AUF1 spoke to Dr. Gunter Frank, doctor and bestselling author, about those
responsible for the coronavirus crimes and calls for them to be dealt with.
Dr. Frank reports on how the rule of law and the
major media have completely failed during this time.
Now listen to the very revealing interview.
Dr. Gunter Frank on Corona state crimes:
Breaking the rules in medicine is standard today
The German physician Dr. Gunter Frank is a general practitioner in Heidelberg and a lecturer at the Business School St. Gallen.
He is the author of numerous books, such as the
Corona bestseller The State Crime or The State Virus.
He also publishes on the blog The axis of good.
I am now connected to Dr. Frank to talk to him
about current medicine and gene injections.
Dr. Frank, please accept my warmest regards.
Before we look at the state crime in
detail, let us first set the headlines.
Since you are talking about a crime that should definitely be solved,
let's speak in court jargon for the sake of simplicity.
What exactly are the charges?
The accusation is that the state has executed a crime
that has harmed millions of people; probably 100,000
or 200,000 people in Germany have suffered
serious damage to their health and probably
a number of about 20-30 or perhaps 40,000
people have been killed as a result of measures
whose basis was unconstitutional from the outset, whose critics were deliberately
excluded and which should have been avoided
at all costs.
Who are the defendants, Dr. Frank?
For me, the defendants are first and foremost those who
head the institutions that are supposed to protect
us from such crimes, such pharmaceutical crimes.
They have broken rules to an extent that is unacceptable and for
which they must then also be held personally liable, i.e. the question
of guilt also arises personally.
I see this primarily as the responsibility of the Paul Ehrlich Institute, the
Robert Koch Institute and their employers in the Ministry of Health.
Please put yourself in the shoes of a public prosecutor.
What is your opening statement?
The opening statement reads - Hach, I can
see myself in the courtroom right now, actually!
- Good. The lawyers would of course say to me now: Ah, that's not how it works.
But let me just put it this way: breaking the rules in medicine,
in science, has become the standard today.
You falsify studies, you favor people who are not professionally qualified.
As a health politician, you sit on legislative committees
and conceal your membership of a lobby, pharmaceutical membership or
ownership.
So, this standard - there are many books about it
- has become the normal state of affairs today.
And let me compare it to a person who drives home in the evening and takes
the one-way street because it's shorter.
And that always goes well, maybe he gets pulled over and gets a ticket.
He gets used to it, to breaking the rules, he drives faster and faster.
And at some point he drives a person to death.
And then it is no longer a misdemeanor or something
similar, but then it is negligent homicide.
And I see it the same way with the gentlemen and
ladies at the Paul Ehrlich Institute or the RKI.
They have broken one rule after another, even in
the past with other drug approvals and issues.
But now millions have been harmed and tens of thousands killed as a result of these actions.
And you can't just say: well, it was
a mistake, we'll do better next time.
No, they won't do any better next time, because the
next attacks of this kind are already in the pipeline
- perhaps we can talk about that later - and that's
why a constitutional state must punish these crimes.
He must bring them to court.
If this does not happen, we do not have a constitutional state.
If this does not happen, it is permissible for the state to kill citizens
through pure official failure, through deliberate official failure.
That's the situation and I think it's unbearable.
The well-known Peter Hahne has said that he would like to hear handcuffs click.
What is your demand for punishment for those mainly responsible?
Unfortunately, we have the situation in Germany that
we don't have an independent public prosecutor's office.
That's why you can't assume at the moment that public
prosecutors will become active, because they would have to investigate them,
who could then call the Minister of Justice and say: "You, stop him!
That's how it is ... In these areas in Germany, we are
at the level of a banana state, to put it bluntly.
And if someone now says:
But he is exaggerating, and I would remind you that the ECJ, the European Court of
Justice, prohibits Germany from issuing international arrest warrants because they say that the public prosecutor's office is politically
controllable and then there is a risk that these are political arrest warrants - says the European Court of Justice.
So please don't point to Poland and say that the rule of law is not in order
there - we in Germany have a huge problem!
But what I would want, of course:
There are so many obvious facts that the state has
deliberately created this panic - the corona panic -
that the state has accepted the approval of a truly criminal vaccine.
