s never been anything else, there have been variations of it, but it’s always the same.

Secondly, FinTech. FinTech best financial technologies contracted is an underlying financial system that the United Nations has declared is the financial system for sustainable development. That includes blockchain, digital currencies, total surveillance and a bunch of other things as well. Capitalism, on the other hand, is a currency based or depends on currency based capital. And that is the underlying financial system that we have today and have had for centuries. Under sustainable development there’s no private property provided for whatsoever. Resources are to be held, that is all resources of the world are to be held in a global common trust for the use of the world through those companies that would be chosen to make goods and services to deliver to us consumers. Capitalism, on the other hand, provides for ownership and the use of private property that is a fundamental right in a capitalist system to own property. In fact, the ability to own property has been argued by many, many economists over the ages, that is the singular most important factor in economic development throughout the world. Lastly, under sustainable development, there’s no privacy allowed. Of course, in capitalism, free market economics, privacy is a fundamental right and is actually necessary for the proper functioning of capitalism. There’s a number of reasons for that I won’t go into them right now, but I just want you to get a sense of some of the differences between capitalism free market economics and what sustainable development is.

Now, having said that,I want to just clearly make the point that sustainable development, which I will argue is technocracy from even back as far as the 1930s is 100 percent incompatible with free market economics and capitalism. When I say incompatible, I mean, it’s like matter and antimatter, it’s like oil and water, they do not mix, they never will mix because they are other worldly to each other. It’s like somebody from Mars coming to earth wanting to live and vice versa, but it’s not gonna happen. When they collide in economic space, economic gangrene sets in, there are so many examples of this. And again, for the sake of time, I’m not gonna go into them, you can discover them pretty easily by yourself, where you see, for instance, the green New Deal, big thing in the world we have it here in America here, the green New Deal whenever that hits traditional concepts of capitalism, or free market economics, that’s when the gangrene sets in and things start to rot.

Unfortunately, for these usurpers of this new system, capitalism just will not die a natural death. They would like it to die a natural death. This was the case back in 1932 when technocracy was originally designed. The Great Depression is a horrible time, and the group of scientists that created it at Columbia University were certain that capitalism was dead, and that they and they alone could come to the rescue and design a brand new economic system from scratch that would be a scientifically operated system. In any case, because capitalism just would not die a natural death, then we have the result like this. Signs like this started appearing around the world, kill capitalism before it kills the planet. This has been a masterful propaganda hit job. That didn’t just stop with Mark Benoiff at the World Economic Forum, but it was it was spread out to all of the alarmist community, whatever around the world. And you started to see, yep, we certainly need to kill capitalism, it needs to die an untimely death.

So what are some of the ways to kill capitalism to destroy it in free market economics, I listed nine things here, there may be a couple of more, but you will recognise these as being really kind of the hinge pins for any for our economic system in the world to work. And I hope at the same time that you’re going to see that all of these areas, every single one has been corrupted, to some extent. Some more than others, perhaps, but here’s the first one, withdraw energy from the economic system. All economic activity requires energy inputs. That’s an that’s a given. I mean, that’s so intuitive. You hardly even have to state it. But without gasoline, your car doesn’t run without energy, the economy doesn’t work. So if you withdraw energy, like for instance, hey, let’s kill call this kill oil this kill natural gas, let’s kill everything else except for windmills and solar panels and whatever to energise the world, you see they’re withdrawing energy from the system.

Here’s the next one, withdraw resources, create shortages of commodities and materials. Heaven knows we’re living this right now. We have huge shortages ahead. Not because there are real shortages, I might add. These are manufactured or contrived shortages that are being blamed for economic woes, but they’re being withdrawn and for instance, the price of lumber is as high as it’s ever been short of a building season in the spring, at least in the north. Well are there any less trees in the forest?You know, in North America or Canada, we know there’s plenty of trees, there’s lots of timber, but they tell us there’s a shortage.

Okay, here’s the next one, corrupt the supply chain. Well, commodities and products have to be transported, even if it’s just on a local basis or international, it doesn’t matter. There needs to be transportation. That supply chain has been an age old concept. But it’s been changed according to modern globalisation to where supply chain now is a very intricate, delicate affair. And if of course, even though it’s being curtailed, right now, it does not mean that it’s going to die and forever be curtailed. For the time being, however, the supply chain is being totally disrupted. And there’s absolutely no doubt.

Here’s the next one withdraw labour. All economic activity requires labour inputs. So what have we had in the last two years here, we’ve had a massive withdrawal of people from the labour force. We’ve had a massive drop in productivity of the people in that remained in the labour force. And many people are still hiding out in their homes, scared to death to come out and go back to work in some cases, because they get too much money from the government as it is.

Then the next one I put up here is withdrawing finance and capital. All economic activity requires flows of money. So you’ve seen World Economic Forum policies and policies from the United Nations that talk about environmental investing, and this concept of ESG, where if your company doesn’t invest in the things we say they should invest in, then you are going to be blacklisted, and blackballed where you will not be able to get loans from the bank, or the projects you want to do. In other words, you have to adopt our conditionalities before we’ll give you another dime. We’ve seen this run rampant in the last two years as well.

The next one is limit consumption. Of course, it’s again, it’s kind of an oxymoron, even to say that economic output must be consumed, but it must be. Somebody has to be out there ultimately to buy the goods and services that are being produced. So is consumption being limited today? Yes, it is. And you say, Well, why? Because the middle class, at least in our country, and I think the rest of the world will pretty much attest to this. The middle class has been so decimated that their consumption has been greatly curtailed. I read a story just the other day, I think in America it says now that 67 percent of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck, they don’t have enough even for an emergency to come up.

Next is kind of an oblique one, but limit innovation. Anytime innovation is limited, products are not created. In other words, a healthy economy requires continuous innovation of products and services. And is innovation being limited in today’s world? Absolutely positively. I just talked to somebody here in the southwest region of the United States that has a new idea for energy production. It’s a unique, I think it’s probably a very unique idea. I won’t say what it’s based on but they’re excited. They’re they’re gathering investors right now to put into this project to see if they can create an energy company that will produce energy in a different way than it’s being produced now. These people are scared for their life, because they know that the cartels are going to come after him, the energy cartels are going to come after him and shut him up. The worst thing for the whole global picture now is that if there was free energy or very inexpensive energy in the world, of course, which would drive economic activity, they’d be out of business. So they simply can’t let it happen.

Next is to create a cataclysmic event. Frightened people don’t produce, spend or consume. It’s the perfect storm. I remember when there was a huge earthquake up in the Bay Area and California back in, I think it was in 1989 I believe or early 90, that was so severe, bridges were collapsing. The Bay Bridge collapsed and it was a horrible thing. Lots of buildings collapsed and stuff. I can guarantee you [where] I was living at the time, there was no business activity took place for six months in that area. Not anything. People wouldn’t buy, they wouldn’t sell, they didn’t want to come out, they didn’t want to answer the phone. The printers weren’t printing, the salesmen weren’t selling. It was a horrible time, but cataclysmic events are famous for well infamous for frightening people into a state of just catatonic shock where they cannot and will not budge to move forward on anything.

The last thing that is, again sort of oblique but I know the economist minded people will understand this for sure, create a system of mal-investment and dis-investment. That is trick people into investing in the wrong things that are not, you know, central to keeping the current system going. So investing in counterproductive areas now, especially because the United Nations, the World Economic Forum is legendary. They’re investing in windmills, instead of you know, in, but hey we got other problems in the world right now, besides, you know, just worrying about how to get a stand of windmills up out the ocean, which environmentalists now are freaking out over because its started to kill all the fish out there, too. And the birds if the things are on land, so mal-investment, dis-investment at this point is robbing the traditional economy of its natural flow of capital.

So those are ways to destroy capitalism, I want to just say, in my opinion, every one of these has been on the table, and it’s been purposely attacked. Now, I’m not going to back that statement up right now. But you can think about it, just a thought to put into your mind. So let’s go now to Klaus Schwab, the Founder and Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum, of course. You all have heard this phrase before “the pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world.” We’ve heard this a jillion times in the media, ‘mI pretty certain that most people will read it and they go, oh, I don’t like that, but they don’t know why, they don’t know what he’s saying, and they don’t really understand why they don’t like it. I’m glad at least they decide they don’t like it. And of course, another phrase that has come out of the World Economic Forum is by 2030, “you will own nothing and be happy”. Nobody asked the question about this either, but I do. So if something exists in time and space, whether it be a car or some other product or machine or something, if something exists in time and space, somebody has to own it. When they say you will own nothing and be happy? Well, somebody has to own all that stuff. The question is who and of course, they talk about pay per view, you know, if you want something, you can rent it, you can lease it, whatever, but we’ll own it, we will let you use it on an as needed basis, as you pay the fees.

Then we have, of course, they’re talking about The Great Reset. And the concept of Build Back Better. I want to just bring this up as a subtlty. I don’t think it’s too subtle, actually. But the great reset implies starting over from zero. When you reset, for instance, when you reset your clock, or you reset a counter, it goes back to zero. And then you reset whatever it was you’re doing, you reset and you move forward again. This is underscored by the phrase build back better. Building back better implies that whatever you’re going to build back from is now reduced to ashes. I don’t know why more people don’t just grasp onto this. But you know, if heaven forbid that your house burned down, it’s a tragic event when that happens, you lose everything, your pictures, your memorabilia and all. And when your house burns down, you’re depressed for a year, you finally get your insurance settlement, living wherever and it’s rental or something for a period of time. And at the end when you get your settlement, you think, well, we’re going to, we’re going to build a new house, you tell your wife, Honey, we’re going to build a new house, but be of good cheer because this time, we’re going to build back better. That’s what people say when hope returns, we’re going to build back better. So the whole idea, the whole mindset of the World Economic Forum, that has been pushing propaganda to the world now for these last two years, especially, is giving us a clear signal as Benioff said at the beginning of this presentation, capitalism is dead. Klaus Schwab is saying exactly the same thing. We need to have a great reset. We need to reimagine everything that we do. I don’t know how you imagine the world and then make it so. it makes no sense. But saying on the heels of that, that you’re going to build back better on whatever got burned to the ground is a very serious, in my mind anyway, very serious tell that these people intend for the destruction of the current economic system to be replaced with the other one that is sustainable development, which I do believe is technocracy.

So having said that let me just give you a very, very quick, the quickest possible definition of what technocracy is. This is from the technocrat magazine in 1938, their declaration, they said, technocracy is the science of social engineering, the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population. That was their scientific analysis at the time. They went on to say in the same article, there will be no place for politics, politicians, finance or financiers. This will be a direct control over all economic activity, there will be no need for discussion because they believe their positions are so right, they can just dictate them to all humanity and humanity will follow. And then it goes on to say technocracy will distribute by means of a certificate of distribution available to every citizen from birth to death. Now we can see hints of this in today’s discussion on sustainable development and what the United Nations and the World Economic Forum is doing. This is exactly what they’re intending to do, distribute by means of a certificate of distribution given to every citizen from birth to death. So technocracy, I want to reiterate, is the only alternative economic system in the history of the world. I’ve studied this, I’ve sifted some documents and you know, places where I could look libraries, talk to people, whatever historians, there is no other economic system, even though an Angela Merkel, for instance, said at Davos in 2020, that there are many different economic systems that the world has experienced, she’s wrong. There is no other economic system that’s been designed from scratch except for technocracy and is highly documented heavily documented at Columbia University in 1932 and onwards from there. It actually goes backwards before that, but it got crystallised in 1932.

So, technocracy has morphed into the doctrine of sustainable development. There’s many other synonyms now that cover [it]. There’s a green New Deal. There’s the green economy, there’s stakeholder capitalism, there’s smart growth, there’s Agenda 21, 2030 Agenda, etc. They’re all referring to the same thing, an economic system based on resource management allocation, where they control and or own all of the resources, and the people of the world own, basically nothing. And that’s why Klaus Schwab can say, well I’m certain of it, why he can say you will own nothing and be happy. Of course, maybe he’s just talking to his colleagues. I don’t know. But somebody’s gonna own it. Somebody’s going to be very happy.

Back in the 1930s. This was the cartoonist view of technocracy, I want to leave you with this last picture. That this is what journalists and society at the time you know, cartoons reflect what’s going on in people’s minds, a good cartoonist can do that. This is how they pictured technocracy that they were dealing with it back in that day, they rejected it, thank goodness at the time. But they understood what technocracy would do. And I don’t care what you call it today, you can call it man in the moon for all I care. It’s a resource based economic system, scientifically managed, including the people in the world, scientifically managed with the science of social engineering. All of this stuff they saw would end in total destruction for society. That’s where we are today, this is not a benevolent, benign economic system that is going to solve the problems of the world. We will come eventually, to the same conclusion that they came in the 1930s with this cartoon. This is what it’s going to look like if we let it proceed. And having said that, I don’t know if I’m close to my 20 minutes, but I give up and I concede and pass the baton to the next speaker.

Reiner Fuellmich 39:01
Thank you, Patrick. This is both impressive and shocking. But that picture that you’re showing this final picture, I think that says it all. They always say that a picture says more than a thousand words, and this time it really does. It should scare all of us. We can at this point, go into the questioning round because our next guest should have been Edward Dowd, who will not be able to join us tonight he will probably be able to join us at a later time, and Dowd was supposed to explain to us what’s happening on Wall Street with two particular shares, the one the Moderna shares and the Pfizer shares. Both of them are under enormous pressure. So there we have, on the one hand health care, which moderna and Pfizer stand for, and the financial system? Why are these shares under pressure? Well, it’s because as we have learned yesterday, in yesterday’s session of the Grand Jury investigation, that Pfizer, the Pfizer trials, for example, just happened to be a huge fraud. And this is coming out. This is being exposed right now. That’s why these shares are under pressure at doubt will, at a later time, explain why this has the capacity of bringing down not just the pharmaceutical industry, but the entire market, the entire financial industry. We’ll take a look at that later. But for the time being, before we go into the questioning round, let us take a look to clarify this a little bit more, at a very short video that was filmed by Project Veritas with a hidden camera. It’s a interview with an FDA executive by the name of Chris Cole. It’s only two minutes long.

Chris Cole 41:15
Biden wants to inoculate as many people as possible. So you’ll have to get an annual shot. I mean, it hasn’t been formally announced yet cos they don’t want to rile everyone up. Drug companies, food companies, the vaccine companies, they pay us hundreds of millions of dollars a year to hire and keep the reviewers to approve their products. If they can get every person required at an annual vaccine, that is a recurring return of money going into their company.

Project Veritas 41:46
So how do you know it’s already getting approved?

Chris Cole 41:52
Well, they’re not going to, I mean, just from everything I’ve heard, they’re not going to not approve this. I think what’s going to happen is, it’s going to be a gradual thing, School’s gonna mandate it.

Project Veritas 42:02
Why do they need the third one?

Chris Cole 42:04
Well, the same reason that you or I would need the third one. So, the three will bolster your system, and then there will be an annual, eventually an annual just like the flu shot

Project Veritas 42:14
For the toddlers.

Chris Cole 42:15
Well, for everyone.

Project Veritas 42:17
Okay, so the toddlers too, then will have to get it annually?

Chris Cole 42:20
Probably. I don’t completely agree with their, the process.

Project Veritas 42:25
What do you mean you don’t agree with the process?

Chris Cole 42:27
Well, I mean, they don’t have all the, all the tests aren’t there. So I agree with the thing that is is important to inoculate them. But you can’t provide the parent as much assurity as you normally want to. It’s an EUA for all age groups, all designations, and then you have to get approved by specific age groups based on the study.

Project Veritas 42:52
Do you think It’s really an emergency for the toddlers?

Chris Cole 42:56
Well, they’re all approved under an emergency. The efficacy data doesn’t have to be as high. The standard is on emergency use authorizations is that it does more benefit than harm.

Project Veritas 43:07
I thought their cases weren’t that high for six months to four year olds.

Chris Cole 43:12
They’re not but because it’s related to COVID, it’s under that approval process.

Reiner Fuellmich 43:28
So what does this tell us? There is a parallel that can be drawn between what is happening now, and what happened 12 years ago, when we had the Lehman crisis, the housing crisis that turned into a world economic crisis. Back then, the banking or financial industry, aptly named financial mafia, created worthless loans. Now, why would they do that? Loans that were given to people who would never be able to repay them for purchasing houses, which turned out to be ghost towns because nobody needed them. They didn’t want them to be repaid. The only thing they were interested in is creating these loans, which they then turned into securities, which were then sold to European banks. Some speak of stupid German money, many German banks were involved, and they sold these securities which were allegedly safe and a sound investment to the little old ladies who thought that this would give them additional income for their old age. Why did this work back then? It worked because there was a trusted third parties, a party that rubber stamped these securities saying this is great. This is a sound investment. The rating agencies

What’s happening now? We have these vaccines, which as we have learnt, don’t work and are extremely dangerous. How did this work? Well, again, there’s a trusted third party. Who is it this time? It’s the FDA. What are they doing? They’re getting paid by the pharmaceutical industry, by the very people, by the very companies that they’re supposed to oversee, and to protect us from, if something goes wrong? That’s why we’re showing this video. Go ahead and ask your questions. I do have one or a couple of more, but I would like you to get started. You’re muted, Dexter.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 45:44
Thank you very much Reiner. Thank you very much Mr. Patrick Wood for your excellent presentation. From your presentation from your evidence that you’ve just presented, it is now clear, and the jury can completely understand that we are now confronted, that is humanity is confronted with two different paradigm mindsets, the one is sustainable development technocracy and the other one is when it comes to capitalism itself. So thank you for clarifying that. What I would like to find out from you sir, is that it is also a common cause, and I believe that a lot of the members of the jury are well familiar with the World Economic Forum, Fourth Industrial Revolution, because that is something that is also on the forefront. And I would like you to explain to the members of the jury when it comes to the Fourth Industrial Revolution, how does it tie in with COVID-19?

