Marvin Haberland Shares Results of His Court Case Against Virology in Germany

Marvin Haberland Shares Results of His Court Case Against Virology in Germany

 

TCTL editor’s note: As shared here yesterday, Marvin Haberland went to court in Hamburg, Germany, early today with the intention of challenging the entire basis of virology. See yesterday’s article for understanding the case and the strategy.

Below you will find the announcement following the trial that appeared in German at Next Level telegram channel.  You will also find an interview of Marvin immediately following the trial.

At this point, all information sources are in German. I have used various software tools to create rough transcriptions and translations, which were then edited. Please understand that I do not speak German, so consider these rough translations.

From the gist of it, it seems that the case against Marvin was dismissed and that the state must bear all costs of the trial. Marvin was not allowed to present any information to the court. Yet, this is one of four dismissals that Marvin has witnessed, all using this same strategy.  Clearly, the courts are avoiding admitting the evidence that reveals the fraud of virology into public  record.

The video includes interviews with a few of the attendees who shared their observations and perspectives.  ~ Kathleen

 

A Small Victory for NEXT LEVEL – A Big One for the People

In short: Our press spokesman Marvin Haberland won the trial as expected, in which the court dropped the case and paid the costs.

The subtleties in this are the big win:

(a) We went into this trial without a lawyer.

No lawyer wanted to defend us by supporting our strategy. Thus, we had no legal fees either. So it can be done without.

b) Our strategy is direct and clear

It aims to clarify the lack of science in virology in court, since Paragraph 1 of the Infection Protection Act requires it.

c) We have thus shown that the measures based on an imaginary virus are not justifiable and not tenable.

d) As has been shown, there is no need for complicated strategies, 400-page justifications or briefs. The only thing that needs to be attacked is the basis.

e) The possible avalanche effect

If many people would follow our argumentation, probably either all fines would be stopped, or someone would go to the next instance, where then the scientificity has to be clarified.

f) Our strategy and our expertise, as well as the evidence requests that could not be refuted, were known to all involved, both to the court apparatus and to the many employees whom we contacted throughout to make it clear that we were looking forward to the trial. Perhaps this was also one of the reasons why our trial was constantly postponed and unclear statements were made by staff.

Especially Important:

If the court, the state and others had known of something that they could have used to make a legal example of us regarding our requests for evidence, they certainly would have done so.

Thus, they obviously used the easiest “escape option” and simply discontinued the proceedings.

Notice:

We will get our chance, we will not let go. Virology will get mighty problems, we are sure.


Virus in Court – Marvin’s Trial



Marvin is interviewed by Jen of Grosse Freiheit TV (found at Odysee & YouTube.)

Jen: [00:00:00]

Hello. Hello and welcome to a new episode of Grosse Freiheit TV. We are in Hamburg at the district court. Here was just the trial of Marvin. You probably know Marvin from my video. We made a video about how he wants to bring down the whole virology in court about five five months ago. And now here was just finally the trial. Marvin, what was it like for you?

Marvin: [00:00:21]

Yeah, so I wasn’t expecting that much of an audience at first. The room was super full. Very thankful for everyone who came. Yes, it was unfortunately only a partial victory, you can say.

As expected, the proceedings were discontinued. So the court costs etc. are borne by the state treasury. One does not have to pay anything, no misdemeanor. But of course, this is not the result one would have wished for now.

I would have liked either to be sentenced or to get an acquittal, so that somehow you have something in writing in your hand. That way, when it’s stopped…

I mean, the judges are also clever, of course. They want to stop it so that they don’t get into trouble, and so that they don’t open up a big can of worms, of course. But that’s not the desired result.

But well, in the end, the judge summoned a witness, a police officer. She couldn’t remember anything and then he stopped the proceedings immediately.

So I had no chance at all to say anything. He then said yes, you have submitted numerous motions for evidence here, but I don’t want to keep you in suspense any longer. I will stop this today, he said, but then I wanted to declare him biased, because this does not meet his responsibility, so to speak. And he didn’t allow that anymore, because he said that the proceedings are over.