Neither has proven its usefulness, even with a huge damage potential.
Everything was known and the state deliberately made this approval possible.
And the damage is so huge, and the lockdown is a separate area of crime,
that you can't say that the state is allowed to do all this.
No, he's not allowed to do that, he has to stick to the rules!
And if these rules are broken, then this is also legally relevant, because otherwise
we are not in a constitutional state, otherwise we are at the mercy of the state.
And that's why the people who broke these rules
- knowingly or unknowingly, or because they were
overwhelmed, or because they simply got used to breaking
the rules - must be charged with these crimes.
In my opinion, it is at least negligent homicide, if not significantly more.
You have mentioned facts, Dr. Frank.
So, let's start with the taking of evidence.
What did you find in your book Compiling the facts of the state crime?
It starts with the declaration of a pandemic of national
proportions and the assurance that hospitals and the
healthcare system will be overloaded if the pandemic is not countered with the strictest measures.
The Federal Constitutional Court waved these measures through, but overlooked
the fact that there is a principle of proportionality in the Basic Law.
And I can understand why people say: Okay, everyone says something bad is coming.
As a Federal Constitutional Court judge, I'm not a doctor,
so I'll let the government do it.
But I set her a deadline by which she has to prove
that this national scope actually exists.
And it was not present at any time,
nor did it threaten at any time.
We had a consistent under-occupancy rate of 16% in hospitals, a historic
low in hospital occupancy - including in intensive care - and the Covid
share of this was officially 2%.
No one can even begin to claim that this disease has brought
the healthcare system to the brink of overload.
Why did this panic continue?
Because incentive systems have been put in place
here for hospitals to earn money from this vacancy.
This is why the hospitals misinformed the
public about the occupancy situation.
They have used a bad personnel policy of the last 20 years, where nursing staff are overworked,
to make us believe that the overload is due to the Covid infection.
That's not true at all, it was always there before.
It has been exacerbated by senseless hygiene measures.
Healthy colleagues were tested away.
So, this is a complete failure to inform the population about the extent to which the health
system has actually been burdened by this virus. The other is the country comparisons.
You can clearly see that countries - now Mr. Wieler comes along
and says in the Brandenburg Committee of Inquiry:
Yes, it was the lockdown that prevented the hospitals from being overcrowded.
He is not allowed to lie to a committee of inquiry.
That is a criminal offense.
And since he is the head of the largest epidemic authority, he must know differently.
The countries that had no measures or only mild measures
did not have any other form of infection.
And if we all remember this graph, 2020, flatten the curve,
where the aim was to flatten the peak of the infection
wave in order to preserve hospital capacity.
But that means that some belly, some wave of Covid-19 patients should have come afterwards.
But there never was, there was the usual winter
infection, and the numbers are just totally normal.
There was nothing out of the ordinary, nor was the mortality exceptional.
Mortality in Germany only increased with the start of the Covid-19 vaccination campaign.
These are all hard figures, they cannot be refuted, these
are the hospital billing figures, these are the death figures.
Over the past three years, the federal government has not been
guided by this reality in any way, but has used completely imaginary
things to panic the population into complying with these
measures and, above all, to accept vaccination.
And that's what it was really all about, with all this pressure
to suffer, with all these measures, all this imposition on the population, this
incitement of the population, it was only about the fact that in the
end a shopkeeper of the pharmaceutical industry, especially of bioweapons
research, could then be approved, which under normal circumstances
would never have had the slightest chance of being approved.
Now that your book has been published, the contracts that Pfizer has concluded with governments and countries have been leaked.
That should benefit their evidence.
What is your general opinion on these publications and the content of these contracts?
Well, that is an absolute scandal.
Either we are an open
society or we are not.
And of course these contracts have to be made public, and this stonewalling
shows that people are obviously afraid that the contracts will become public, and rightly so.
It says that the manufacturer says it does not know the long-term
effects of this vaccine, nor does it
know whether it is effective, nor does it know
what other side effects will occur.
It is Russian roulette when a government
concludes such a contract. You don't even know where to start.
I try to limit myself to the main path.
If I know that as a government, and if
I also know that this vaccine has only
been conditionally approved, then there
is a very, very great obligation to carry out careful surveillance.