Patrick M. Wood 46:58
Well, this is the frontal of the frontal assault, in my opinion, that has been well, let me back up just a second say, going back for the last 20 years, we can identify false starts to a total frontal assault. There have been times when it you know, it looks like somebody’s trying to punch through and really get something started. Global warming is a good case in point, by the way, they ran out of steam on that whole thing, because everybody figured eh, you know, nothing happened in here, move on. And so the same crowd that was pumping climate alarmism jumped over onto the COVID-19 track, same universities, same crack?? computer models, same type of, you know, analysis that was used to predict the world is going to end soon and we’re all gonna die, sort of thing. So we’ve seen the frontal assault was trying to get out for I think, probably, you know, maybe 10-15 years at least in 2007-9 was a perfect example of that. But for one reason or another, capitalismd dies hard for one. And finally, they got enough traction to pull it off, I believe in spades and 2020. I’m not sure that COVID-19 or the vaccines that we’re looking at right now, in one sense, those are just props. They’re the means to the end. We could have had some something else if they had been successful with global warming to get the whole world stocked up to go into sustainable development, they would have stuck with it. But it wasn’t working for him. They needed something else that was more dramatic. One thing that global warming didn’t have was dead bodies lying in the street. There weren’t any. Polar bears, they said, were dying but then they found we found out that they’re doing fine. There’s plenty of polar bears in the North Pole.

But with COVID-19 now you have bodies lying in the street or lying in the hospital in the morgue, whatever and people know people that have died, and they go oh my gosh, it really is true, we’re all gonna die. And that allowed them to throw everything against the wall, all the mud against the wall to stick, and it stuck. They panicked the whole world. And it was a different type of a panic this time and people have asked well, how can the whole world panic at the same time. It was the United Nations. The United Nations had been around all of those countries before in the world and had them sign memorandums that would commit them to doing certain things if the World Health Organisation declared an emergency. So when this emergency hit, the World Health Organisation and the United Nations at large set out the memos to all the countries in the world. Remember, when you signed this back here, this is what you need to do now. You need to follow what we say. And they go, oh my gosh, it’s a pandemic, and they got scared, you know. And so all of a sudden, these policies start rippling through the world like a wildfire. And all of a sudden, everything shuts down, just shuts down.

So it’s not to say that the virus thing is important, the vaccine is totally important, totally important. But I just want to point out the big picture, it could have been anything that would have taken them to their end, that’s all they care about is getting to the finish line. The finish line is getting sustainable development in and capitalism out so that they can own and control all the resources in the world. However, they can do that.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 50:51
Thank you very much for clarifying that. It’s a follow up, one, can you say based on the evidence that you’ve just given, there is a direct correlation between the fourth industrial revolution and ultimately now COVID-19.

Patrick M. Wood 51:06
Yes.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 51:06
You made it very clear as well, where you said that this is basically just a means to an end, they had a lot of other quivers or arrows in the quiver itself in the quiver. But they ultimately decided this is the one that they will basically then shoot. So it all comes down to what you’ve actually also presented. And this is general knowledge as well. Also, it is a common cause fact, and I am going to read it once more. And this is what Mr. Klaus Schwab has actually said, because this is in line to the evidence that you’ve just presented, that the pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine and reset our world. So by just reading that, for me, it is a clear indication that yes, this is and there is actually a clear direct correlation between the Fourth Industrial Revolution, and then ultimately COVID-19. Thank you, sir.

Patrick M. Wood 51:54
Yes.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 52:06
Would you like to comment on what I’ve said?

Patrick M. Wood 52:08
Well, I would say that if I went all the way back to Zbigniew Brzezinski’s book in 1970, called Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era, he was looking forward to that fourth industrial revolution. That’s where he was, that was his vision. He saw in other words, he saw over the valley to the mountaintop on the other side. And this is what we’re experiencing today. I think many, many authors and scien[tists], you know, people have commented on this, or maybe over the years, it wasn’t put together very well, but the fourth industrial revolution is the scientification of the planet. Basically, and that’s a new word, I don’t know if I just coined that, the scientification of the whole planet, where science runs and rules everything, data runs and rules everything. And the opinions of people and the political systems that we create to you know, moderate, our societies are meaningless, foolish, ignorant, whatever you want to call it, in their mind. And that they want to take direct control, and tell everybody what they should do. That’s the fourth industrial revolution. And Klaus Schwab is pretty clear about that.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 53:20
Thank you very much for basically just answering or basically just reflecting on what I’ve just said. What I want to get to once more just by reminding the jury the audience, that we are talking about natural law and from your presentation, I will say there is now clear evidence from you have presented that whatever systems they want to put in place technocracy, it all comes against natural law and natural law, what we basically say is the right where you basically have autonomy over your own body, the right to make certain decisions, and from the ways to destroy capitalism, the nine ways that you’ve mentioned, for me there is a clear indication as well, it is in direct conflict with natural law. Would you like to comment on that, sir?

Patrick M. Wood 54:16
You’re absolutely right. Everything. Everything that has to do with what we’re talking about today, is an affront to natural law. Totally. It’s not just, that’s not even an adequate word to use on a front. It’s death. It’s death to natural law. And this has been I’ve demonstrated this in my books multiple times. In both of my books on technocracy, recently Technocracy Rising and the Hard Road To World Order. This is their attitude, that they have a better way, that they have such a certain way according to science, that there’s no need even to discuss it. This is the height of egotism, it’s the height of I want to use the word, pathological. But when somebody can honestly believe that they’re so right, that you don’t have any other choice but to obey them, that goes way over the top. And this is what this whole crowd is doing at this point. When somebody like Marc Benoiff stands up and says capitalism is dead, he runs a single company, who is he to declare to the whole world that capitalism is dead. And don’t get me wrong, capitalism has problems. Only because of bad actors in it, I might add, but it has problems, the problems need to be corrected, that could be done. But that’s not what they’re ever going to even try to do. They want this new system for the express purpose of grabbing the resources of the world and taking them out of our hands and putting them into their hands to where we will then be kind of like in a neofeudalistic society where a few own everything, and the rest of us just kind of squat on the back of forty and raise a few pigs and some corn and whatever and hope that we don’t get thrown off.

This is not the world that we the people voted for. This is not the world they asked us about before they just did it. And now they’re telling us it’s so wonderful, benevolent and benign, that we should just follow them like the pied piper, you know, blows his whistle. And you know, while the rats and children I guess, alike, follow him into destruction. We see through this now, this is a massive gaslighting operation has been taking place for decades. We see we’re starting to see through this, people are starting to see through this, this is not pro humanity. It’s not pro human. It’s not pro human dignity. It is crushing to the human spirit. That just makes it, just by that alone makes it, so wrong. Doesn’t matter what policies they bring to us. Anybody that comes to us with that kind of an attitude is off base immediately, and their solutions along with them.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 57:01
Thank you so much, it should also tie in with FinTech. Because based on your evidence, I mean, we talking about blockchain, digital currency, and then total surveillance. So obviously, all of that in a sense is then specifically when it comes to total surveillance, it comes against your human dignity. Will you agree with that?

Patrick M. Wood 57:20
When people have, you know, we talk about private property. People have in the West, the right to own private property. It’s been seriously degraded in the last 20 years. But that’s made the economic system great, I have to say. But when you, that’s not the property that they’re talking about, totally, it’s part of it. But you have the next level of property is your own person, your own body. So the question immediately comes up, you’re claiming your body belongs to you, that doesn’t go with their philosophy, their philosophy says, no, your body belongs to us, we’re pretty sure we want it, and we’re going to get it one way or another. Then beyond that, what’s the next level of probing that they can do? Well, it’s what’s up here in your mind, we want what’s in your mind too. We want to take away your ability to think and to reason and to come to your own critical analysis of some issue, whatever for your sake, for your own body. This goes so much further than just what you think of private property, like a car you own or maybe property or you own a factory, something like that. Getting down to the bottom line is the ultimate loss of human dignity is what’s in your mind. And they want that they want to fill your mind full of what they want it to believe, and how they and they want to rewire your mind into thinking the way they want you to think. This is just evil, you know, in my opinion. Nobody has a right to do that to another person, another human being on Earth. I don’t care who you are, you just don’t have that right. And they are crim[inal], you can say, well, what about a criminal? Well, no, you still don’t have the right to do that. There’s other ways to deal with it. Not to play 1984 with them and say, How many fingers am I holding up, Winston? Or whatever, you know?

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 59:17
Thank you very much, Mr Wood. No further questions from me.

Reiner Fuellmich 59:22
Patrick, am I getting this right? Both Corona and global warning are simply false alarm tools to bring the population into panic mode so that they will ultimately do as they’re told?

Patrick M. Wood 59:44
Yes. Let me temper that though, by saying that there are other objectives to the messenger RNA shots. We’ll talk about that I think next week. The very important part of this too is the you know why messenger RNA into the arms of the human race at this point in history? I think there’s a very important story there that plays into this. And in fact, I’ll just say it this way, technocracy is to the restructuring of society, at large, as transhumanism is to the people who live in that society. Okay, it’s a kind of a two pronged thing. Why would you create a new Fourth Industrial Revolution and fill it full of old fashioned people, that’s not gonna work. Even winemakers know that, you know, you put new wine and new skins and not the other way around. So in their mind, they and the World Economic Forum is very plain on this, they speak about transhumanism and the merging of technology and the human condition to create an augmented human, augmented humanity. Some people call it H+ humanity, 2.0, etc. And their whole idea is to move these individuals now these augmented, genetically modified people into this new reset technocratic world that they’re conjuring up.

So on one hand, yes, it is a prop in the sense that its ushering in sustainable development. That’s the only option that’s ever given, by the way. You never hear a plan B. There’s no other option besides sustainable development. And who has the lock on that? Well, it’s the World Economic Forum in cahoots with the United Nations. They got it all, they say. So there’s multiple threads running through this whole thing. That’s all I want to say. It’s not so simple that we can just say, well that’s all it is. There’s a lot of other things that have jumped on board with it as well, which leads you to believe this all was a very carefully scripted, orchestrated event in human history that somebody else has talked about that, I’m sure.

Reiner Fuellmich 1:01:57
Virginie?

Virginie De Araujo Recchia 1:02:01
Thank you, sir for your testimony and expertise. I only want to trace the responsibilities. You said that it was Brzezinski is well known for his controlling chaos theory. And you also say that he’s already linked with the Rockefeller. Can we say that they are behind everything? I know Brzezinski is also behind the TT tainment theory that it exposed in 1995. And it seems that it’s always the same people that are behind these theories, that they created alone without the consent of the people, so.

Patrick M. Wood 1:03:01
Yeah, I think you’re absolutely, that’s very astute, and I think it’s absolutely correct. There has been a limited number of people behind this whole concept from day one. And of course, in 1973, Rockefeller represented the banking world, he was chairman of Chase Manhattan, well Chase Bank at the time, now JP Morgan Chase. And his family, of course, was involved in oil back before the 1900[‘s]. And they were part of that global financial crowd that we now struggle with, with the International Monetary Fund, The World Bank, the central banks to the world, the Bank for International Settlements. This group of people, Rockefeller included, were central, for instance, in the inner core committees of the Bank for International Settlements, for example. They created monetary policy for the whole world, they create economic policy for the whole world. And we see the same crowd today.

Back then, when they started the Trilateral Commission, just to give you a European flavour, Rockefeller and Brzezinski travelled to Europe in 1972, to visit the then meeting of the Bilderberg group that was meeting in Europe to float a trial balloon to see what do you think this would work because it was something new for them. They didn’t just want to go out and do it. So they went and they collaborated and asked questions of the people who attended the Bilderberg conference sat here, which are very similar in nature to the World Economic Forum today. And they gave universal approval. The literature says now they gave universal aapproval to it. You go for it. We’ll be right behind you. So they weren’t the only ones. So 300 members that they took into the Trilateral Commission on day one were not the only ones in the world that were involved with this thing. There were other people that were on the periphery on the outside say, okay, you guys are, to use the American term, you are SEAL Team Six, to us. You’re gonna take the beachhead, we’ll be right behind you with the big guns and the boats and you know, whatever, to conquer the rest of whatever it is to be conquered. And this is what we’ve seen over the years. But it was something new back then. And it was engineered within the banking elite circles.

This, of course, rings true for just my co author back in the 70, Professor Anthony Sutton, has written books on this that were censored on one hand, but greatly accepted on another by another group of people, wrote about Wall Street, for instance, and the rise of Hitler Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, Wall Street and the national suicide of the United States. He wrote, you know, he did research and wrote about these things. This is the same crowd. In some sense, it’s the same, you see kind of the same modus operandi with this banking crowd, they’re still after the same old thing – global domination. Rockefeller, I’ll just mentioned this in passing, you didn’t ask but I’m gonna say it anyway, Rockefeller understood because gold had just been decoupled from currency, especially the dollar. Rockefeller understood as a monetary expert that there would be an end one day to the fiat currencies of the world. He saw that, I mean a fifth grader could have figured it out if he had a calculator and a piece of paper, there will be an end eventually to fiat currency. His dilemma was being one of the richest bankers in the world, okay, what do you do when money disappears? When currency disappears? What do you do for an encore to keep your hand on the control of the levers of control? Well, you get the resources directly. If you own the resources directly, it doesn’t matter what kind of a monetary system you put on top of it. It just doesn’t matter. It could be buffalo chips, it could be Indian bees, it just doesn’t matter. Anything you call currency at that point, if you own all the timber, you own all the farms, you own all the oil, the gas, the gold and the minerals and nickel, and everything that comes out of the earth, if you own those resources, nobody else can get them. You’re on top of the world, you own everything and so you get the call all the shots.

This, I believe, was Rockefellers mindset at the time. And I saw that writings also from other people in Europe at the time and the bulk that were attending the Bilderberg meetings. This was a new thing for them because it kind of foreshadowed all things from the debt based economics banking system that we had, when the Federal Reserve was first created, the other central banks of the world were created. All those things, all those institutions were seen as eventually disappearing, and they were laying the groundwork for their future conquest, and that’s where we are today.

Viviane Fischer 1:08:04
I would like to ask a question like with regard to motives and timing of the whole situation, the whole plandemic. Why do you think it might have been especially important to pull this whole thing off now?

Patrick M. Wood 1:08:20
Well, at the time, and I wrote January of 2020, by the way that technocracy’s coup d’etat was underway. It was based on my observation that the people pushing the initial panic were the same people that were pushing climate alarmism before. And I’d watched that for a long time. And we found out later, that was my first (inaudible), we found out later about Event 201. And how it appeared that the entire pandemic was very carefully scripted by that group of people that met for Event 201. And I think that this schedule had been prominent in their mind for some time, you remember, Christiana Figueres said we have a timetable. In 2015 you didn’t know what that timetable was? I mean, who could we don’t have a crystal ball. But the fact that she said to have a timetable, and then this happens in in 2020 speaks pretty clear to me that this was it.

That was just my hunch in January 2020. But I think it’s proven out now. When you see the combined weight, the organisational weight of the entire United Nations coming behind it, and then forcing the entire medical community the whole world to follow suit, it speaks of massive orchestration of human effort that can’t just be done on the spur of the moment any more than you could have a professional football league appear on the scene with one week notice. It doesn’t happen that way, it takes years of planning. And I think they have been years in planning in this. And I’ll just wager to say at least from 2015 when Figueres declared, we have a timetable. That means the timetable already existed before she said it. And I don’t know how long and you can’t find anything in the United Nations that would tell us how far back it goes from there. But they had a timetable to pull us off to get rid of capitalism. And I think this was it.

Reiner Fuellmich 1:10:46
Patrick, one final question may be, did I get this right that many of the crises that we’ve experienced, including this one, including the global warming crisis were staged? And did I misunderstand you when you told us about the Great Depression, how that too was staged? Is that correct? Was that staged as well, according in your mind?

Patrick M. Wood 1:11:20
Yes. I laid no groundwork for that, but since you brought it up, yes, I do believe the Great Depression was staged. And the reason I do is because people who have studied the activities of our Federal Reserve back in that day, realise that the great crash of 29, when the stock market, the bottom of the stock market just fell apart. That’s what led to pictures of the people jumping out of windows in Wall Street, by the way, because they lost their fortunes virtually overnight. The great crash of 29 was caused by the central bank withdrawing money from the system, from the economic system. They’d allowed it to build up and then all of a sudden, they pulled the rug out from under it. Margin Call started to insert and ensue because people had borrowed on credit, when they cut off the credit people had to sell their stock, and it just resulted in a freefall that took the market into oblivion. The Depression followed after that for all the reasons that we could look at here, and I dare say, that was one of the frontal assaults, I believe, of that century. That was one, not the only one, that was one of the central assaults, or frontal assaults that took place.

Another one probably with World War One. Another one is probably World War Two, Professor Anthony Sutton wrote about both of those extensively. And we’re sitting pretty much on the same precipice right now that we were in 1928. I hate to even use that comparison, because it implies it can get really ugly really soon. But right now we have manipulation of monetary systems like we’ve never really seen before in history. And at this point, the only question is, will the banking system withdraw liquidity, suddenly, inadvertently, or on purpose, it doesn’t matter? What will liquidity be drawn from the system and if it is withdrawn from the system, prices will crash period. That’s an economic certainty, that’s such solid monetary theory that nobody would really object to that. When you remove money from the system, the system is going to deflate, it’s just a question of how fast. And if you can start a good panic to do it, first, it’s gonna go much further than it would have otherwise.

Reiner Fuellmich 1:13:40
Obviously. So is it true that it’s always the same small group of people or families who are in their desire to dominate the world in this megalomaniac desire to dominate or control the world, first steal our assets and our money? And then go after our bodies and even our minds? Is that a correct assessment?

Patrick M. Wood 1:14:06
I think it is. That’s kind of the bumper sticker version of what’s going on, right. It’s really hard to kind of get the whole sense of it in such a short statement, but that would be a correct statement. There’s been a narrow group, throughout history, of people who try to conquer and dominate other people, and we’re dealing with that today. We’ve dealt with it in the last 150 years, we’re dealing with it today. Unfortunately, I suppose for us is that they’re very sneaky. And they’re, you know, how they do it. And so this new pandemic scenario, we never really dealt with this like we are right now. Now we had, you know, we had the swine flu, we had some other things happen, HIV that Anthony Fauci has evolved. We’ve had other things over time that were, you can kind of see where they maybe wanted to take it further than it went, but today, it’s over the top. And everywhere you look, you see the same small number of people. Even in the World Economic Forum, by the way, their membership is roughly, I think it’s a little over one thousand corporations in the world. Well that’s not all the corporations that exist in the world, there’s a lot more than one thousand. Why aren’t they involved? Well, it’s kind of because those are the families. Those are the companies. Those are the interlocks in the directors and, you know, sitting on multiple boards of directors and stuff, those are the ones that are bought into creating the fourth industrial revolution for their own profit.