So it was obvious to them, to the spectators, of course, that this was just embarrassing. But well, he got quite red in the face, the judge But that’s how it is.

Jen: [00:01:55]

He then also immediately threatened the audience. Then it got a little bit louder, so the people. Yeah, I did too. I thought ‘so, now it’s about to start, now he’s going to be insulted by everybody’. But fortunately the people held back. And then he also said something like, yes, hold back, otherwise I’ll have to have the hall cleared and you’ll be reported to the police. He impressed the people with his authority, so to speak.

Marvin: [00:02:20]

Yes, right, exactly, yes, hides there just a bit behind the barricades, behind this legal facade. But he was visibly uncomfortable. Did you, did you notice? But he probably just has too big problems when he gets involved.

So in my opinion, there were also a lot of people there today. You can then spread this, carry it out, Look here, if you go this way or if you get fines or also with other topics, with vaccinations, if you address the scientificity, so to speak, the virus existence question, which is always played down or ignored by everyone or by many.

That is the only way to lead these things to success, because an attitude is also a success in itself.You just don’t have to pay the money.

If everyone knew that, every citizen would no longer have to abide by these rules, no one would have to follow the vaccinations or other things and would just not have to be afraid of anything, because that only works on this fear basis. Exactly.

Jen: [00:03:25]

Can you report back. You’ve seen other trials in Hamburg. Have they all been stopped?

Marvin: [00:03:30]

Yes, all the trials that used the argumentation with paragraph one, that the scientific nature of virology is not given and therefore the penalty notices are all illegal, they were all dropped.

That was a total of four that I accompanied, including my own proceedings. And they were all simply discontinued, even two of them by the same judge without justification, simply ‘I will discontinue it now. Done.’

Jen: [00:03:56]

And what was your impression here on site?

So you wrote me yesterday evening, you wrote me only then, so about yes, here are security checks and then I have, when I came in here, I have just seen how at the airport you become. You have to leave cell phones there. I had to leave my camera in the car and now someone from the audience, you’re about to see the whole player again. He also said that it seemed to him a bit like sabotage, that the people were left outside, that they didn’t deliberately create a queue, that they deliberately chose a small hall. I also said, I don’t know what it’s like here otherwise, I’m never here otherwise. What is your impression? Do you think it was deliberately done that way, because of course they got it? It gets big media noticed that it gets a big media attention. What is your impression? You have also been standing here in front of the lock.

Marvin: [00:04:49]

Exactly. So I’ve been here a couple of times. So I can’t agree with that. I don’t think that there was blocking, I haven’t been able to determine that now. It was a long queue, because many people were there. But they got in quite quickly. I think the hall is actually the largest one they have here. Well, or there is a bigger one. Okay, but it was definitely big, I think.

Of course, not everybody got in. I didn’t see exactly how many didn’t get in, but I think there were about 40 people sitting in the back of the hall.

Yes, basically you can say that the judge knows from the beginning that he wants to stop it.

It doesn’t matter what I said. It doesn’t matter what the witnesses said or didn’t say, in the case that it is to be stopped. That’s programmed from the beginning. And yes, that is already valuable to know, if you have this strategy, then you are just so strongly right that the legal system cannot help itself any more than to just stop it. That’s their only chance to even cover this thing.

Jen: [00:05:58]

Yes, I say the judge, then his hands were more or less tied. If he had actually said, I’ll invite an expert and that would have come out accordingly, that the whole virology, that this is simply not scientific, then it would probably have been the same for him as for the judge in Weimar. Or what would you say to that?

Marvin: [00:06:15]

Yes, that’s exactly how I see it! So of course the judge is under extreme pressure. I mean, if he had done that, then it would certainly have been similar to the judge in Weimar or it would have had other consequences. He also happened to be ill two weeks earlier in October, when the actual hearing was scheduled. I don’t know whether that was for strategic reasons.