And the Paul Ehrlich Institute in Germany
has made an absolute - I can hardly contain
myself, I would probably have to restrain
my language in court - it has made an absolute
total failure.
The Paul-Ehrlich-Institut is a pure failure institute
in the monitoring of vaccination side effects. It was completely overwhelmed.
Was this intentional or is it simply incompetence?
But it has in no way failed to meet the minimum standard of fulfilling its duty
to record these vaccination side effects and then
to sound the alarm accordingly.
The alarm signs were not red, they were dark
red, they were dark, dark, dark red!
It was incredible to see all the alarm signals, i.e. the
excess mortality in 2021, the many, many reports that
were already there and are 20-50 times higher than the normal flu reports, not to
mention the number of unreported cases.
The head of the health insurance company Schöfbeck, who
said: Our diagnoses are going up, he was then dismissed.
There are so many examples where the state has failed to
protect its citizens from this dangerous drug.
And I can't accept that as normal,
as a mistake, but there really
is a naivety to it that I can almost
only explain with intent. So that's a huge crime.
The problem is that the German judiciary was also
involved in this crime, at least in such a way that
it did not prevent it, which would have been its duty,
because it did not allow all the motions for evidence,
because it did not allow all this.
So that's a really tough job, because
in the end you would also have to indict
the structures that decide whether an indictment
takes place and ultimately pass judgment.
Dr. Frank, in the Bundestag you described the mRNA injections as a thalidomide scandal with a factor of ten.
In future, these will also be vaccinated against many
other diseases. What do you think of this?
Of course, that was the fundamental aim
of this entire corona campaign.
The whole story was aimed at the
approval of these novel drugs.
You can perhaps also explain it in general terms:
I'm a GP, and when I look at
the medication I use, it's basically
the same as it was 40 years ago.
So the real innovations in modern medicine have become rare:
A little in the area of rheumatism, a little in
the area of chemotherapy, but not much more.
And that is bad for the pharmaceutical industry.
It needs new pharmaceutical group drugs with
new patents that can then be monetized.
Investors are asking for it.
And that's exactly what happened here.
A new active substance group has been pushed through,
drug safety has been deliberately destroyed in this way and now it is simply being added.
Now all of these funds are being pushed
forward to turn them into money.
This is another reason why we have to take those responsible
to court, because they will just carry on like this.
And it's a cheek, you can't call
it a cheek, it's monstrous.
When, for example, Jeremy Farrar or Christian
Drosten or the biggest charlatan in the history
of medicine in Germany, Karl Lauterbach, hold conferences
in Berlin and announce the next pandemics, namely with the H5N1
and MERS viruses.
And these are precisely the viruses for which we have a lot of evidence
that they were also artificially created in the laboratory.
Yes, H5N1 is the bird flu virus that
Ron Fouchier modified in 2011 to
make it transmissible to humans.
There was a huge outcry at the time, which even led to a US moratorium
under Obama, who then stopped funding this research.
But these viruses do exist and MERS was part
of Peter Daszak's research proposal 2018.
Together with the head of the Wuhan virus laboratory,
Ms. Zhengli, he wanted to create a virus that
corresponds exactly to SARS-CoV2.
So SARS virus with the incorporation of an artificial furin cleavage
site (a Moderna patent from 2016).
And in this research proposal, the same was also planned with MERS viruses.
This research proposal was rejected by the Pentagon.
Nevertheless, there is SARS-CoV2, and therefore
there is certainly also MERS with a furin cleavage
site in the freezers in Wuhan.
And it is precisely these two viruses, Farrar and Drosten
are now announcing, that will be the future pandemics.
Are we crazy? This is organized crime.
They create boldly manipulated viruses and have
probably already developed the vaccines
to turn them into a business model.
And in the process, the security systems
are destroyed and people die.
So we have a huge crime here, and we have to clear
it up, otherwise they'll just carry on like this.
They have brought international names into the conversation after
these corona measures were announced worldwide.
Do we not have to expand the group of defendants in this case?
Is it not even an
international crime?
It is an international crime, but every nation state must first hold those responsible
accountable, because that is what has to work first.