Those are the ones who can clearly see the vision. And even within that group, we’ve noticed this before in our network analysis, even within the group of a thousand companies, or even if you look at the Bank for International Settlements with their central bank directors all been coming to their board meetings. There’s always an inner core in these groups, and these network groups like this. So the World Economic Forum has an inner core. Who’s involved with it? Somebody like Mark Benoit, certainly somebody like Angela Merkel, certainly somebody like Klaus Schwab, absolutely, he started it. But you’ve got an inner core that are kind of calling the shots for all the rest of them. But if that inner core say 2 percent, or 5 percent, the other 95 percent are cow towing to what that 2 percent or 5 percent bring out to say. This is the way it is in the banking world, as you know, pretty much any click you get a hold of there’s always some inner core that’s kind of controlling the whole thing. That’s an even smaller group.

Reiner Fuellmich 1:16:45
Luckily, Klaus Schwab gave us a really important piece of advice, because he said that there’s only a small window of opportunity. Let’s close it for him. And in order to understand why we should close it, we’re going to play a very short clip, which I think is demonstrative of what this is all about. I think the people in this clip, most of them don’t know what they’re talking about. But they’re giving us great secrets. Let us see.

Klaus Schwab 1:17:23
Features of the Fourth Industrial Revolution is that it doesn’t change what we are doing, but it changes us.

Nita Farahany 1:17:30
the very idea of human beings, some sort of natural concept, is really going to change Up until now the conversation we’ve been having is around freedom of speech, once we can access people’s spots and access people’s emotion.

Franklin D Kramer 1:17:42
The focus as all of you know today is on what’s now called the Internet of bodies, involving medical implants and other kinds of devices that go inside your body, and all together with the internet as a whole comprise the internet of bodies.

Mary Lee 1:17:57
The Internet of bodies, or IOB is actually an ecosystem. It’s a bunch of devices that are connected to the internet that contain software, and that either collect personal health data about you or can alter the body’s function. We think of the internet of bodies as this collection of all these devices, as well as all the data that the devices are gathering about you, And in healthcare, Internet of bodies has been around for quite a while.

Eleonore Pauwels 1:18:26
So the internet of bodies. Imagine the power of AI, what is artificial intelligence. It’s a way to automate computation and cognition. So we can now automate learning, perceiving, doing computation. It’s a pervasive, general purpose technology that will be used in all of our industries that will come into all professional networks, all private networks, all schools, all industries and all offices. What I wanted to epitomise with the Internet of bodies is this notion that we will be under assessment. We’ll be under measure of computation in every aspect of our lives in the future, from what you eat, who you date, what you buy on the internet? How much energy you use, but also, what are your vital signs? What are you doing in terms of health? What kind of specific genetic quirks do you have? What’s your genome telling you about your health, about your mental health, about how well you’re doing, how well you’re ageing? What kind of disease you’re susceptible to,

Interviewer 1:19:35
it has a bit of an Orwellian twinge to it.

Reiner Fuellmich 1:19:41
So that is the opportunity that they are talking about when they’re saying there’s only a small window of opportunity to introduce this. Let’s close it for them.

Viviane Fischer 1:19:51
Can I have one more question? I mean, since this has gone quite far. Do you think there’s like a plan B for them in case it doesn’t go through. I mean, even with the help of like creating new scares like Ukraine, like the other things that you mentioned, like these supply chain problems and what else you could manufacture. But say it doesn’t go through. I mean, it seems hard to find a way back, I mean, to some sort of normality that people wouldn’t see through that. It’s that it’s kind of maybe not, you know, that something else has gone on in the meantime, because it’s a totally different situation like when we compare to, for instance, this let’s call it attempt during the swine flu, or other things to change things around. I mean, this has gone really far and the masks are pretty down. I would say, What do you think they have something, some idea to withdraw, like control –

Patrick M. Wood 1:20:52
It has , the window that we have, their window, of opportunity may be closing on that, but here’s the danger. These people have immense power, they have immense money behind them. And they have immense networks of people to get things done. When you corner an angry bear, and you shoot and wound that bear, the bear won’t be cornered very long because they have a way of coming after the one who did the wounding and in a very vicious way, I think we’re dealing with the very vicious, immoral, ammoral, you know, completely criminal type of an element that will do anything in their power to do to not be defeated, whatever that case is. So this is one warning to me personally, is that we must be ever vigilant for changing directions in this angry bear. And who knows what that could be? I’m not going to even speculate there’s a few things I’ve been looking at, but you all probably are aware of some things that you know, you’re looking at, and you’re very concerned, like war in Ukraine with Russia and so on. Maybe that will happen. Maybe it won’t. But, you know, Europe has already had two wars at the hands of these megalomaniacs. Another one probably isn’t going to concern them too much, if it gets them out of Dutch. Yeah. So what if you lose half a million people in a war? You know, that’s just chump change to them. And they’ve lost plenty of people in history to wars that they started and didn’t blink an eye.

So we’re dealing with a very dangerous adversary. And the only answer, in my opinion, this is maybe a phatic answer, we need to get these people out of public policy. That’s the key thing. And we can’t say we’re gonna go kill them. That’s not right. You can’t just can’t go around killing people or we’d be just like them. But we need to extricate these people from all public policy platforms everywhere. Every local community, every province or state community, every national community, national governments, wherever they might be, these people need to be removed from positions of public policy, where they can lord it over if you will, other people and do these kinds of things. And that may be impossible to do and maybe difficult to do. I don’t know yet. I’m not, you know, that’s not my area, but I see that as being one. And Professor Desmet, by the way who I know has already addressed the group. He boils it down like this saying, you know that the issue of mass formation psychosis, which creates a scapegoat for one and also has people who are Looney Tunes on the other hand, the only defence he says, against mass formation psychosis is free speech. That blew my mind. When I first heard that from him. Free Speech I’m involved in Free Speech Movement here in America called Citizens for Free Speech. When I heard that my my antenna went up. And I thought about why. When the scapegoat is silenced. He said this actually, I’m not quoting don’t quote me, he said it, when the scapegoat is silenced, the killing begins. That is sobering to me, really sobering.

So we need to keep the lines of communication open like you folks are doing here with this hearing, keep the lines of communications open and refuse to shut up no matter how much they tell you. You’re gonna be quiet, we’re gonna censor you, we’re gonna deplatform you, we’re gonna do this to you, that to you, in China they just disappear you. They’re not doing that here, fortunately, I don’t think they are in Europe either. But we need to never ever be quiet. Not again, that’s not an option. We must keep speaking regardless of who we’re speaking to. We have to keep the dialogue going.

Reiner Fuellmich 1:24:57
That sounds like very good advice. Thank you very much, Patrick. And stay with us. Yes.

Patrick M. Wood 1:25:05
I will, and I look forward to corresponding with any of you, you got my email address. I know we’ve exchanged back and forth. I’d love to talk to any one of you about anything and hear what you’ve got to say and contribute as well. And I will stay with you and listen to the rest of this today.

Reiner Fuellmich 1:25:19
Thank you very much. Now let’s turn to an investment banker, Leslie Manookian. You’re mute?

Leslie Manookian 1:25:37
Okay. I actually have to figure out how to share screen before I expand it. Here we are. Can you see that?

Reiner Fuellmich 1:25:58
Yes.

Leslie Manookian 1:26:02
Okay. So I’m gonna follow up with much of what Patrick said and reinforce it. I fully believe that what we are experiencing is a controlled demolition of both our political and our economic system. And the reason for that I’m going to go into, to me what explains that is the fact that most of the measures that are supposedly about public health, define logic and reason and must be unchallenged by any scientist or doctor who has a differing opinion. And I think that, you know, I mean, we all understand that a hallmark of tyranny is silencing the opposition. If this were really about public health, we wouldn’t be injecting children who have zero risk, we wouldn’t be injecting pregnant women who have not been studied, we would be protecting the elderly and that’s it.

And this entire crisis, I think, is being used as a cover to do exactly what I said, which is to collapse the system, because it’s collapsing, and then with the hopes of resetting it so that those who are actually in control right now will retain that control. And I think that it’s very, very clear to anybody who’s a neutral observer that that is what’s going on, that there are people who are trying to control this, for some reason, that’s not about public health. I’ve said this from the very beginning, from January of 2020, this is not about public health, and it’s never been about public health. It’s about power, money and control.

Now, I want to share a little bit about my background, because while I am the president and founder of Health Freedom Defence, I’m speaking as a private citizen, in particular, because I have experience working for Goldman Sachs and Alliance Capital, two of the you know, when I worked there, two of the most prestigious financial institutions in the world, and the reason that I want to talk about it is because I want to share my experience, because I think it gives a unique insight and perspective to what’s happening right now. So first, I was a investment manager, managed our European growth portfolios, and I was also director of European growth research at Alliance Capital. And my job was to interview the CEOs of multinational corporations. And so I got to see the CEOs and the whole management team of most of the major companies in Europe, and many of those in the US, in particular, the ones in which we owned a large chunk. So the reason I’m sharing this is because these management teams would come in and see us and speak with us. And if we were unhappy with what one of the management teams was doing, we were told by our own management, sell the stock, don’t own the stock, don’t vote against management, don’t exercise your power as a shareholder, just choose a different stock.

And this is really important because the lay public is led to believe that shareholders act as a kind of check or control on, you know, a balance on management, holding them accountable for their decisions and for their strategy. And the truth is that what’s really happening is that the giant investment managers, like I was a part of, are not doing that. They are abdicating that responsibility. They vote along with management. And if they don’t vote along with management, then they just sell the stock. So there’s this complete absence of this major check and balance that should exist in the system is not actually operating, because it’s being suppressed in deference to this solitude between the investors and the corporations in which they invest. I think it’s a really important thing. It was exactly the opposite of what I learned in business school. And I was very, very surprised by it, but it is what you are instructed to do. And now I only work for one big investment manager. But that was my experience in talking to all of the different kinds of investment managers that I worked with. They were kind of under the same sort of marching orders that, you know, if you don’t like it, sell the stock. There essentially, is no shareholder activism. And I think that’s not well understood by the public.

The next thing I want to share is an experience that I had that will, I hope, crystallise for everybody listening, what exactly is going on in the minds of these management teams. We were one of the largest shareholders in one of the biggest pharmaceutical companies in the world. And their blockbuster stock blockbuster drug, which was in phase three trials, there were rumours leaking out of their phase three trials that there were some problems going on in the phase three trials, and that a few people had died in the phase three trials. And the answer to this wasn’t to expose it and discuss it, the answer was something actually very sinister. So what happened was the CEO, the Chief Financial Officer, the head of R&D, head of investor relations, all came into our offices, and they went to see all of their big investors. And the point was to go and reassure us that everything was okay. Well, they came in and looked me in the eye and said, listen, in very, very rare instances, this drug that’s supposed to help your heart is actually causing a problem in the heart, and a few people have died. And the CEO looked at me and he said, the bad news is the FDA is going to make us put a black box warning on our packaging. The good news is, we still think we’ll be able to do $7 billion in peak sales.

Now, I hope that alarms everybody who’s watching because it certainly alarmed me. And it was the first time in my life I had ever heard firsthand, someone be that cavalier about the assessment, or the trade off between human life and corporate profit. And that it was the CEO of the company saying this was very, very eye opening for me. And it was actually one of the catalysts for me deciding that despite the fact that I had a fantastic career, that I needed to leave. And it was one of the catalysts for me to do so a couple of years later, I started planning that I was going to leave. It’s really important that you understand that backdrop and that context, and then apply it to what’s happening right now. Because we, as average human beings who care about our families and our friends, we have moral codes by which we lead our lives. We have moral codes which direct how we interact with other human beings. And it would seem that that moral code is lacking in many of these people that I interacted with who are at the very, very top of the corporate world. And it wasn’t just the pharmaceutical industry, it was other areas where a corporate management would say, you know, we’re quite sure that we’re going to get the damn contract in some, you know, developing country. And I came to believe that that’s because they had, you know, bribed the politicians in those countries, and so they knew what they were going to get. My point is that I had a front row seat, and I have a very uncomfortable taste in my mouth about what happens in those upper echelons of the financial world.

So I wanted to say, I’m gonna now present some information that was sort of my introductory remarks, I want to present the information that backs up my assertion, and that actually explains the motive because I think it’s so important that a judge and a jury understand the motive behind any alleged crime. And I believe that that’s what we’re witnessing is a crime. And it’s so important to understand that what we’re doing or what we’re experiencing is the demolition of Western civilization, and why it’s happening and why it’s happening now and not 10 years ago or 10 years in the future. So with that let me move to my first slide. Actually, this is not my first slide. This is my first slide. And I want to go to full view but I don’t (inaudible).

Reiner Fuellmich 1:34:47
We can see it.

Leslie Manookian 1:34:48
Can you see the whole thing? Okay, perfect. So essentially what’s happening is that there is this elite class, politicians, super rich, media, corporations and they want to retain control of everything that they’re doing of everything that they have. And they’re going to lose it because the system is imploding. So they’re going to try and destroy it in order to reset it before everything collapses. As Patrick mentioned, I want to re-emphasise that this is about total centralised control of business, assets, natural resources, by unelected unaccountable leaders, ultimately. And we’re already seeing that transition. It’s been going on in Europe for decades already.

What will ultimately occur, I believe, is the creation of a super rich elite who’s not accountable, and then a surf class of all of the rest of us. And we will have zero recourse as average citizens because they won’t be elected, and they won’t be accountable to us. And the really burning question that we must all be asking ourselves is why, why now? Why is this happening? Why did it happen basically, in 2020. And I think that the origins go back many, many decades. But this really became a serious problem during the financial crisis that began in 2008. In which we saw financial securitization of loans, homes and sold off to someone who didn’t care. So people were making loans. And in the United States, this crisis was resolved after a few years, because the banks in the United States wrote off their bad debts. That did not happen in Europe. But what has happened in the last eight years since things have sort of slowed down since 2013, 2014, is that the pension crisis has exploded. And the reason that that’s happened is because we’ve had negative to zero interest rates for that entire period.

In Europe, we’ve had negative interest rates, in the US almost zero interest rates for a very long period of time. And anyone who invests in a bond knows that when you invest in a bond, you want to get the interest, that’s the income that you derive from your investment, and pension companies, most of them across the western world have to invest mostly in government bonds. So when government interest rates are zero to negative, it means that the yields on their investments are extremely low. Pension funds need to generate about seven to eight percent, on average each year, in order to service their liabilities. So their liabilities are all the people who’ve retired. And when I’m talking about this, I’m talking about public pensions, so not corporate pensions, I’m talking about the public pensions that are guaranteed by European governments, or in the United States for people who’ve worked in any way for a government entity, whether it’s a school or a state, or something like that.

So in the United States the unfunded pension liability had skyrocketed to $5 trillion by the end of 2018. And that’s just the unfunded, so that’s the amount of money that pensions owe for all the people who’ve retired or are going to retire, that they don’t have money to pay. And so they have to rely on new people coming in. But there’s not enough of them. And they’re never going to get out of this problem. So that’s a major issue. The other major issue is that there’s been this explosion in government debt. And in the United States, we went from 1 trillion in 1981 to $30 trillion just a week or two weeks ago. I’ll show you a chart in a moment which will put this into context for you. But the really big issue is, if you are 65 years old, or whatever your retirement age is, and you want to start drawing on your pension, and there’s no pension there, there may be one for you, but what about the next person next year? What’s going to happen to these governments, when tens of millions of people all over the world wake up and realise that their pensions don’t exist, that they are never going to be paid? And so what I would argue is that what is happening is that the central banks, the giant corporations, big tech are all collaborating in order to push everybody into digital currencies, and reset the system before that can happen.

This is the chart actually of what’s happening in US government debt. You can see what’s happened, how it has exploded from something that was very, very manageable for many, many decades. I mean, it took 230 years to get us to 1 trillion and then forty two years to get us to 30 trillion. Now, in Europe, you don’t have quite as much government debt. But you have a far worse situation with respect to the financial system and to the pension funds. I mentioned that the US banks had written off their bank debt, the Europeans didn’t. And they didn’t, because the entire structure of Europe is different. And no one country wants to bail out the next country. So what’s happening is that the banks have kept this bad debt on their balance sheets. And there was a financial crisis in October and September of 2019. And what happened was, US banks didn’t want to counteract in something that’s called the overnight window with their European counterparts. And that’s because they didn’t want what’s called counterparty risk. There’s this window called the overnight window where banks can park funds. And the US banks didn’t want to deal with the European banks like Deutsche Bank, because they have huge liabilities for all these bad debts that they haven’t written off. And then they’ve also got huge derivative exposure. And so what happened was the US banks said, we’re not going to work with you, and overnight money went to 10%. It’s usually very, very close to zero, but it spiked to 10 percent. And that meant that the Fed had to step in and start backstopping all banks and countries around the world because the system was on the verge of cracking. And that has not really gone away. So that’s been basically something that’s persisted ever since then. But that was a real, you know, shot across the bow that they needed to do something and they needed to do it quickly. That was September October of 2019.

So now turning fully to Europe. As I mentioned, they’ve had negative interest rates since 2014. And what that means is, as I mentioned, the pensions can’t actually meet their liabilities, they’re broke. In Europe, 44 trillion euros of unfunded public pensions, that’s almost $50 trillion. And the four biggest economies, Germany, France, Italy, and Spain account for 32 trillion of that. That is staggering, there is no way they will ever be able to meet those obligations to I don’t know, if it’s 100 million Europeans, it’s never going to happen, they cannot kick the debt can down the street any further. And this is the reason that I believe that everything is happening. To me, this is the motive for the great reset, for using COVID as a cover. Britain itself is about $8.7 trillion. And they’re never going to get out of this situation. But there’s another piece of it as well, which is that the European Central Bank owns more than 40 percent of all the outstanding Euro national debt in Europe. They don’t have a bond market anymore, because they destroyed it, so there’s no marginal buyer when they have to roll over their debt. They’ve basically painted themselves into a corner with their policies. This is what’s happened in Europe, it only goes back to 1995. because it’s the European Union. Of course, if you went much further back when these countries were not part of the Union, then you would see that it was very, very similar to the US chart.

