Honest, constructive and speedy processing!
We recommend an investigation committee that follows these 8 points from Prof. Homburg. 1. is there a consensus on these statements? If not, what other facts are there? 2. if there is a consensus, how could it happen that so many wrong decisions were made and communicated uncritically by all the media? 3. what needs to be changed so that the next pandemic does not produce equally bad decisions?
There are various indications that new pandemics will be declared in 2024/25. If committed people, convinced democrats in all institutions, politicians with a conscience, heart and mind do not take action against this, one group will once again enrich itself through the suffering of others. Philanthropists, who have become much richer through their "donations" and through the corona pandemic, should be suspect to everyone. The WHO is 80% financed by pharmaceutical and financial groups. It, and in particular its director, is to be given omnipotent powers to declare and control global measures. We have seen to some extent what this means. How much of it was wrong and unscientific is well summarized in the video. There are thousands of scientists who have already commented critically on this. This is the most concise, accurate, validly documented summary in 15 minutes.
Prof. Homburg uses the sources of official bodies to destroy the media and political narrative with which the population was misled in 8 steps. Why does no politician or talk show dare to refute this data? There would also be a lot of evidence for the false statements and their origin according to the RKI files to discuss in a review and, if necessary, to deal with legally. Many people have died and become seriously ill due to misinformation.
To the video by Prof. Homburg: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfOpv4sxRZ0
About us
All the people involved here work on a voluntary basis, are independent of political parties and are committed to democracy and science.
We are committed to the Code of the World Medical Association, which makes it our duty to provide a critical scientific view of the advantages and disadvantages of mRNA vaccines.
It must not be the case that critical contributions based on medical facts are defamed, discredited, concealed and people are excluded from the profession. We do not want a vaccination inquisition. That would be unscientific and undemocratic!
Diversity of opinion enables discourse on the best solutions. That's what we want to achieve here. Everyone is invited to express their opinion and ask their questions to our medical experts so that they can be answered in our conferences.
We look forward to an evidence-based dialog!
more info