But I see a completely different quality to this
crime, because for the first time, so-called
group moralism has been integrated into a huge
campaign by the pharmaceutical industry.
It was almost deliberately inserted into the campaign that
the critics of this campaign are inhuman and that they can be destroyed.
This was scientifically legitimized by a study at Yale University
2020.
It was started in 2020, when a serious vaccine was still a long
way off, and the test subjects were given messages, so to speak,
and they were then asked to assess the extent to which they
would be motivated to be vaccinated against Covid-19.
The most effective messages had been:
Vaccine deniers are antisocial, vaccine critics
are killing our grandparents, etc. In other words,
critics have been deliberately dehumanized and this force, which
has always led to pogroms, witch hunts and genocide in the history
of mankind, has been integrated into this campaign.
And we can be happy, yes, really happy, that vaccination
critics have not been stoned to death or worse.
They deliberately integrated these forces into
this campaign, and that's why I'm talking about a systemic,
a systematic attack on the civilian population.
And that is in line with international law, paragraph seven I believe.
This is an attack - a crime against humanity, and therefore this is actually a case
for the International Court of Justice in The Hague.
I'm reaching very far now, and I don't have the imagination
that Mrs. Merkel or Mr. Scholz will one day be defendants
there, but according to my sense of justice, the Covid
vaccination campaign has exactly this dimension.
It was a systematic attack on the civilian population,
executed by the state, and that amounts to a crime against humanity.
In your opinion, what role do self-proclaimed philanthropists
such as Bill Gates or NGOs such as the World Economic Forum play?
They play a very important role, of course, but they
are not the first people I want to see in court.
Because there will always be rich weirdos, if I may say so, who believe they
have to save the world and actually want to achieve the exact opposite.
No, we are a constitutional democracy, we have institutions that
are supposed to save us from such excesses of philanthropy.
And they have failed.
So a Bill Gates, seen in isolation, is not a problem for me at all.
My problem is when a state then implements
the fantasies of such people.
How can it be that Mr. Bill Gates - I think it was on the Tagesschau
or Tagesthemen - gets minutes of speaking time to promote a vaccination
that didn't even officially exist at the time.
Using confused arguments, he is now the expert on health issues for the Federal Republic of Germany.
I would also look there first: Who is responsible for the program?
So, for me, these are the people who need to be investigated
to see to what extent they have committed crimes.
The Bill Gates of this world will always exist.
Yes, that would have been my next question, Dr. Frank.
Hasn't the mainstream press, or as the Ws put it, the system media, also committed a crime by covering up the crimes?
Again, this can only be explained by getting used to breaking the rules.
For more than - I would almost say - twenty or thirty years, we have had a thorough moralization of society.
Important future issues are now only
discussed from the point of view of hyper-morality
and not on the basis of factual knowledge.
If you know Max Weber, who wrote a lot about politics 100 years ago - good politics is always about ethics of responsibility and not ethics of conviction.
And the ethics of conviction has prevailed in our country, i.e: You can make a career today, as
editor-in-chief or even in universities, if you argue morally but not objectively.
And the problem is simply that the factual arguments
often contradict this preconceived morality.
And that leads to everything that is competent becoming
a threat to you. You have to bite them away.
In this way, we have established incompetence
networks across the board in our society, whether we
look into the editorial offices or whether we look
into the universities or other areas that have become
accustomed to negating facts and reporting one-sidedly in
order to pay homage to this morality.
And this time it went really wrong, this
time their misinformation led people to
take dangerous medicines that they would never have
taken if they had been properly informed.
That is why the media are of course also to blame, because they have allowed
themselves to be involved in this systematic attack on the civilian population.
And you have to reproach them for that!
Well, they have failed terribly, to put it bluntly!
Yes, the editors-in-chief of the big newspapers,
the TV stations, have - I'm sorry - blood on their hands.
Now all decisions on health policy issues
are to be transferred to the WHO.
How do you rate this project?
Yes, so these moralist networks can't stop. They go on and on.
The problem is that - and this goes beyond my competence, you have
to ask people who are well versed in economic issues, I can mention
Norbert Häring and his book Endgame of Capitalism - the fatal thing
is that this incompetence is obviously in the interests
of the big money.