So I want to talk briefly about, I mean I hope that the gravity of that financial situation has been made because it is so serious, and it is literally a gun to their head. They cannot get out of this without destroying the system or resetting it, they need to have a massive debt forgiveness. And what they want to do is tell everybody, we’re having a debt holiday for everybody around the world, they’re going to default on their debt. And they’re going to allow the public to default on their debt, so they’ll say it’s a holiday, everyone gets to reset their debt. And the the reason that they need control of the system is because of course, people are going to be very angry when their pensions aren’t there. And so they need to get everybody into what’s called UBI, Universal Basic Income. And this is the reason, the true explanation, for why they are destroying the small and medium sized businesses, because they can’t have people being employed by independent businesses and earning a living. And in the United States, roughly two thirds of all businesses before COVID were small and medium sized businesses, they employed two thirds of the workforce. So if you want to control people, and you want to force everybody into a government stipend, universal basic income, you’ve got to get rid of all of those employers. And this is why none of the measures made sense that the small and medium sized businesses couldn’t remain open, but Walmart could. It’s because of all of this.

Now turning to, I think we really need to understand that there’s not just this financial aspect to what’s going on, but there’s also this corporate and importantly a medical complex component to it. And when I say medical complex, I mean, the pharmaceutical industry, of course, but I also mean the hospital systems, the NGOs, the research institutions, you know, the NIH, the National Institutes of Health in the United States, and very importantly, the giant foundations like the Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation. The Open Society Foundation, which is George Soros’ foundation, these groups siphon millions and millions of dollars every single year to the colleges and universities. The NIH and other governmental institutions siphon millions and millions of dollars to these same groups. They actually siphone money to the journals, the journals are not independent. And so basically, what you have is complete control of what is published, what is censored, what is written. So, in the journals, what is published is dictated by these same people. In the research, the research that is conducted at the universities and research hospitals is dictated by NIH and these giant foundations. The universities teach what is dictated as well. And then you have I mean, just to give you an example, the University of Washington is very near to Bill Gates’ home, and he gives them unbelievable amounts of money. The Gates Foundation authorised a grant of $279 million in 2018 to the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. This institute is one of the biggest tools that was putting out the terrifying models that millions and millions of people were going to die from COVID.

Another one of the big institutions, which I’m sure many people know about is Imperial College. Imperial College took $79 million from the Gates Foundation, I believe it was January of 2020, and 133 million in the couple of years leading up to that. This is a massive operation, and it’s only happened because basically the medical complex has been brought under the fold of these people at the very, very top. The same thing applies to the media and to politics. If you look at politics in the United States, Pharma is the biggest lobbyists $250 million a year. They are the biggest donors, literally nine out of 10 US Congress persons take money and 97 percent of US senators are taking money from pharma. They have twice as many lobbyists in Congress as there are members of Congress. And then when we drill down to what’s going on with the media. I cannot emphasise enough this second to the last bullet point. The pharmaceutical and healthcare industries spend $35 billion annually on advertisements globally. They own every major media outlet because they are the lion’s share of their investment advertisement, of their advertisements, rather. if you look in the United States, just digital ads alone are $10 billion. And if you look at, you know what’s going on, you think well, I should trust my doctor, but the truth is that the doctors are beholden as well, because the journals tell them what to believe, and so do their societies like the American Medical Association, or the American Academy of Paediatrics, which take millions and millions of dollars from the pharmaceutical industry and much of what physicians have to do in terms of continuing medical education credits is funded by the pharmaceutical industry itself.

So how are they going to do this? I’m going to run through this very quickly. I mentioned universal basic income. I’ve mentioned Central bank digital currency. They need total control of finance, the economy, they need total control of everybody. And they’re going to do it through currency. This is why they’re tracking transactions, eliminating the small and medium sized employers and putting caps on cash. So one of the big components of this is getting rid of cash, they’ve got to destroy cash, and they’re doing all that they can and have been for several years in order to plant the seed that cash is dirty – that came out of China in the beginning of January. Remember they were talking about how it carries the virus. In Australia, they’ve been saying for years that cash is for criminals. They’ve been putting caps on any kind of transaction so you can’t spend more, I think in Europe, it’s down to a few 1000 euros now that you can actually conduct a cash transaction. In the United States, it’s still around 10,000. And in Australia as well, but they are restricting and capping cash based transaction. And even more importantly, they’re actually outright cancelling cash. Justin Trudeau signed some kind of an order at the beginning of 2021, I believe it was, allowing him to cancel the currency at will. And he’s already ensued with cancelling large denominations. We’ve seen the same thing in other countries, and in India we’re seeing similar things as well.

So there’s this massive agenda, I believe, occurring as a result of all of the financial imperatives, and they are using all the tools available to them in order to implement it. One of the big things that they are going to use to actually implement this control system. and the video talked about the Internet of bodies, is low Earth orbit satellites, which are being shot into space all over the world. Elon Musk’s Starlink is I think, plays 1700, and Bill Gates has somewhere around 500. But basically the idea is to blanket the earth in surveillance that is live every single square inch so that there is no escape, and that they have total control of humanity. I won’t really go into this, Patrick kind of touched on this, but basically there, you know, we’ve already seen I mean, two years ago, we said that there were vaccine passports coming, and everybody said that we were conspiracy theorists. And, you know, we’ve got these digital identifications, and the merger between identification, medical records, financial records, voting, ID, travel records, all these things are all being merged into these passes. It’s not about health. It’s not about a vaccine passport, it’s getting you to accept that you give over all of your information to the people who control the system. And I think it’s really important to nail that, you know, reemphasize that there is extraordinary technology. They’ve already implanted chips in people’s hands, which connect to their vaccine records to enter their medical, I mean, to their financial records, enter their employment records. And there’s already nanotechnology that’s been injected into animals, that can control their behaviour, monitor their brains and their bodily functions. The bottom line is just to wrap up, I’m sorry I’ve gone sort of fast, but I know I have 20 minutes, and there’s so much to say. There is essentially no way out of the financial mismanagement that has occurred at the hands of these leaders. There has never been any intention of repaying all the debt that they have borrowed and issued. There’s never been any intention of coming true on all of the promises that they have made to hundreds of millions of employees all over the world. And they have no way out of the situation that they have created themselves aside from cancelling all the debt, resetting the entire system, and getting all of us to accept living in Klaus Schwab’s dystopian future. And so I hope that this testimony helps people to understand that there is a dire financial situation, which I believe is a very, very clear motive for these people to have done all of these acts against crimes against humanity in the last two years, so that they can retain control of the system, the power that they have, and live lives of luxury while they enslave the rest of us. Thank you very much for your time and for inviting me to participate in this incredible proceeding along with these, it’s been a true honour with these esteemed other colleagues. Thank you so much.

Reiner Fuellmich 1:54:19
Thank you, Leslie. This is brilliant. It’s an eye opener, not just for us, but I hope for the entire world for the jury. Essentially, they are with their backs against the wall. Isn’t that true?

Leslie Manookian 1:54:40
To understand, to put some of these things in context, the amount of pension liability that European countries have? I think Luxembourg and Belgium are something like four or five times the national GDP. That’s how much they owe just to the public for the pensions, there is no way out of this situation, they will never be able to repay it, just like the US will never be able to repay $30 trillion in national debt. There’s no way. And if you look at what’s happened between, I didn’t even touch really go into Australia, Canada, Japan, they’re all in the same situation. The UK as well. If you look at just the US, Japan, Europe, and I think the UK, they have spent, the central banks of those countries have spent $9 trillion, which is an increase of I think, if I remember correctly, 50 percent of what they had spent in history up until that point, there is just no way for them to fix this, and so what they will likely do is create what are called perpetual bonds where they, and George Soros has already sent out newsletters to his readership, that he recommends that this happen. He’s already publicly called on Macron of France to create perpetual bonds. And so what they will do is if you have an investment in a government bond, they will say your government bond, we’re not paying it back in 10 years, or 20 years, or 30 years, it’s now a perpetual bond that will go away when you die. And we will pay you a nominal interest rate on it until you die. So you’ll get 2 percent or 3 percent, but you’ll never get your money back. This is one of the ways so they have to do everything that they can to placate the populace, because otherwise the populace is going to do some very, very horrible things. They are going to drag these people out in the streets if history is any measure as to what happens when people have been lied to and robbed blind for decades by their political leaders.

Reiner Fuellmich 1:57:02
So is this an oversimplification? Or is it correct when I say that the debt that they’ve issued in return for the debt that they’ve issued, they’ve taken our assets and our money?

Leslie Manookian 1:57:18
They have stolen everything that Western civilization has created, essentially. That $30 trillion in debt went into someone’s pocket? Right? And whose pockets has it gone into the most? The people at the top, whether it’s a defence contractor or a pharmaceutical industry, I mean, I think that the US government gave $10 billion to the pharmaceutical industry to create these COVID injections, and now they’re making tens of billions of dollars, but we will never be repaid that. They are buying off school systems, they are buying off the universities, they are buying off, so yes, this money has been issued, it’s been created out of thin air, and put on the backs of the taxpayers. So we have been robbed of all of our future earnings and our future productivity, in order to keep the people who are in power who have created this catastrophe, this financial and political catastrophe from being held accountable, because they know darn well what’s going to happen when people realise that they have no intention of ever meeting their promises or obligations.

You know, if you look Reiner at what’s happened in the US, we have more federal national debt than we do unfunded public pensions. In Europe, they’ve been promising the people, oh we’re gonna give you these unbelievably generous retirement programmes. So there’s this imbalance if you look, one, the US has super high federal national debt, and in Europe, they have super high pensions. In the US, we have lower pension liabilities, and Europe has lower federal debt obligations. But if you look at them in aggregate, they’re very, very similar amounts. Yes, they are broke, they’ve been promising people for decades that we’re gonna give you these generous retirement benefits, and they don’t have the money to do so. So you know, listen, at some point, the buck stops somewhere, right? I don’t know if you have the saying all over the world, but at some point the chickens come home to roost. And basically, that’s what’s happening. There is no further way to extend this, they’ve got to do something before they actually start defaulting. And countries are very close to defaulting on their debt. And once that happens, there will be this spread, it will just spread all over the world and they have to prevent that from happening.

Reiner Fuellmich 1:59:57
So in other words, the small window of opportunity that Klaus Schwab talks about really means it’s a euphemism for, we’ve got to run, or else they’re gonna catch us.

Leslie Manookian 2:00:09
A 100 percent. I think that this financial piece reinforces everything that Patrick said about them talking about, you know, the window of opportunity. And I think that they’re really struggling because I think that they gave themselves roughly two years to achieve this, and that’s up. Two years to achieve it before 2022, because otherwise, if they didn’t have everybody jabbed, if they didn’t have everybody in the system, if everybody was not implanted with something to control them, if they didn’t have a digital ID to access the internet, and to control their health and their participation in society, then they didn’t have enough control to force the last few percent who haven’t complied into it. And that’s where we are. So I think that the wheels are starting to come off and what’s going on in Canada, if we need proof that what has happened around the world in the last two years is not about public health. All I have to say is one word, and that is Canada. They have invoked martial law, they are arresting people for exercising their constitutionally protected right to protest peacefully to demonstrate peacefully. They are freezing their bank accounts and their assets. This is not about public health. This is about maintaining control. So I think that that is evidence that there is a crack in this dam, and they are going to struggle very, very hard to manage the situation.

Reiner Fuellmich 2:01:40
Thank you very much, Leslie. I don’t want to cut anyone off. So please, Dexter and Virginie, and Ana.

N. Ana Garner 2:01:48
Yeah, I would like to jump in. I have a couple of questions. Leslie, what an excellent presentation. Thank you so much. One of the things that hasn’t really been discussed, at least from the financial standpoint is this agenda that some people are aware of that there’s also a depopulation component to this. I can understand how with the debt, regarding pensions, how the elderly or post pensioners would be targeted, perhaps. What befuddles me is, why would they target in some ways the children and the unborn, as we know, the pregnant women receiving this injection have super high levels of miscarriages. And there was a large study about that, and the children who were at no risk of dying from COVID are being injected with a much greater risk of dying from the injection. So not that it’s acceptable to kill off the elderly to avoid facing that debt, but it seems to me that the other would be so counterproductive, even to these pathological agendas that they have. Do you have any comment about that?

Leslie Manookian 2:03:15
I think it’s a very, very interesting issue, Ana. We know that they were using deadly drugs in the UK, literally, you know, killing the elderly. We know in the US that they’ve been denying them treatments. It’s a very peculiar situation that they are doing this to young people but you know, Klaus Schwab has said, and Bill Gates has talked about the problem of population, it is no secret to anybody that these people involved with the World Economic Forum, have a depopulation agenda. And so I think that they have such hubris as well, that they believe that they should decide who reproduces, and there is evidence for this. I’m sure Patrick knows more about it than I do. But there is evidence for this. There is, you know, I mean much of the World Economic Forum, much of the people involved, Bill Gates, Bill Gates’ family, they go back they’re connected to the Nazi regime and to the original eugenicists. The UN is tied into that. You know, everybody knows about the book, Brave New World, which was written by Aldous Huxley, but his brother, Julian Huxley he was instrumental in UNESCO. And I think that that’s a big part of it. And so this is why so much of this perhaps, you know, listen, I’m not an expert on this, so I don’t want to, I can’t give you references off the top of my head, but I do know that Bill Gates’ father was involved with Planned Parenthood. He was a eugenicist. Margaret Sanger, who was the founder of Planned Parenthood talked about that the most compassionate thing that a large black family could do was to kill some of their young, stop having babies. These people have very, very sick motivations. And so, again, I think it’s important, I think I said this earlier, it’s so important to understand that most of us are decent, kind, compassionate, honest, loving human beings who want what’s best for our fellow human beings. But there’s a percentage of the population who don’t think like we do. And it’s very hard for us to get inside their minds. Because we don’t think like them. And because it’s unconscionable. What they do is unconscionable to us, to any of us, who have a shred of decency in our hearts.

And so Ana, I mean, it’s speculation, but I think that it’s served their overall agenda of reducing the population. They are very concerned and listen, would you if you wanted to rule the world, do you want to have to try and control 10 billion people? Or do you want to try and control? I don’t know, 5 billion or 500 million? You know, I think that’s probably the explanation. And then I think there’s also an explanation that may not be sinister at all. And that is that they are injecting things into us. And they have no idea what it’s going to do to people. Maybe they do, but let’s just give them the benefit of the doubt and say that they are pushing these things without clear evidence of what they cause. Maybe they just didn’t realise what it was going to do to reproduction. Maybe they didn’t know. And so maybe that is their explanation. I don’t fully buy that. Because the distribution studies that were leaked out of Japan, the biodistribution studies showed that the lipid nanoparticles were accumulating in excessive amounts in the ovaries. But that could be a less, you know, just a more innocent explanation.

N. Ana Garner 2:07:07
Thank you very much, Leslie.

Viviane Fischer 2:07:08
The strange thing, if we think about like if it’s the incompetence theory, then it’s strange that once these more and more hints with regard to the problems, especially with regards to fertility, are not being taken seriously. I mean, that’s kind of weird, because otherwise, okay, if you’d gone the wrong way, then maybe you would now need to come forward and say, we’re awfully sorry, we have to do something about it have to stop that like with pregnant women, or like also the toddlers or whoever they target now. I mean that’s not explainable, I think.

Leslie Manookian 2:07:49
Viviane, I agree with you 100 percent. There is no way to explain the tens of thousands of deaths that have been reported to the CDC and to the European Medicines Agency, and yet these products persisted being on the market. There’s no explanation that is innocent. There is not. I totally agree with you. I was just trying to say, you know, listen, if you want to try and make some kind of innocent explanation, there’s no explanation for spending $30 trillion. There’s not because obviously there’s no way to ever repay that. It’s not possible. There’s no way to promise all the promises. It’s always been about politics and power, with no intention of ever coming good on their promises. Any thinking person has to conclude that what’s happening is a global coup. That’s it. It’s a global coup. And, you know, I’m sure people will lambaste me as some kind of a conspiracy theorist or something, but there is no innocent explanation to what is happening around the world right now. None.

If everything that was happening was innocent, they would have stopped all of the spending. They wouldn’t have silenced all the doctors and scientists. They wouldn’t have given this to innocent children and pregnant women. They wouldn’t have done anything that they’ve done. They would have taken these off the market. There would not be [all] this. They wouldn’t have changed the definition of pandemic. They wouldn’t have changed the definition of a vaccine. They wouldn’t have done all the things that they’ve done, if there was an innocent explanation.

Reiner Fuellmich 2:09:25
I agree.

Patrick M. Wood 2:09:26
Can I throw a question back in, Reiner.

Reiner Fuellmich 2:09:29
Sure.

Patrick M. Wood 2:09:30
Leslie, you might have mentioned the word derivative along the way in your presentation. I’m not, I think I heard that. But could you expand just a little bit more on this? The bank creditors International Settlements estimates, this was 2000, well this was a year ago, they estimated that the total notional value of the derivatives market in the world now, ah let me get the number right, estimated to be $610 trillion, and the the function of the derivatives market almost destroyed the financial system back in 2008 when Lehman Brothers went south and caused global shock wave and all these derivative contracts started to be called or triggered, and it almost put the giant insurance company AIG out of business, the claims that were being lodged against them for these derivative triggers. This market now is almost twice as large as it was in 2008, the derivatives market. it’s a number we can’t calculate it. I mean, who knows $610 trillion. But this seems to me to be a sword hanging over our head that nobody really pays attention, maybe because it’s so hard to understand what derivative is in the first place. But you have any comment on that?

Leslie Manookian 2:10:58
Yeah, Patrick, it’s such a complex issue, and most people don’t even understand. A derivative is, it’s hard to explain, I mean some people don’t even understand what a stock or a bond is. And a derivative is something that derives its value on that underlying instrument, but it has components of time, and volatility and other components that play into its value. And the reason I’m unpacking it a little bit, so that people have at least a little bit of an understanding of what it’s about. And it is literally a sword of Damocles, hanging over everybody. And here’s how it works. $600 trillion is, you know, beyond any of us to even comprehend how big that is to the financial markets. I can’t remember off the top of my head how big global government bond markets are, or stock markets, but I do know that global bond markets are about five times that of the stock market. And this number, this derivative dwarfs the global bond markets. And the reason it’s so important is because what happens is, when a bank or a corporation issues a bond, or a government issued a bond, what will happen is, and this is why there was a mortgage problem is that the bank issues the loan to a borrower, and then the bank sells the bond, sells the loan to somebody else. And then that other person, that other player took those loans, packaged them together, so that they are all super high investment grade investments, and packaged them and sold them to the public. And what happened was, people started to realise that this was junk, literally junk, it wasn’t investment grade at all. And it threatened to take down the entire financial system.

And now we’re at $600 +trillion in derivatives. And those same, same factors are at play. But it’s worse because it’s not just in the United States, or in Europe. Now what’s been happening for the last 10 or 15 years, is that the emerging market countries have been issuing debt in dollars. Okay, they’ve been issuing it in dollars, they have to pay it back in dollars. If one of them defaults, or if you see one of these derivatives, these derivative agreements default where someone has bought a put, which is an option to sell a bond. If one of those things collapses, you will have a contagion that is global, that will bring everything to its knees. And so it’s another way that two things are happening. One is they’re keeping the system going through these derivatives. And two, they make extraordinary amounts of money, because people just pay them to buy options, or a derivative on these underlying assets. And so if one little domino falls, the whole house of cards will come down. So I know I’m trying to keep this as simple as possible, but it’s a really, really important issue that would take a long time to really unpack and frankly, I’m not as up to speed on every single aspect of how it plays out in the markets today. But I can tell you that it is something that would create a huge problem around the world, if you just saw one thing, and there is evidence of this in the past. I mean, I was in the financial markets in what was called the Long Term Capital Management crisis, which was the “smartest guys” in the room. It was all these super mathematical geniuses who created models to invest and they were investing in Russia, saying that they would never ever default. And what happened was actually, there was a default, and then it was contagious. And all these other markets, the same thing happened. We also saw an Asian market crisis contagion and so, to your point, when you’ve got that amount of money, which is not on anybody’s balance sheet, no one is recognising the risk or accounting for it anywhere, if one or two of those things go down, and this is the exact reason why the US banks wouldn’t deal with Deutsche Bank, because they had so much derivative exposure, trillions of it, I forget what the amount was that Deutsche Bank had, but they said, we’re not going to deal with you anymore, because they knew that it was a house of cards waiting to collapse. And all it’s going to take is one bank somewhere, or one country somewhere to collapse, which will trigger a massive contagion all over the world.

Reiner Fuellmich 2:15:39
Thank you for directing our attention that way, too. I think it was over 70 trillion back then. And maybe it’s down to 40 trillion. Bjorn probably knows better than I do. Dexter and Virginie, you wanted to ask questions.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 2:15:55
Yes I’ve got, Leslie I just want to say thank you so much for your excellent presentation. You have definitely clarified the evidence, specifically in relation and you’ve very beautifully built up what Mr Wood has presented when it comes to technocracy and ultimately sustainable development. In your opening, you have mentioned the following and that is that there is no shareholder activism. So I would like us to focus specifically, what does this mean in respect to the pharmaceutical companies, and the pharmaceutical companies I’m making reference to is the COVID-19 pharmaceutical companies?

Leslie Manookian 2:16:42
It’s a very interesting question, and it’d be very interesting to see how that plays out as more evidence of fraud and the clinical trials does come out. There have been allegations of fraud in the Pfizer clinical trials, as we all know, that was, I think, that was revealed by Project Veritas. But essentially shareholder activism is, well the way that a corporation is structured is that it borrows money from debt, but also it finances itself through investments in the form of stock. So the very large investment managers have a role to play in terms of holding management accountable to having sound strategy, investing their capital because it’s their capital, if you invest in the stock of a company, you own a piece of the company, okay? And it’s your job, and your right to require that management of those corporations actually manage the company to maximise your interest as a shareholder. What is happening is that that element of shareholder activism is gone, because all of the giant institutions are not asking corporations holding their feet to the fire.

Now and then you will see a corporate raider come in, who will buy the company on the cheap, and throw out management and then sell off the assets. Okay. I mean, people have heard about those corporate raiders in the past, but that doesn’t really happen anymore. Now, when we turn specifically to, or it doesn’t happen very often. And I would say as well, Dexter, it’s very important to say that not that there’s no shareholder activism, but it is not very widespread. And that for the most part, it is my belief that the major investment institutions that are investing in corporations in the stock market are not actually actively giving criticism and really holding management’s feet to the fire. They will sell the stock if they don’t like what management are doing. But that’s not enough. They should be, you know, actively harassing them if they think that they’re doing crazy, you know, pursuing crazy strategies. And what’s very interesting, if you look at the pharmaceutical industry is now Moderna, who are the investors in Moderna? I don’t know every single one. But I do know that Bill Gates is a big investor. I do know that there are other major insiders in it. And so there is zero incentive for them to act as activist shareholders. And there was also very little incentive for them to hold them accountable if there was anything awry in their clinical trials.

When it comes to Pfizer, it will be very, very interesting to see how that plays out because there have been these allegations of fraud by someone who was involved with the clinical trial itself. And if I were a major investor in Pfizer, I would want to be investigating this and finding out what exactly happened because you could actually sue them. You know, we saw in the Enron scandal that they were ultimately sued for fraud. And so that is something that could actually happen. And, you know, if the allegations that have been made so far are correct, then they absolutely should be held responsible, and there has been fraud. The big problem here is that the amount of assets that are held now by BlackRock and Blackstone and Vanguard, and I’m forgetting the other really big one, they are so big, I mean, they make AIG looks like a little flea in terms of too big to fail. And so they literally own a huge portion of the system. And it is very unlikely, in my opinion, that they would do anything to hold these people accountable, because they are actually in on what’s going on. And the reason I say they’re in on it is that they’ve been buying up houses, you know, Blackrock allegedly bought 20,000 houses in Florida. They’re buying up full neighbourhoods in Texas. This really speaks to the Klaus Schwab promise that you will own nothing and be happy, and it will all be owned by the people at the top. So I hope that answers your question.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 2:21:21
You have clarified it. So what I want to get into now is that I want to get into the shareholders. And my question that I want to pose to you when it comes to the United States, CDC, the NIH, and the FDA specifically. And yeah, I’m actually also looking specifically at Mr. Dr. Anthony Fauci, who is NIAID, Director of NIH, do they have any shares in any of this C19 vaccines, pharmaceutical companies? Are you aware of it?

Leslie Manookian 2:21:57
Yes, absolutely. So I didn’t go into all of this, because you could talk about it for hours. But basically, what we are seeing is that there has been a wholesale takeover of the medical complex by these special interests for the past 110-[1]15 years. And there were two really pivotal things that happened. One in 1980, there was a bill passed in Congress called the Bayh-Dole Act. And the Bayh-Dole Act allowed those who work for government and conduct research, funded by taxpayers to begin to retain some of the intellectual property rights to those patents that they develop. And Anthony Fauci’s [NI]AID developed the Moderna vaccine, essentially, they developed it, and many of the people who work for him, including himself, own patents on the Moderna vaccine. And yes, they can earn $150,000 per year per patent. That’s my understanding. So if they have patents in other country, in other companies as well, so I don’t know if they actually have stock ownership, but they have a financial vested interest.

But I think you’re getting at an even more important thing, Dexter, and that is that there is a revolving door and extremely intricate web of finance between the FDA, the CDC, NIH, NIAID and industry. FDA, the drug approvers at FDA 60 percent of their, – oh, I forgot to talk about one other thing, I said there were two things, there was the by Bayh-Dole Act, and then there was something called the Prescription Drug User Fee act, and that was passed in 1992. And that’s very important, because what it did was it it set up a system to allow the pharmaceutical industry to have their drugs fast tracked through the FDA approval process, in order to get drugs for unmet medical needs to the market rapidly. And what’s happened is it started out as like $100 million a year, I think it’s $1.3 billion this year, and it amounts to about 45 percent of FDAs entire budget.

If you look at just the drug approvers the pharmaceutical industry pays about 60 percent of their salaries. In addition, if you look at the person who was the head of the CDC for eight years, Dr. Julie Gerberding, she left after Obama left office, she left and she went and she headed up Merck vaccines globally making millions and millions of dollars. Scott Gottlieb who used to be, I can’t remember I think he was CDC or was he FDA, he’s on the board of Pfizer now. There is a revolving door between these people who go from NIH, CDC, or FDA into industry. But on top of that, there are purse strings. So if you look at like, as I mentioned, the FDA is beholden to the drug companies that it’s supposed to regulate. And it’s even worse than that, because not only is FDA beholden, but so is CDC. There is something called the CDC Foundation, which is a public private partnership, and essentially, the pharmaceutical industries and the foundations like the Gates Foundation, and others give millions and millions of dollars to the CDC. The CDC and NIH both own patents on vaccines as well. So they have another vested interest. So the point is that it’s not just about ownership and stock. It is a mass web of conflicts of interest and financial interests, at every level of the regulatory agencies, and the pharmaceutical industry, and the medical complex.

And so then if you look at what happened during the last years of crisis, the hospitals were told under the Prep Act, if you do what CDC instructs you to do, meaning if you follow our COVID protocol, you cannot be sued by anybody. You have no liability, you can’t be sued. But if you deviate and you prescribe ivermectin, for instance, then you can be sued. So the hospital system is controlled as well. And then if you look at the grants, the budget from NIH, I have a slide on it, but I think Fauci’s own NIAID budget is somewhere in the 4 to $5 billion. But NIH’s whole budget, which he has a huge say on, is about $40 billion. That is what funds the research at the universities, the hospitals, all across the nation and the world. And so if you’re a scientist, or you’re a doctor, and you’re wanting to explore something that goes against something that the government policy supports, you will not get funding, or if you publish something that contradicts government policy, you will lose your funding. So they have a mechanism to shut down research and control what comes out. And then I mentioned that they also, the pharmaceutical industry, essentially controls the journals as well.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 2:27:37
So in short, what we can then clearly say, based on the evidence that you have just given that when it comes to the CDC, the NIH, the NIAID, and the FDA, there’s clearly a conflict of interest. And they have a vested interest in this pharmaceutical C19 vaccines?

Leslie Manookian 2:27:59
Dexter, I would go further, I wouldn’t say, I mean I would say yes there is absolutely a conflict of interest, but I would say it’s even worse than that. They are fully captured industries, fully captured agencies by the industry they are supposed to regulate.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 2:28:14
So my final question that I want to put to you in at the beginning of your evidence, you actually paint a very clear picture, and the picture that you’ve actually painted was to the extent as to why you left an investment manager at the time. And that is that you were shocked when, and I believe it’s one of the CEO of one of the guys or ladies in power, when they came to you, looked you in the eye and informed you yes, the FDA has got a problem, however, they are going to stick a black sticker on the medicine, but that i can tell you and that’s basically just paraphrasing, that does not even bother us, because the good news is that we will still be able to make billions and billions. So having said that, and there is now evidence that is on record, I would like you now to tell the jury based on that specific experience of yours, when it comes now and what is currently happening is that Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca and Johnson and Johnson what they are currently doing, and I believe that the audience are aware of it, and in a sense, it is common knowledge they are but only now starting to stick warning signs on the vaccines. It can cause myocarditis, it can cause pericarditis and so forth and so forth. But that in itself does not even stop the roll out. Will you say based on the scenario that you’ve actually sketched at the beginning? Is that exactly the same as to what you see that even if the sticker is on the vaccines, it still does not help them. And will you then, as a follow up question, say the only solution to stop these vaccines is for the FDA, the CDC to say these are toxins. It has to be stopped, as a matter of urgency. Can you please just clarify that and bring it within the context that I’ve stipulated? Thank you?

Leslie Manookian 2:30:24
Yes, so to the first question, Dexter, the situation is very, very similar. Yes, it is. The FDA requires this little black box, and it’s a warning. And it basically says then that the onus is on you. You’ve taken the drug, you took it voluntarily. And here’s the warning. If you don’t pay attention to the warning, then that’s your problem. So it is a way to keep the money machine rolling without taking it off the market. And with putting the pressure on the individual who makes the choice. Ultimately, there still can be lawsuits, as we saw with Vioxx and other things, but other drugs, but this is a people have to understand that the pharmaceutical industry in the last 20 years, was it Public Citizen released information that they have paid $35 billion in fines just in the last 10 or 15 years, I think it is the timeframe. These are not benign well meaning corporations. These are peddlers of toxins, literally. The vast majority of this stuff is not of use to the public. What is useful to the public is exercising, eating well, and supplementing, and managing stress levels, and sleeping. You know, I’m actually a healthcare practitioner as well. I’m a qualified Homoeopath. But the pharmaceutical industry doesn’t make any money. And so when I said that this whole takeover of the medical complex goes back over 100 years. What I meant is it goes back to something called the Flexner Report, which was a report that was commissioned by Rockefeller and Carnegie themselves to smear all of the natural forms of medicine that have been around for centuries, and in some cases, millennia, 5000 years for acupuncture, to get rid of them in order to install this chemical and pharmaceutical based paradigm.

I think that so yes, 100 percent what we’re experiencing right now is parallel to what I experienced a little over 20 years ago, in that conference room. And I think that the only way it’s going to get a lot worse is if there is some kind of a class action lawsuit or something major or something breaks to expose that there has been more fraud. I think expecting FDA to do the right thing is not going to happen right away. So, you know, that addresses the blackbox warning.

And then the other part of your question, I actually can’t, can you refresh my memory as to what exactly so I focus on that.

Reiner Fuellmich 2:33:11
How do you stop this?

Leslie Manookian 2:33:14
How do we stop it? Um.

Reiner Fuellmich 2:33:17
You’re muted Dexter?

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 2:33:20
Yeah, sorry about that. So the second part of the question is related to FDA, the best for then, and you actually in a sense you actually answered it in your last sentence, is that they supposed to actually stop it as a matter of urgency. So can you comment on that?

Leslie Manookian 2:33:40
Yes, they are supposed to –

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 2:33:41
– but if you want to elaborate, you’re more than welcome.

Leslie Manookian 2:33:44
I think that the answer to all of our problems is local control. Okay, everywhere around the world, in our own communities, we need our own currencies. We need our own independent healthcare systems. And I’m not saying that modern medicine can’t be part of it, but it should be about all of the holistic practitioners. They are harmless, and they are extremely beneficial and efficacious. They are just being smeared and silenced by the medical complex that controls everything that we’ve all been talking about. So to me, the true answer is, we need our own newspapers. Because the Gates Foundation gave a billion dollars to the media in the first decade of the 20th century. These media outlets are all controlled. We need to basically create local control, and we need to get rid of all of the changes that have been made to our constitutions and founding documents, because our founding documents are extremely profound, and and I think right on in most cases. They’ve just been bastardised over the past decades and centuries. So to me, the answer is to push back. And we push back locally by holding our local politicians accountable, our school boards and everybody else and saying, no, we are not going to participate in this anymore.

And one word of caution, I would say, Dexter is that, as I said in the beginning, I do not believe that what we are experiencing is about public health, or has ever been about public health since the very beginning. I think it’s about implementing a system of control so that those in power stay in power. And they can only do that if they have centralised power. So if we start to take it back in our own communities, they lose the power that they have. To me. That is the answer.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 2:35:49
Thank you very much, Leslie. Thank you, no further questions.

Reiner Fuellmich 2:35:51
Thank you very much, Leslie. That was really brilliant. In order to put things in perspective, what does it mean? If we look at what you have just told us itself, it’s a gigantic fraudulent scheme. But what does it mean, in reality? Let us take a very quick look, before we then turn to our next expert witness, at a couple of very short videos, just to see what the end result of this kind of corruption, because that’s what we’re talking about, what the end result is.

Khalilah Mitchell 2:36:32
Hi, I am a registered nurse in Nashville, Tennessee, and my name is Khalilah Mitchell. I’m reaching out to everyone about the COVID-19 vaccination. I recently took the COVID-19 vaccination. After the shot, I felt fine, but within three days, I went to the doctor because I had problems with my face. The whole left side of my face actually, I have Bell’s palsy now, and as you can see I can’t smile. I’m trying to smile but I just want everyone to know that I think this vaccination is the worst thing ever and I would not give this to anybody, even my worst enemy. Please America they do not care about us. Do not take this vaccination

Covid-19 Vaccine Victim 2:37:42
What’s going down. Just video me (inaudible) holding me it doesn’t help. So I’m nervous whenever I keep my legs (inaudible), the shaking is not as bad, but watch what happens excuse the clothes on the bed. My husband has actually put up clothes for me watch my legs as I bend them out. mouth Can y’all see my legs? Watch this. It’s crazy huh just from standing out like this, you can see it’s got my whole body shaking. Put them back up and it kind of goes away and then just goes back to my upper body.

Benita Black 2:38:53
I took the first dose, the Pfizer first dose on the second of August 2021 in Atlas Road Boksburg. You listen to the news and they say it’s safe. I was thinking I was going to make a difference. I was very healthy. The only problem I have, well still have is this (inaudible) ulcer. Yeah, just normal anti acids because I do work for myself business owner. Firstly I had chest pains. I had shortness of breath. went to the doctor half of my lung is the tissue is damaged. So he said to me it looks like I’ve got emphysema, some kind of lung disease. Got back home started on the medication. About two months later, around about then I started feeling sick again. I went back to him and he described me antibiotics, which paralysed me completely. I thought I was going to die. My blood pressure was very high. I had joint pains. I couldn’t, I had cramps, I was shaking. I couldn’t even drive my car. So I decided to medicate myself, obviously, because my electrolytes are very low. I tried to get my electrolytes up so I have more energy. I still by this day, I can’t stand for very long. I can’t work very long because my joints, my muscles do tend to go in spasms. I’ve got like arthritis. My finger joints is quite sore. News media because they’re not telling you the truth. They’re not. This thing is killing people. If I knew that this would be the aftershock, I would have never taken it. Never give this to a person and say it’s safe and it will help to keep you safe from the Coronavirus or the COVID-19. It destroys people and it must be stopped.

Reiner Fuellmich 2:42:08
Someone is paying a very high price, as we have just seen. Now, let us hear another expert witness Bjorn Pivots is a lawyer and a financial expert from Germany. Bjorn.

Bjorn Pirrwitz 2:42:27
Okay, can you hear me all right.