It's a bit complicated to understand, I'm not even going
to try to explain it now, but it seems to be the case,
and so obviously forces have now come together here that are making money
from artificial disasters, yes, like the inflated, man-made climate change,
that the climate is changing is normal, but it must be man's
fault, or from these artificial pandemics, for example.
And for that I need an incompetent functional elite.
And they are now being so pampered that anyone who has any sense and
is competent no longer has a chance of getting a management position.
So the whole thing, including with the WHO, is now blowing up so much.
I mean, of course it will implode on its own, because
these people leave nothing but destruction in their wake.
But maybe things won't have to get quite so bad and we'll
wake up before then and vote these people out of office.
In your opinion, when will the great enlightenment
begin, including the great reckoning?
Let me break it down very, very small.
Yesterday - I'm on a bit of a vacation, so I don't
have any patients - I went shopping yesterday and took
the kind of time you don't really have to shop
on foot here in the Neuenheim town halls.
And that's when I met a passer-by.
We first got talking about another topic and then about corona.
And this was an absolutely intelligent woman who teaches,
she has psychotherapy training and thinks a lot, and in
conversation she said she couldn't imagine a government deliberately
endangering its citizens like that.
Or another example: I had
been on BILD TV, with an SPD member of parliament, I think his name is Alt.
I had an absolutely authentic impression of this person.
So it was a man who had also previously been an officer in the German Armed Forces.
He then went into politics.
He struck me as honest and authentic, and he also voted against the facility-based vaccination requirement.
So, everything speaks for him.
He came up to me after the show and said, "Mr. Frank, do you really believe
that the pharmaceutical industry is endangering human lives with its eyes open?
- That is our problem!
People cannot imagine the scale of this crime.
And that is why they vote for the forces that tolerate or even execute this.
And we have to educate, educate, educate! - until
the passer-by I spoke to can imagine it.
And then something will change, not before.
Dr. Frank, I like to end my interviews on a positive note.
I would like to do the same in this conversation.
With the life experience you have today, with what life
has taught you - what does happiness mean to you today?
Luck!
The basis of happiness is also health, is people who want to do you good, with whom you can exchange ideas.
Happiness is associated with security, with a high degree of self-determination,
and I can only say that I am a happy person in this respect.
Now you mentioned your emotionality yourself
earlier and it's no wonder, given
the topic you have to deal with.
What method do you use to get yourself back
in the mood when you're actually in a bad mood?
That's a really good question, because I'm sitting here in
a room where I wrote my books, and these
walls here have heard a lot about me.
I've already shouted at them too.
And I sometimes have fantasies that are really not nice,
given the nonsense and brutality we are exposed to.
In this respect, it's important - and I also talk to many patients about this - that when we realize
that it's creeping into us too much, we stop, take a break, switch off the internet, spend
some time doing nice things, cooking nice meals.
If you make music, make music, go to the theater, take a break!
And once you have refueled and regained your equilibrium, you
expose yourself to this madness again in order to fight it.
So nobody should become a martyr, we don't need martyrs.
We simply need people who are in a good mood
and have the energy to tackle the madness.
And we will prevail.
Do you know why?
Because the others have to use more and more force to fend off reality.
And that is the gateway to neuroses, to obsessive-compulsive disorders,
and a good mood is really only right where you live in reality.
And that's also what I see, the fellow campaigners I've
had the pleasure of getting to know over the last three
years, when we meet, when we have Zoom conferences, the mood is
excellent because we know that we are striving for reality and in this
respect we do everything with the right dose - Paracelsus already knew that.
And we don't want martyrs.
Even if the thing collapses, we don't want to be bitter, we want
to be in a good mood and get back to building it.
One last brief question to conclude this interview.
If you could only wish people one thing, whether
it be ability or skill, what would it be?
Wow, now I have to think!
- So I think the basis of being human is the feeling of self-determination, the freedom to
shape one's life as one imagines it - with consideration for others, of course - and I think
that without this freedom of self-determination we could
not lead a life worthy of human beings.
That is exactly what we have set
out to do, you, Dr. Frank, and we at AUF1. Thank you very much for this
very informative and insightful interview. And all the best to you!
Thank you Mr. Eglinski. I really enjoyed it.