Reiner Fuellmich 2:42:29
Yes.

Bjorn Pirrwitz 2:42:31
Okay, let me screen share my screen. I have to give approval for the recording. Okay. So do you see my screen?

Reiner Fuellmich 2:43:16
Yes.

Viviane Fischer 2:43:21
I think you’re not seeing the right screen.

Bjorn Pirrwitz 2:43:25
You’re not seeing the right screen. One second. Let me just move. Is this this one?

Reiner Fuellmich 2:43:37
Yes, I think we’re getting closer to the real thing. Okay.

Bjorn Pirrwitz 2:43:45
Okay,

Reiner Fuellmich 2:43:46
Now we can see it. Go ahead.

Bjorn Pirrwitz 2:43:47
Good. So, first of all, yeah, I’m gonna be quite short, because basically Leslie has already said most of what I was going to say, and more of course, but I mean she also touched upon some of the aspects I wanted to cover. So I’ll be quick. It’s just going to be a recap. But I first wanted to make two comments to what she said. And one is connected to shareholder activism. And this is a nice tie in to both the previous two presentations that we’ve heard from both Patrick and Leslie, because it ties in the technocracy with the financial disaster financial fraud that we’re seeing, and that’s the shareholder activism. I think one might say that yes, shareholder activism in the classical sense has disappeared, but what we are seeing today is a different type of shareholder activism, and that’s promoting and pushing today under the label of corporate social responsibility, and that’s pushing all the agendas that Patrick has touched upon in his first presentation. And it just shows that the investment world and the shareholders, they are all in on this. Yeah.

And so what we are doing here, because this is another thing that Leslie mentioned, she said we are being called conspiracy theorists. Now, we’re not, I mean, they label us as such, but we’re just doing what an investor would do, what any stock picker would do. You act on insufficient information, you try to read the tea leaves, you connect the dots, and then draw a conclusion from that. It’s an absolutely normal thing to do. So with that being said, let me jump right into it. I wanted to, these are the four points I wanted to talk about. The money system, the historical background to where we are today, the reasons of where we are today being the unresolved global financial crisis of 2007-2009. And at the end, kind of wrapping it all up with things that are happening, developments that are happening a little bit outside the public limelight.

So first of all about the money system, there is an interesting quote that helps to illustrate what we are talking about, and why it is so easy for these people to push through what they are pushing through all the timem, and that’s from Henry Ford. And he said, “if people knew and understood the banking and monetary system, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning”. And that’s actually quite true. Nobody knows that when you put money in the bank, that you earned, put it in your bank account, it is the bank’s money. All you have is a claim, you have a receivable against the bank. And when the bank goes belly up, then unless you’re covered by the minimum insurance amount from the banks Association fund, and there are enough funds in there, you will lose all your money. So that’s one thing. And the other thing is, people think that the bank works still in a way it has worked 100 years ago, meaning people bring money into the bank, as deposits, and the bank takes those deposits and lends them out. This is no longer how the world works. In effect [the loan] is created by the commercial banks themselves in the moment that they write a cheque that they write, that they createa loan. So this is how it works. And that is about 80 percent of the money in the market today is that money created by the private banks. And roughly I mean orders of magnitude, and only 20 percent is what the central banks print.

So let’s move on from there. And try to understand how did we get there? How was it possible that we have such a totally toxic and crazy system? And that’s there are two basic milestones that we need to be aware of. The first one was the abandonment of the gold standard in 1971, by Nixon. He basically, after the gold reserves of the US which were 75 percent of the world’s gold reserves after World War Two and when the Bretton Woods system was installed, had dramatically shrunk because of financing the Korean War, the Vietnam War, all kinds of other things that led him to push the brake and say we can no longer afford to have people with dollars come to our central bank and redeem the gold that they are entitled to. And from then onwards, all we have this was the creation of the so called fiat money. And fiat money means the dollar bill that you hold in your hand is worth something because we say so. This is basically what it means. And as long as people have trust this is going to continue. So everybody understands immediately that once the trust is gone, the system is no longer sustainable.

The second biggest or very important milestone that we’ve gone through is the so called deregulation or Big Bang, that’s in 1986 in London, and then in the US under the Reagan administration, which basically allowed banks to do things that were previously forbidden. And this led to a huge stock market rally, which culminated in the dot-com bubble, crash off the dot-com bubble in the year 2000-2001. And it said it was the start for a gigantic casino capitalism, as I would call it. Leslie has talked about that before, that’s the global rise of the derivative market, which ended in the Lehman collapse of 2008, and the great financial crisis which followed thereafter. Just to give you an example, we’ve talked about it before both Patrick and Leslie have mentioned it, the value of the global derivatives market, I think the number mentioned was $600 and something trillion dollars here and this number from the Bank of International Settlements in Basil was December 2019, it was still at $558 [trillion]. But that’s only half the story, because this only takes into account derivatives, trading and exchanges. There’s a lot of over the counter products, bespoke products between two parties. And the estimate is that it’s going up to like 1 trillion. And 1 trillion is a gigantic number. It’s about 10 times the global GDP, which is just under $100 trillion. So this is just gigantic.

What happened between 2007-2009, first the subprime crisis then [the] global financial crisis, sovereign debt crisis in Europe was that, essentially, the central banks have taken all the risk that had accumulated on banks down sheet and moved them onto their own balance sheets. It was just yeah, a bailout and a transfer of risk to the taxpayer. And this is where we are today. And this also destroyed the revenue model of the banks, because in order to keep the banks afloat, interest rates were lowered, and they went down to zero and even negative in the euro zone, which basically destroys the business model of a bank. If you have to pay money, interest on deposits on an asset that you hold and cannot earn an interest, I mean then you’re basically screwed. I mean, this sooner or later must crash. it’s obvious. And also, central banks have started to buy up bonds and other assets from the banks from corporates, and this is what we call money printing, which resulted in a huge expansion of the money supply in the markets, as we can see here, and on the left we have the ECB balance sheet as percent of GDP, and on the right we have it for the FED so your Eurozone versus dollarzone. And you can see that the ECB balance sheet, these are the orange data points, has risen dramatically and has now reached almost 75 percent of the Eurozone’s GDP. This is an absolute dramatic increase, and this has basically doubled in the last two years.

In the US the situation is almost similar from an absolute number with both in the order of magnitude of 8 trillion in that, yeah, in balance sheet number, but the economy in the US is far bigger, which is also due to the fact that the dollar is actually a reserve currency. And the US can rely not only on its own economy, but on all the rest of the world, which uses the dollar to do transactions denominated in dollars. And that’s about three times its own economy. That’s why the other percentage is still lower, so they have a longer run rate. But you can see that if we continue at this pace, we will reach a point where the ECB balance sheet, which is basically worthless, I mean all these are worthless assets, except for the growth that they have, but that’s not more than 5 percent, will actually cross [and] overtake the amount of the GDP. And this system at that point is bankrupt.

This money printing has also resulted in a huge asset inflation, as you can see on the right hand side, in the real economy the inflation has not been that American’s that fell by people, and that’s why we have been told that we can print as much money as we want. You see, it doesn’t really affect your daily life, and there is no real inflation. But on the other hand, the inflation has occurred in different asset classes, everybody who owns real estate, who wanted to buy real estate in the last years, knows about this. And it’s also happened in the stock markets, in the bond markets, I mean everywhere.

So it has been the money that the central banks printed has been going directly to the financial investors. And they have basically benefited hugely from this. You can see this also here, this is just a NASDAQ. And you see that, basically it almost doubled between the beginning of 2020 when the COVID crisis started until today. It came out a little bit from its top, which was in December lately, and maybe this is the beginning of the downfall we’re going to see. But who benefited I mean, only the richest of the rich benefited obviously the people who own the stocks, especially the large shareholders and founders of the big tech companies. Just another interesting KPI, the so called Shiller price earnings ratio, which was invented by a famous economist Shiller, the author of the book, Irrational Exuberance, who has created this index, which basically takes the last 10 years revenues of the companies and divides them. In the market capitalization of the companies today, the trading value by the last 10 years average earnings, and we can see here that we are at level 35. So 35 times earnings is where the market trades today. This was as of Friday. And you can see when Black Monday happened in 1987, we were just at about 17. So this is absolutely critical territory. And sooner or later, this must collapse because no bull market runs forever.

Let’s go back to here. So this is where we are. Asset inflation. The rich got richer, huge debt out their balance sheets of central banks almost over taking the GDP number. So that’s where we are. And as Leslie mentioned before, there’s no way out because the central banks is already the last resort, there’s nobody behind them. Meaning there’s really only you and I, and everybody who has a bank account in the bank, the next model, when there is a crash, it’s going to be a bail in.. Remember the Cyprus crisis in 2013 when deposit holders were basically I think they were shaved over 47 percent I think it was. The most was the assets, their accounts were wiped out? Because that’s the way to recapitalise the banks. So a collapse is inevitable. There will be deflation, there will be hyperinflation, we just don’t know when, but it will happen sooner or later. And it might happen once people realise that the emperor has no clothes. So meaning once their trust in the system has vanished, and then there will be a bank run, and then it’s over. But we don’t know when, this is the one thing that we don’t know.

So to wrap it all up, how does this all connect together? And why is it happening now? There’s the people in power who basically own the world economy. They obviously know all that, and they are preparing for the day when this is gonna collapse because you cannot kick the can down the road endlessly. And there are several things that have happened in parallel in the background, kind of outside the public limelight that tell us that obviously, this is premeditated. One of the things is that digital identity ID2020 Alliance. You see, there’s big fortune 500 companies, and big NGOs like Rockefeller Foundation, Gavi, of course, is part of it again, which is coordinating programmes and promoting the idea of a digital identity. All and (inaudible) a digital identity, which is a prerequisite for the control that Leslie mentioned before, of the population.

And it is more and more obvious that the green pass or vaccine passes that have been introduced, virtually in lockstep all over the world, are a dry run for this digital identity. And I put one example in the lower right hand corner of just one such initiative, it’s a German startup that’s just created an app where you can integrate your physical and your national identity card, your green pass, and your driver’s licence all in one app. I mean, it all goes in the same direction. And it’s just showing that this is in the making. Another trend that is being pushed, and that both Patrick and Leslie have mentioned before, it’s the global effort to get rid of cash. There is this Better Than Cash Alliance, also under the umbrella of the United Nations. It’s always done in the name of financial inclusion of sustainability. This is kind of the headline that has been promoted. So it’s all these socialist social responsibility agendas that are being pushed by the United Nations and the programmes that are pushing socialism that Patrick has so brilliantly outlined in his first presentation. So just another data point.

And now, the last trend that has been emerging over the last few years is the push for the introduction of digital central bank currencies. This is a paper from the Bank for International Settlements, which is kind of the Central Bank of the central banks sitting in Basel. And this paper is from March 2018. So this was already two years before the COVID crisis broke out, that’s showing the status of the different projects that are being studied in central banks across the globe, and virtually everybody is in there, except Africa. Which, by the way, is the main reason why they are pushing, allegedly the buzzword being financial inclusion, for the effort to get rid of cash, so obviously a contradiction. And what will these digital currencies do? What’s different to what the two other crypto currencies are to what we have today? Well, the big difference is gonna be this is going to be programmable money, and it can be switched on and switched off at will by the central bank. They no longer need what Chrystia Freeland, the finance minister of Canada has just done last week in Canada, where she still needs the cooperation of the banks and apparently she’s gotten it and has tracked all the transactions of all the people who funded the Canadian truckers, the truckers themselves, anybody that sold them anything. I mean, they can already do all that, if all the establishment and all the institutions cooperate. So we can get a glimpse of the future of how it will look like. But it will be even easier once you have central bank money, you have your wallet on your phone, then they can switch you off and on like this. So all these things together show that they are aware that the crisis will come that the system will collapse.

And these initiatives are necessary to prepare for the unrest that is going to come and then as Lesley mentioned, the hand that they will extend to us is going to be the universal basic income or whatever financial relief we are going to offer you, but you have to download this app, and this money is going to be on your phone, but you can only spend it. You have to spend it you cannot save it. If you go outside of 50 kilometre radius of your home or five kilometre radius or whatever they invent, then the money will not be available or it will be cancelled. So these things are happening. And another final tell of what’s going on is that the really rich people prepare by flight into real assets. Bill Gates is now the largest landowner in the United States of agricultural land. And he’s not the only one you see there. There are other big rich families who are doing the same thing. So all this shows that there’s a shift of their assets into real assets. Leslie mentioned before that Blackstone and BlackRock also are buying up big portfolios of defaulted properties with defaulted loans all across the country, so becoming the biggest landlords in the United States. And the end result will be that they are going to be the ones that are going to rent to you once you’ve lost everything.

And so these two books we’ve already spoken about them, of Klaus Schwab they tie it all together. They’re not even shy about what their plans are. Everything is spelled out in these two books what their plans are. And for me, this is absolutely clear that in the background, they are trying to prepare for the new order. And they use COVID as a deflection from the financial crisis, so they could blame it all on COVID. Now that maybe the narrative is starting to collapse from the borders, they are pushing war with Russia and with Ukraine. So they needed another deflection, and they will probably come up with others. But this is the plan. And with that, I’m done. I just wanted to say a few words, because I forgot to say this at the beginning to establish my credentials, like why am I qualified to give this expert testimony. So as Reiner mentioned, I’m a lawyer by education and I have a German and a US Law Education, and I’ve worked in finance and in investment banking, and I was a managing director in Lazar in Germany before it merged. In the year 2000, I ran a Pan European venture, (iniaudible) German office. We didn’t last long because of the collapse of the market. And then later, I started a fund in a private equity and a mezzanine fund, together with a couple of partners. The company still exists today, but I’ve left to pursue other projects already a few years ago. And, yes, I have been in the venture capital business basically since the year 2003. I’m an investor myself, and I’m the chairman of a venture capital company, headquartered in Germany. So that’s it for me. I hope I was quick enough. And if there are any questions, I’m happy to answer.

Reiner Fuellmich 3:12:34
Thank you, Bjorn. Again, this is probably oversimplifying things, but is it correct that those who are pushing the great reset and the fourth industrial revolution, Mr. Global, or the Davos Clique, is it correct that they have been running a gigantic Ponzi scheme, which we now have to pay the price for?

Bjorn Pirrwitz 3:13:01
Well, in my mind, yes absolutely. I don’t have any other when the data (inaudible) clear. Obviously, we don’t have any written agreement where these people agree to come together to conspire. But we have circumstantial evidence, and I think the circumstantial evidence is unambiguous.

Reiner Fuellmich 3:13:30
Okay. Do my esteemed colleagues have any questions?

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 3:13:36
Yes, Bjorn thank you so much for your evidence that you’ve let.Thank you for clarifying and basically just continuing with what has been said, and just making sure that the audience in the jury understands. My question I want to pose to you, Bjorn is that you have actually started off your evidence by stating that you have to understand and that is the jury needs to understand where this problem started. And the problem started when we entered into a fiat money system. And then you start to build up and then you went to the second factor. And then the second factor is where the gold standard was basically removed completely. So I want to focus on those two specific factors.

Bjorn Pirrwitz 3:14:34
Can I interrupt you Dexter, I’m sorry.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 3:14:37
Yes.

Bjorn Pirrwitz 3:14:37
This is one and the same thing. The abandonment of the gold standard was actually the creation of fiat money because you could no longer redeem. Before when we had the gold standard, when you had $1 bill, you could go to the (inaudible) and you could redeem the gold it represented. This is the gold standard. And in 1971, the Nixon administration said, we’re no longer going to do this. And so then he just basically said, just trust me.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 3:15:17
Okay. So it is one and the same thing. Thank you for clarifying that. So my question that I want to put to you, and you have actually also mentioned in your evidence is that the money that is currently printed, which is fiat money, it does not have any value. [Do you agree with that?

Bjorn Pirrwitz 3:15:37
It doesn’t have any inherent value. Of course, it has value because you and I, we use currencies every day to purchase things, and other people then who get the money. So it represents a certain value, but this value is exclusively based on our trust that it does have a value, otherwise, it’s just a piece of paper.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 3:16:03
Okay, so I understand and you’ve actually put an emphasis on inherent value itself, will you then say, in order to resolve this financial problem that we are currently faced with, will it be best then to actually get back to the gold standard? Is that a possible solution going forward?

Bjorn Pirrwitz 3:16:27
Yes, that’s one aspect of it, it definitely has to be tied to that. So the thing with printing money is that if your GDP doesn’t grow at the same time, by the same amount, the value of your goods and services will decline. So I mean, the nominal value must always go up, there’s more and more money for just the same things. And if you have gold, then that puts a lid on it, it’s a limitation to that and you cannot expand the nominal amount of the currency in circulation indefinitely. And you know, as a consumer, or as a citizen, that I can redeem my my dollar bills any day for the amount of gold it represents.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 3:17:39
Thank you very much, Bjorn. So you have also stated and there is basically clarifying, we are talking about inherent value. So now I want to get to then, which means all these investors that has invested in this fiat money, so is it correct if London actually then used the same terminology and say that even their wealth is inherent wealth? It does not have any value? Is that correct?

Bjorn Pirrwitz 3:18:06
No no, wait, I think there’s a confusion. Nobody invests in currencies, I mean, you can do it if you want to speculate because the external value of a currency may compared to another currency may move, and then you do an arbitrage deal. But the assets have a value, and you represent them with money, and the more you print, but if the amount of goods remains the same, then obviously the prices nominally go up, and your money becomes worth less and less. So holding cash then means you’re losing, and that’s why you have to go into real assets, because the real assets are what they are and you get for them the amount and currency that they are worth at any given point in time when you choose to make that transformation.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 3:19:03
Okay, so then the emphasis is real assets. That’s what we need to focus on. So then, you have also mentioned and you have corroborated evidence from Leslie as well, and also from Patrick Wood, and that is there is absolutely no way out. So, ultimately we are going to encounter this complete financial collapse. You confirm that?

Bjorn Pirrwitz 3:19:33
Yes, there is no other intellectual solution out of that. I mean, it’s inevitable. You cannot continue to increase to print to make debts and to increase the amount of money in circulation indefinitely. Eventually the whole system will collapse because people will lose trust. This is what happened in the hyperinflation in Germany in 1923 One bread?? cost 130 billion, I think. Crazy hyperinflation. I mean, in the morning, you got paid, and in the afternoon your money was already worth half.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 3:20:15
Okay. So then in essence then when we actually go back to the evidence from Patrick Wood, he actually mentioned frontal assault, meaning then that seeing this can cannot be kicked further down the road. Ultimately, you will then confirm that we as humanity are now basically faced with the ultimate end that we need to come to the realisation that we are talking about a complete financial crash?

Bjorn Pirrwitz 3:20:48
Yes, I think it’s inevitable. The only thing is, as Niels Bohr, the famous physicist said, predictions are very difficult, especially regarding the future. So we just don’t know when it’s going to happen. But it will happen eventually. And all these trends that I showed, in the end, are proof, from me, that the people who know that and they are preparing for their crash, can then pick up the pieces.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 3:21:24
Okay, so then based on your experience, your expertise, and perhaps maybe I’m asking you now to speculate, and the reason why I want you to speculate is just so that the jury can get an understanding. And I will tell you as to why I want the jury to get an understanding is that if you’ve actually given us a historical backdrop as well as to when it basically started, and then what was the major events that actually brought about major changes? And that goes with evidence from Mr. Patrick Wood that goes as well also from the evidence which was laid on the second day of this grand jury. So what I want to put then to you itself, is then when it comes then to this historical backdrop, and the speculation, and I specifically say speculation, because you’ve made it clear that you do not know when, if you have now based on your expertise and experience, if you have to give a date, say maybe for argument’s sake, five years, two years, three years, what will you say? And I mean, obviously, I will actually say that will come to speculation, but at least it will give an indication.

Bjorn Pirrwitz 3:22:39
Yeah, I mean I don’t think it’s gonna be five years, I think it’s gonna be less than that. It’s gonna be less than that.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 3:22:49
So we are very very close then?

Bjorn Pirrwitz 3:22:51
Well, I can only say that, as me for myself, I’m trying to keep my cash in the bank at the very minimum, just so you can do you, yeah live your life and pay your bills and that stuff, and not leaving anything in excess in bank accounts, because it can happen any day and remember the Cyprus crisis.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 3:23:20
So will it then be correct as well to also say maybe perhaps one should actually talk about, it can be imminent, it can be like you say, any day.

Bjorn Pirrwitz 3:23:30
I don’t think it’s going to be that close. I mean, if we go back to this chart here, I think a critical point will be when the bad assets on the balance sheet of the central bank, like the GDP. So if we have, we already had 75 percent, we doubled that from in the last two years, from about 30 percent to 75 [percent], almost doubled. If we go over 100 [percent], then it’s basically like we are broke because the assets except for the gold, but that’s only 5 percent of the central bank assets, they’re not worth anything. They are corporate bonds, government bonds. They are nothing.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 3:24:25
And my last question that I want to put to you is that we’ve actually now been put in a their sustainable development and in capitalism and so forth. But then my last question I want to put to you, having regard that you have now given evidence to say that economic collapse is inevitable. Is it then that can one argue, can the other side basically argue, and I believe that that’s basically the argument, the argument is that the only way for us to avert this financial collapse is to introduce the Fourth Industrial Revolution, is to basically introduce technocracy. But again, technocracy can the fourth industrial revolution, can it actually avert this financial collapse?

Bjorn Pirrwitz 3:25:17
No, I think you have to turn this on its head. I think, when the crash happens, then these instruments will be introduced, or the hand will be extended to us “to save us”, allegedly, but as Leslie pointed that out very ably before, this is just about control, they will then just say, okay you’ve lost everything. We give you that Jubilee, but you have to agree to our terms, here’s the wallet, here’s money, you can spend it every month. You cannot save money, but you have to behave and so forth. I mean, this is kind of a scenario that I based on the developments that I observe, and that are happening, regardless. Yeah, very likely. I mean, this is the scenario. I mean, this is what’s gonna happen. They will try. This does not mean that it will happen like this, because people may wake up or may not, or a sufficient number of people may wake up and may not allow this to be introduced, but we will definitely have a crash.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt 3:26:52
Thank you very much. No further questions for me.

Reiner Fuellmich 3:26:54
Thank you, Bjorn. I’m sorry, Virginie.

Virginie De Araujo Recchia 3:27:02
Thank you sir for your testimony. I’m feel in terms (inaudible) also, I think that people has the real explanation now of what is really happening. My question is very simple. Should we start creating new local currency to form a parallel system as soon as possible? Should we create new local currencies to avoid this?

Bjorn Pirrwitz 3:27:36
Well it’s already happening, there are cryptocurrencies, although they’re trying to crack down on them and regulate it more and more, or people are using – the solution is not the creation of the new currency in the first place. So this will come later. First, the system needs to crash, and people will then find ways to make exchanges directly bypassing the currency which is just a storage of value. Yeah, the currency has lost this characteristic or this quality of storage of value. And people will find other storages of value, they will maybe trade in gold directly or in silver or in anything that they will come up with.

Virginie De Araujo Recchia 3:28:36
Thank you.

Leslie Manookian 3:28:37
I just wanted to chime in. First of all, Bjorn. That was fantastic. I’m sorry, I went first. But I wanted to say on the currency thing, Virginie one thing that we have in the United States is something called Junk silver. And these are coins that were made before, I think it’s 1965. And they are almost pure silver. And so they’re small denominations. And they’re also, you know, of a good metal and it’s a recognised unit of currency. And so there are certainly people who buy bags of what are what’s called Junk silver in order to have a means to exchange. Because as Bjorn said, so well, it’s just about having a mechanism to change it so that if I’m growing avocados, someone else may not want avocados, but I have to have a medium of exchange. And so it’s just something that we agree upon. It doesn’t have to be that there’s a new currency and you could use something like junk silver that already exists. I just don’t know like if there’s I don’t remember what the situation is with coins and currency in Europe, whether or not they are silver or anything like that. But I mean, it could be cowrie shells, it could be anything ultimately,

Bjorn Pirrwitz 3:30:02
Yeah, I agree on buying silver. Silver has the advantage that I mean, it has an advantage and a disadvantage. The advantage is that you can buy it even with a small wallet if you want to buy one ounce of gold. Boom 2000 euros. We have it’s been shooting up in the last few days actually, we are at 1900, and silver is just at 23. But then it makes it very heavy, right? If you want to carry one ounce of gold worth in silver, that’s kilos. I mean, you need suitcases for them. But yeah, I mean, but you can also buy smaller denominations, but then the premium is higher. Yeah.

Reiner Fuellmich 3:30:56
Well then let’s go back to what happened in the 1930s. Let’s ship huge amounts of money, which buy you just one loaf of bread in wheelbarrows. I hope it’s not gonna come to that. Well, Bjorn thank you so much. Thank you very much. Now let us turn to our last expert, Professor Christian Kreiss. He’s a professor of economics, Christian, maybe there is another way to solve this problem, I think you have a different view of these things.

Christian Kreiss 3:31:51
My microphone. I’m very glad to be able to speak here after these three very good and profound presentations. I really don’t know what to say anymore, but it’s a very good foundation for where to speak about. So let me go over the books. Okay. I’ll try to put it in around 20 or maybe 30 minutes, I will, again pick up a little bit of the background, but focusing on inequality, and increasing debt load, which was already mentioned several times, the role of COVID, and then I change a little bit and try to look to the real backgrounds in my opinion. And of course, in the end, introduce some possible solutions.

So what we have seen during the last 40 years, more or less, in the beginning, Patrick mentioned in the 70s, that there has been a shift. And you can see this shift, this simple chart here, which shows the productivity of the workers raised more or less the same rate as hourly compensation. But in the 70s, it just changed, productivity continued to grow, but hourly compensation not, so a wedge unfolded and inequality went up enormously. And that’s a worldwide phenomenon. It’s not only in the United States, it’s also in Europe and in most industrialised countries. And just one hint, if worker compensation would have increased along with productivity today, the minimum wage would be $26 instead of [$]7.25. So we don’t speak about peanuts, but about real, real huge sums of money. And this rising inequality led to growing investments led to increased growth because all this money, which went to the top one or 5 percent of the population, had to be reinvested, went to the funds, the banks, insurance companies, and drove growth quite a lot.

What we can see data from the Census Bureau of the United States during the last forty years, until shortly before COVID, we see a GDP per capita growth of 86 percent in real terms, but median income in the same time, timespan increased by only 18 percent. So mass income didn’t grow at the same pace as the supply side. So we had a wedge between supply and demand. When I first read those numbers and nearly couldn’t believe it, but what happened with how did all these people finance these beautiful new cars, beautiful new mobile phones and so on Berghaus??. And the answer is that as we have already worked by Bjorn, for example. So we have seen unfolding a huge growth wedge funded by debt.

For example, real household debt in Western countries increased six fold between 1980 and 2010. Though, that’s a pace, which just cannot go on back like this. And if you put it the other way around, if you put all the mass income of the people to buy real goods and services, so if you just divide the increase in median income by the US GDP per capita, you get 0.63, which for me was again, a shock, because it means that to supply all the goods and services needed, we just could shut down every third company, every third hotel, every third burger company and so on. Because the mass demand mass income just hasn’t kept pace. And that’s the very, in my opinion, the very reason for the financial crisis and our prices just before COVID.

So this increasing debt level, we can reconstruct it to you about Europe, or we already mentioned it and also Leslie mentioned it, total debt is just increasing, increasing, increasing this total debt as a percentage of GDP, back 40-50 years back. For $1 of GDP, we just hit $1 of debt today, we have 2.5 dollars of debt. And here at the outbreak of the first financial crisis, we had 195 percent debt, so nearly $2 debt per $1 GDP that was too high and caused the financial crisis. And the remedy for this debt, which was too high was more debt. That’s no fake news, it was really the remedy more debt. So what we can see here is a huge jump in debt during 2020. And percent of GDP, if you add the financial sector, you come up to about 360 percent. So each dollar of GDP corresponds today to 3.6 dollars of debt, and you can never pay back this debt. It’s what also Patrick, Leslie and Bjorn already said here..

And if you look at the quality of the debt, it’s also been going down here you have a chart, looking at the triple B rated debt and US high yielded only the US market. So the bad debts with low rating have increased a lot, that for me as an ex investment banker, I’ve been an investment banker for seven years before going to academia, and from a financial point of view, from a bankers point of view, it doesn’t doesn’t look pretty well. And as already mentioned, it’s not only debt that’s been exploding, but also the central banks with here the central bank balance sheet of the US Fed, it was about 8 trillion before the first financial crisis. And now it’s up to 9, you have to pay attention to 9 trillion. So the central bank money is the quantitative easing the fresh money printing, is it’s increased by 11 times if you put all this is a crisis mode. And the same applies to the ECB, you see, the central bank and the freshly printed money increased nearly tenfold within 15-17 years. So what’s the result? A lot of checks have been written on the future, especially during COVID, I’ll just in a few minutes come to COVID. We need some way a debt or money cart, it’s just necessary, it will never be it can ever be paid back. And there are at least six or seven solutions by the thing. The three most probable is either we will see inflation like the United States did in 1948 up to 1950 when prices just increased and debt was deflated. Or we’ll see a financial crisis depression and maybe deflation, or war also can be a solution, of course, because we have a huge wedge between supply and demand. And you can close the wedge also by just destruction processes, just like 1945 and the Hiroshima and Nagasaki and Central Europe you trust decreased production to catch up to close to wedge.

So which of these solutions might come? Now what’s the role of COVID in these structures? What I told you now was more or less the situation until COVID. if you have a short look at history in 1907, we had a big financial crisis and nearly no one knows about it. I studied economic history, my internet connection spare it tells me does it work?

Reiner Fuellmich 3:40:16
We can still hear and see you.

Christian Kreiss 3:40:20
Okay, if you look back at the crisis of 1907, John Pierpont Morgan then had owned 141 banks, and huge iron and steel complexes, he was one of the richest men in the world together with the Rockefeller. And he caused this world financial crisis by not involving his loans. And on August 22 and so a huge crash ensued until October, and John Pierpont Morgan got rid of his most important competitors. So that was the biggest deal in his life, in my opinion. He just increased his wealth tremendously. And what’s the message? You can earn much more money during crisis, during depressions, and even during war, than in peaceful times, so there are always people who profit from crisis. And if ever looked at the situation since COVID came to us, every day of lockdown fetches billions in profits to the big companies, to the big billionaires behind for the big players that are just like JP Morgan, then eliminating their competitors, the small and medium sized companies, the most the most famous example is Amazon versus retail shops. Yeah, there are small shops closed down and Amazon and Jeff Bezos grow richer and richer and richer.

But how do you achieve to that governments really will introduce lockdowns? Well, you have to systematically generate fear of death and illness, and that’s exactly what happened., because media, as Leslie told, the media are in the hands of some billionaire families. The media ownership structure is very, very concentrated. And either the media in the hands of some very big investors or families, or they’re government controlled, and they are all interested in generating fear and fear and fear of death and illness. And that’s how it works. And in those situations, those crisis situation, cash is king, and the big companies and the big players do know about that.

Last year, 3000 [of the] biggest companies in the world increased their cash holdings by nearly 1/3. It blew up and the stories from a purely financial point of view, very simple. You have huge cash reserves. The small and medium sized companies don’t, you wait until they go bankrupt, and it’s yours. Either you pay a very small amount or you get them for free, or get their their locations because they are just bankrupt. And our beloved Klaus Schwab and Thierry Malleret said exactly this in their book. In France in the UK, several industry voices estimate that up to 75 percent of independent restaurants might not survive the lock downs and subsequent social distancing measures, the large chains and fast food giants will. Of course, they have huge cash reserves. And they know this story. And they know, the playbook maybe. And that’s exactly the result we can see today is that the US billionaire wealth surged during the pandemic by over 2.1 trillion, an increase of 70 percent. That’s a huge increase. I think it’s not a coincidence. And today, the share of the US wealthiest people is higher than ever, even higher than the types of Rockefeller and JP Morgan. So what we see is a huge increase in financial power, the pyramid getting very much sharper.

And now I think we have several possibilities coming from this debt load which is too high, well either it could be inflation but if you wonder how would the very smaller billionaire elite how would they get their highest profit, how would they get their highest return, can really get rid of all these small and medium sized company and get all their market share, or war? As far as I know, did all the big American Chemical Corporation increase profits sixteen fold during World War Two. So there are always huge profits during war times. So I wonder, what’s the incentive? What’s the interest? What’s the incentive for the really wealthy people? And they have not so big an incentive to have inflatio, but the best thing to make really huge profits is either a deep financial crisis, depression, or war. And financial power always translates to political power to influence in the scientific community, as Leslie really, really showed, in a great way, I don’t think I need to speak about that. You know, there’s a more or less corrupt elite power. And I think this picture has been taken long before Mr. Trump became president. This time its your turn, next time it’s mine, it doesn’t matter who’s President really.

And what’s behind and that’s, for me new, I want to give you an explanation. Pretty much spiritual explanation based on anthroposophic view of Rudolf Steiner, which in my view, is the best explanation, at least I have. Rudolf Steiner says back more than 100 years that aristocracy shall be restored. That’s the political aim. You use the phrase of revolution, the phrase of democracy, you use these masks to retain as much power as possible, and how to do it via private capital of small group of oligarchs. But he said this nearly 100 years ago, and I think it’s very, very, very, very actual. And it goes on, and it goes a little bit deeper. The most efficient way nowadays, to extend power over as many people as possible, is the economic way, the economic subordination. For example, if you have to look for a job if you have a high debt load. But this is only the means. The ends, what is intended in reality, is something completely different. It’s about freedom of the will, that’s the real target, which ought to be eliminated. The real purpose is to transform society in which freedom is possible into a society of slavery.

And Patrick spoke of just evil things that are happening of dignity, which dignity of man, which is very bad treated, Leslie spoke about no innocent explanation, or inconceivable things that are happening. And I want to dig a little bit deeper into that. There are different tools, the adversary, now it’s becoming quite spiritual, the unlawful prince of this word can choose for example, hanger and social chaos, then physical power, pressure, compulsion are used instead of the free will of humanity, or just martial law. If you introduce martial law, if you create chaos, if you create hunger and fear, then your freedom will be just reduced to maybe nearly nothing as we cruelly learned in Germany, from 1933 to [19]45.

So in my conviction, it goes far deeper than financial interest, the aim what Steiner says back in 1919, and this very important choice man faces today, to return to be like an animal, to become more animal than any animal, this is exactly what Mephisto tries to achieve, or to absorb, to take in spirituality. I think in the background, it’s a battle of fight between materialism and spirituality. And if you exercise the spiritual way, you know that sound knowledge can only proceed from sound human beings, according to the Latin saying mens sana in corpore sano, but if you turn it around what we see during the last two years and COVID measures, it’s exactly the Canterbury. Masks, school children running around with masks even when they [are] exercising. No exercise, stay inside, don’t meet others without the inoculation. All these COVID measures make us ill, and in my eyes are intended to make us ill. If the body isn’t really sound anymore, it’s harder to achieve sound knowledge. If you turn the legend saying round mens sana in corpore sano – if the body isn’t sound anymore, you cut off the people from their spiritual, from their Divine, from their religious dimension, and then that’s behind, there are powers behind. And just two small explanations, or some examples, Mephisto in Goethe and the Faust says at one point, he calls it reason and it’s only used to be more animal than any animal so we use our intelligence to become even more animal than animal, They are two good examples in my eyes for example porn. The porn traffic

Reiner Fuellmich 3:51:41
I think we have just lost you. Christian, I think we have lost you, If you can try and reconnect that should solve the problem. Let us see if he can reconnect so that he can finish his presentation because I do believe that he has a slightly different outlook for us. I hope it’s not the war scenario. I’ll check with Corbin because he is probably in touch with him. Okay Corbin is telling us that he has to dial in again. There’s no other way. So we’ll have to wait for a few seconds. In the meantime, what do you think Leslie? What’s the most plausible outcome? You really think it’s gonna be war? Is that what the Davos clique is going to choose? Or is there another way out for us? We all realise that the crash is inevitable? But can we do something to stem this off? Can we be quick enough to create our own parallel societies, our own regional money, for example? Or will we not be able to do that quickly enough?

Leslie Manookian 3:54:00
I personally see this as, you know, people say to me all the time, oh, thank goodness COVID is going away. It’s over. I say no, no, no, it’s not over. It’s far from over. Because they haven’t achieved their agenda yet. Right. It was never about public health. And the agenda is still going to be attempted. And so I personally follow someone named Martin Armstrong. I think he’s one of the most brilliant people alive today. And he has a model he’s predicted all sorts of things. I won’t go into much detail about it. But his model predicts that there’s going to be about a decade of strife. And to me, it seems like that’s the most likely most plausible outcome because look at what Trudeau is doing. The truckers have made it very clear that they’ve shut it down. It’s been over three weeks and he’s not backing down. He won’t speak to them. He’s now freezing their assets. He’s doing all these things. These people are evil.

I mean, when Patrick was speaking so many times he said these things that I wanted to say, yes, the word is evil, right, these people are evil, and they’re not going to give up without a fight. And so I think that humanity has this immense opportunity in front of us. And the question is, how does it unfold. And I just hope that more and more people wake up and demand that we have freedom and that we hold these people accountable. And so I think it’s going to be a very rocky road personally, for a number of years. And what happens politically and financially, you know, even during wars, think about when France was occupied by Germany in the Second World War, they still went about their lives or actually more in the First World War, they still went about their lives, there’s still black market economies and things like this. And so I think it’s very likely that there will be this immense upheaval, but it’s not like we go to the dark ages, and how we get out of it as I think that we can make our, I mean I’ve been involved in my local food community for over 15 years. I’m a health care practitioner, I’m a Homoeopath, I have my own medicine, you know, like we have, we’ve been building these things in our own community. And I think that’s what everybody should be doing. Because I think that’s what’s going to help us to weather the storm. And ultimately, I think there will have to be a day of reckoning for everybody. And the question is, how long does that take?

Reiner Fuellmich 3:56:37
So, the surprising thing to me is that everybody whom we have interviewed as expert witnesses, at one point or another, came to realise, and told us that there is something really important going on, apart from all the statistics, apart from the numbers, apart from our legal efforts, and that spirituality, and all of a sudden, we have a professor of economics who is also pointing in that direction. So it does appear to me, and also yesterday, for example, when we interviewed when we got testimony from two psychologists, Meredith Miller, she too said, if people understand what’s going on and rise up a higher power is going to come to our rescue. Now that sounds like something from science fiction. But it appears that even economists agree on this, there is something other than materialism, there is a spiritual tied to all of us. Is that something that? Do you agree with that assessment that if we rise up, if we understand what’s going on and rise up, there is another a higher power that’s going to come to our rescue, that’s going to come to our aid at least?

Leslie Manookian 3:57:57
Well, 100 percent? I mean, first of all, I want to say I think what Christian has been saying is so spot on. I mean, first of all, Rudolf Steiner actually said that vaccines would be used to actually destroy our connection to spirit. He wrote that over a century ago. And I think that’s a very interesting thing. And have you guys all heard of Yuval Noah Harari, and seeing the video clip of him talking about all of you people who think that you’re unique individuals who think there’s a soul or something inside of you. It’s over. That’s what he says. it’s over, we can hack you all, it’s over. Your idea of being an individual human, it’s over, I’ll send you the clip, I think you guys should play it. To me, that is exactly what’s happening. We are in the midst of a spiritual war between those who believe that you’re nothing but a bag of bones on the one hand, and those who believe that we are all individual unique creations of some higher power, right, a manifestation of I liken it to being that we’re all spiritual beings having a physical experience. And I think that’s exactly what’s playing out. And these people who think that they can inject us with nanotechnology and control our brains and hack us and push AI on us and all these things, that’s exactly what’s playing out. So I 100 percent believe that there’s something bigger than us and that yes, just standing in truth, standing up for what’s right and for our freedom, ultimately will bring in more of that energy and I believe we will win.

Patrick M. Wood 3:59:38
Let me interject something with that, Reiner.

Reiner Fuellmich 3:59:39
Yes please.

Patrick M. Wood 3:59:40
From an economic point of view right now, this is my favourite lifelong topic, by the way, even though I’ve been studying technocracy for many years. I would rather be studying economics. The problem with economics, modern day economics is the tools that we used to use simply just don’t work anymore. They’re very unstable. And they’re not producing results that can guide us into the future. Well, there’s a reason for that. That’s because capitalism and free market economics is just being shattered. But we’re at the top of a supercycle right now. Undeniable, in my opinion, when you see the charts like some some of what he just showed. We’re at the top of the cycle where we’re tipping over into a period of not only demographically reduction in humanity, and that’s being helped along by programmes today, but there’s already demographically a winter ahead of us because the world population is decreasing like crazy. And that also brings brings to light economically that we’re also on the verge [of] just tipping over into probably the greatest deflationary cycle that the world has ever seen.

Patrick M. Wood
And when you when you explode debt, when companies go bankrupt, when people go bankrupt when value of property go down or whatever, this is deflation. Some people confuse that with inflation, but even in the case of Germany in the twenties, yes, prices went up, but what happened to that currency? Is there any of it around today? No, there’s not. It got completely decimated. That was the ultimate deflation when it finally popped. So we’re rolling over into this period of deflation right now anyway, and we’re getting this so called Humpty Dumpty that sits at the top of the wall, Humpty Dumpty has given a little push, they’re pushing them off a wall to make sure that capitalism dies right now, etcetera.

Patrick M. Wood
But what’s going to happen when this happens? If the world economy gets reduced to ashes, what’s going to happen, in my opinion, is that there’s going to be a great reset amongst humanity, there’s going to be a great reset of relationships. You remember some of the times in New York City when the lights went out? And everybody thought, oh no, it’s gonna be anarchy, they’re gonna be killing each other. It’s gonna be horrible. But what happened, people came out the streets, they started talking with each other, they started hugging each other. They realised that, hey I haven’t seen you cousin for six years, and they had a wonderful time, It was a wonderful reuniting of humanity. I can see this happening if they reduced the world to ashes.

Patrick M. Wood
And they think that we’re gonna come out of that other side and say, oh, please help us Mr. Technocrat, I have a feeling that the people who have been reconnected on the ground level, are just going to say, get out of my face, we don’t wanna even see you around here anymore. And they’re gonna reject him once and for all. It’s gonna be painful in a lot of ways to us headed down to economic hardship that may be coming. But I’ll tell you what, there’s nothing more important in the history of the world than connection of humans to humans. That’s what it’s all about. Family to family, humans to humans, we all find in the end that we’re so similar, we’re so much alike. And in the process of that we’re gonna go back to things probably that meant something to people from decades and centuries ago, that had been thrown out of our current current system That is, for instance, you know, things like morality, things like ethics, things like the Bible, imagine that, that people would go back and get any truth out of the Bible.

Patrick M. Wood
I think there’s going to be a great resurgence, honestly, in human connection. And I think that’s potentially gonna be a very, very good thing. I honestly, I look at it though, I don’t want to go where I’m out in the street, and lights are off and all that kind of stuff. But you know what, this could be for our own good in the end, depending on how we take it.

Patrick M. Wood
And I think if I remember correctly, nine months after those black outs, there was a surge in births, right. So that’s another type of connection that seems to still be working. Okay.

Patrick M. Wood
Yes. That’s right.

N. Ana Garner
I wanted to make a comment to Reiner and Patrick, that’s very well said, I think that what is happening as a result of the evil that so in our faces, and is so apparent is that we have to wake up. And when they cause us enough pain, when there is enough pain, we want to change whatever has been going on, because continuing to do the same thing is going to continue to get the same result. So we start waking up, and I really feel that this is what is happening across the globe. We can’t ignore any more the evil that’s happening here, and they are in the minority. And we have to remember we’re in the majority. And as we wake up and we had the side of God on us, I think that it’s an incredible opportunity for our whole planet to evolve. And it’s just going to take the critical mass. We’re not there yet, but it’s not that far off.

N. Ana Garner
But one of the things I also wanted to caution people about just before we lost Christian, he mentioned something about material. It’s a battle of materialism versus spirituality. And we are spiritual beings. having a human experience here. That doesn’t mean that we have to live in poverty or that we have to live without. I don’t believe that our creator intended that for us. And I want to caution people about the twisting of language and the twisting of propaganda that happens to us incessantly, and one of those that whole Klaus Schwab thing, you know, shows this happy, almost stoned looking 20 year old, right? You will own nothing and you’ll be happy. And he looks like he’s absolutely stoned, right? Well, maybe that’s part of the plan, too. You know, you legalise marijuana, and everybody can be stoned and be happy. But that’s not really where we’re wanting to go.

N. Ana Garner
Their view, they will even infiltrate the language of spirituality and twist it so that we think something is sounding good, you know, you’ll own nothing and be happy, you can still be a wonderful spiritual being connected to God and you don’t have to have anything. We’ll take care of you. Just like they have bastardised our language with pandemic, with cases, with the word vaccine, all of these words. sustainability. The only one that’s sustainable for are the wealthy. It’s not sustainable for us. All of these words progressive that used to mean advanced thinking. No, not anymore. It means regression of thinking. So we have to be very careful not to let their language start framing what is spiritual for us and the connections, the human connections that we need. we’re social creatures. The fun times that we need, having dinners together, having parties together, entertainment, all of that is very necessary for us. And we can have all of that. And I think Leslie’s idea of making it local, extremely local, local food production, local healing, local exchange of whatever we’re exchanging our services and goods. And I think that that is the solution is get down to the local level, to where we create and step out as much as we can. Step out of that particular matrix, because it is dystopian and dysfunctional.

Reiner Fuellmich
Thank you, Ana. Christian is back. Do you want to continue Christian. We picked up where you left off? We’re talking about spirituality all of a sudden, and I couldn’t believe it, because these are lawyers, and you’re an economist, rational people. And all of a sudden we’re into spirituality. Please continue, if you will.

Christian Kreiss
I’m sorry. We are here in Costa Rica and we had a complete complete internet breakdown in the entire region, obviously. So I was nearly done. It’s nearly done. Maybe, and I, frankly speaking, I got some beating of my heart because I normally never speak about all these things. But that’s my approach since 15 years. And it made me understand the first financial crisis and the second financial crisis that was behind the euro area. For me, it was just a wake up to follow the spiritual path and do meditations and also individual experiences in doing my meditations and so, but normally I never speak about it in public. So it’s nearly the first time, so what I want to say it’s not about money. It’s not about not even about power. Power may be how it may be, but it’s not about money. Is the internet working? For example, nearly all 12 year old boys in Germany are playing fortnight, which is a war game, all against all, just one survivor out of 100, they just learn to kill.

Christian Kreiss
And this kind of video games of military games of killer games has been used by US military for decades before the soldiers have to kill others. For example, before the first Iraq war, they used exactly these kind of games. It’s to de-humanize the young man, It’s to de-empathize the young man. Its not about money. It’s really about de-humanize man and that’s my central message. I think it’s really a war. What Leslie said it’s just evil. No, Patrick said it’s just evil, and there’s no innocent explanation, as Leslie said, That’s just right. There is no innocent explanation. And it is just evil. It is in however you want to call it. It’s about Mephistopheles, and what I also see is a huge increase in nationalism and international conflicts. I think there will be huge conflicts, not about increasing competition fight for market shares. But Mephisto is the spirit of war. He wants to destroy. He wants to create chaos. He wants social unrest, he wants military powers to reign, he wants to eliminate freedom. These powers want one to dehumanise us. And I think that’s the real battle even behind the big players like Bill Gates or whatsoever.

Christian Kreiss
These powers, they have a fight within our heart within our breast. It’s us they have to act through us. And we as humans, we have to decide which side are we on. So it’s never these powers itself that really exercise their power, but it’s always through men, through humans, they have to act through humans. And that’s the power in our heart, in our mind, well in my opinion. So the solutions, what do we need? Well conscience, conscience and conscience. People just must wake up. They’re just deep asleep. But how to achieve it? Well, we need free press, we don’t have free press, we don’t have any longer free speech. We need free science what Leslie told us, we need democracy instead of a monopoly of political parties, which are all corrupted by huge money transfers from those billionaires. So we have, of course, to take lobbies, and we need free schools, universities financed by vouchers not by foundations, or some billionaires, and of course, no billionaire controlled media, no state controlled media, that’s just a no go. It’s just impossible to put all the media power in the hands of very, very few players who have huge incentives to ignite fear to produce fear to make us fear.

Christian Kreiss
So the concept behind is the threefold state I won’t elaborate on this, what we will need during the next month years, probably, we will need the ancient virtues courage, power, sincerity, honesty, compassion, and that can be developed by spiritual anchoring. Where does health really come from? From inner peace and self recognition? So we should also prepare for this battle? I don’t think it’s over, even if now Omicron is over, I think that will arise or the next version. I think battle is not yet over, and if we get through in really a big financial depression, or even in war, we have to need even more inner strength. So can some kind of meditation, some kind of spiritual approach just to strengthen us in our hearts in our minds? Where does health come from, from inner strength, recognise yourself it’s very hard, because we are lying pretty often to us, we pretend to do things for good motives. And in reality, they often are less good. So it’s a hard way, this inner way of transformation, it’s a hard way. But then we can feel that within us we have such a huge power, you can call it a divine power, you can call it spiritual power whatsoever. But if you make exercises and meditation and travel this path of inner knowledge, you feel what huge power is in us in each in each of us to find the divine, the divine within us, but does it come from inner balance inner anchoring inner immersion. So I think it’s really it’s truly about these spiritual questions. In the end, at the end of the day, it’s not about money. Maybe it’s about power to hegemony becoming world power. Yes, I think there might be huge conflicts between China, the US and maybe Russia. They’re strong nationalisms. I think that we will see there big conflicts. But at the end of the day, it’s all about the dignity of us, the dignity of the human beings and this dignit. you can, I think, only really appreciate and know, if you see something eternal in each individual in Eve, but also in in the trees and the birds. If you see these things within, then will dignity arise from then, and that we really, really treat the animals and nature in a really human way. I think in the end, it’s the powers behind even powers behind these seemingly almighty families, almighty billionaires, I think even they are kind of tools even within them there are some spiritual forces having their battles within their breasts and their hearts. Thank you.

Reiner Fuellmich
Thank you very much. Christian, this is very surprising to hear from a former investment banker and a professor of economics. But it looks as though everyone agrees with you. And the most important thing is great job. And the most important thing is that the other side agrees with that as well. They know this, they know that we have these powers, and they don’t. They have no access to it. And to illustrate that, we found the video you mentioned, Leslie, and we’re gonna play it right now, so that we can all see that that is what they’re fighting. And that is what we must protect.

Prof Yuval Harari
To basically hack human beings, there is a lot of talk about hacking computers, hacking smartphones, hacking bank accounts, but the big story of our era is the ability to hack human beings. And by this I mean that if you have enough data, and you have enough computing power, you can understand people better than they understand themselves. And then you can manipulate them in ways which were previously impossible. And in such a situation, the old democratic system stopped functioning. We need to reinvent democracy for this new era, in which humans are now hackable animals. You know that the whole idea that humans have you know, they have this soul or spirit and they have free will. And nobody knows what’s happening inside me. So whatever I choose whether in the election, or whether in the supermarket, this is my freewill that’s over. We need to come to terms with the fact that no matter again, this is where philosophy meets computer science.

Reiner Fuellmich
Now, I would venture to say that this is what true evil looks like. It’s just that I’m surprised to hear it from someone from Israel. You know what this image reminds me of? It reminds me of the banality of evil. And it reminds me of old footage from just after the war, when the Israelis had caught, I think his name was Eichmann and put him on trial in Israel, of just evil, pure evil, but also banal evil, banality of evil. I completely agree with what you said, Christian. I just wasn’t aware how true it is. I don’t know. I have nothing to add to this. We have to protect this. We have to find this spirituality in each and every one of us connect with each other. That’s what it’s all about. Because they have no access to this. Yes, Leslie.

Leslie Manookian
You know, we can all look to what’s happening in Canada, I think is a fantastic example. Because I mean, 80 percent or even more, I think it is of the truckers in Canada have gotten the jab. And yet tens of thousands of them have come out and they are from all walks of life. And there are people who are Native American and Sikh and white European and you know, just a huge mixture of people and they are dancing in the street. They are cleaning up the crime. They are feeding the homeless. They are, you know, celebrating freedom and joyous, you know, and just coming together joyously and I think that what they’re doing is exhibiting exactly what is our birthright and what humans should be doing and how we can and should live.

Reiner Fuellmich
Virginie. I’m sorry, Ana,

N. Ana Garner
Thank you for confusing me with Virginie. What a compliment. So I wanted to say, an often repeated saying that I’ve heard throughout the years and that is be the change that you want to see in the world. So it has to start with us. And that’s what we’re doing here is we are being the change we want to see.

Reiner Fuellmich
Thank you. Now.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt
Thank you so much.

Reiner Fuellmich
I’m sorry, Dexter, go ahead.

Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt
Thank you very much, Professor Kriess. Thank you so much for your evidence. And I must say, when you started to bring in this spirituality, that was definitely a curveball that I did not foresee. However, I want to mention the following. When we were in the process of assembling this grand jury, we came up with a slogan, and I’m going to read a slogan to you and it is in our media statement. And it says empowering public conscience through natural law, injustice to one is an injustice to all. So your evidence that you have given iin the angle from the spirituality side definitely coincides with what we are currently doing with this Grand Jury, so thank you so much for bringing that and basically putting emphasis because that is confirmation that we are on the right track. Thank you for your evidence, Professor.

Reiner Fuellmich
Yes, thank you. And we can see this injustice to one is injustice to all. We can see the correct reaction to that in Canada. The truckers and the people who feed them, who give them gasoline, who support them. That is what humanity is all about. And they don’t know anything about this. Maybe we should end this session on this note. I’m very, very grateful for all of you being here. I’m especially grateful for Deepali joining us because I know it’s very late in India. I’m especially grateful also for Judge Rui de Castro to stay with us for so long. But he will have to summarise this. And I think he’s gonna like this. Thank you very much Christian. Thank you, Leslie, Bjorn. Virginie, Patrick and Dexter and Ana, thank you very, very much. This was especially important.

N. Ana Garner
Thank you all. Thank you. ie

Reiner Fuellmich
We will see you all tomorrow.

Leslie Manookian
It was an honour, Reiner and all of you to be with you

Reiner Fuellmich
And vice versa.