In any case, I can say that ‘I saw you here’ in the building during this time shortly afterwards. He had other OWI proceedings that I was in the room for at the time. So he was, in any case, healthy again shortly afterwards and then it still took half a year until I got the invitation here again.

So you can think about it, was that just to annoy him or to put him on the rack? Well, I mean, in the end it doesn’t matter. I just want to show the public that this kind of thing is simply stopped. Everybody can follow that and that’s good.

Jen: [00:07:14]

So what’s the way forward now? Are you going to pursue further litigation or what is your next course of action now to bring down this viral lie?

Marvin: [00:07:25]

Yes, so I’ve talked to some audience members today who actually still have cases pending, some of them even now in the second instance. So we can certainly support there.

And yes, I will simply continue to get involved in the area and of course by making this so public, that was also my goal, people also see from this. Hey, this will simply be stopped.

These arguments are not discussed at all in court, they are not even taken up, they are simply dropped.

So there’s probably something really hot cooking. So it can’t be completely wrong.

And of course also with friends and family, etc., who have all understood that in the meantime, even those who were super-pro, so to speak, on the subject of vaccination or corona have apologized to me in the meantime and also understood that, so to speak.

And that is actually the only thing that we also want to achieve, which is simply to provide clarification and in what way it is now done, whether with attitudes or with a verdict, it is actually the same for us, because we make it public anyway.

And yes, with the attitude is the thing actually, so to speak. Silence can also be something — can also be a statement in that case.

Jen: [00:08:37]

All right? Yeah, thank you so much for putting yourself out there. And now here are a few more impressions from the hearing here.

Trial Attendee#1: [00:08:43]

Our jurisprudence is totally screwed up, so screwed up. The judge already had his verdict. It was so obvious, because yeah well, there was another policewoman called as a witness, but she couldn’t remember. A subject, that was a joke. So that was to make it appear it was a really good trial. No, it wasn’t. He then also outed himself, after all, by saying, ‘Yes, I don’t want to keep them in suspense for long. I’m going to stop the proceedings.’

Trial Attendee #2: [00:09:11]

And they weren’t up for the expertise thing and that’s why they said okay, let’s shut this thing down before we do any more damage to our already placed ship. That was actually my impression.

And it was also interesting that the judge, when asked why he had made this decision, only referred to his judicial sovereignty. So one cannot say more to it… Now that the fairy tale, the narrative, so to speak, little by little disintegrates, one simply does not want to let in still such long discussions, which could still increase the damage…

Trial Attendee #3: [00:09:45] That happened very quickly. The policewoman couldn’t remember. Right. But when the judge asked again if there was anything with an affidavit or something. then all of a sudden she could remember, but not really. So it seemed to me like it was a little comedy that was being performed. The policewoman then also went out again and then then the judge then stated ‘yes, I’ll put that then’.

Jen: [00:10:10]

On, Have you been in the room?

Trial Attendee #4: [00:10:12]

[This clearly did not translate well.] No, So we were actually, let’s say in a relatively strange way ultra-slow dispatched here I as extra because of the process traveled to and did not know that here somehow so a kind of combination control, courtroom and airport takes place. Was there but male female separated, there it went already. Then was yes the process begins.

Jen: [00:10:33]

Let’s see, it was missing.

Trial Attendee #4: [00:10:35]

Exactly and 10:30 only up. So there was already the smell of sabotage somehow in the air, I say. We were then still upstairs and then Mr. Marvin already came out and announced, the process was stopped. So all in all, half hour wait and one minute information.

Trial Attendee #5: [00:11:02]

I’m not a lawyer. Maybe they have their formal legal reasons, but it makes you wonder if it’s our court and our state.

Trial Attendee#1: [00:11:12]

It is. I would have quite liked to see 100 years of virology just go down the drain. But that’s not going to happen because they’re just too powerful.

 


 

For background see:

Marvin Haberland & Katie Sugak: On the Court Case Against Virology — April 26, 2023 in Hamburg, Germany

 

 




Marvin Haberland & Katie Sugak: On the Court Case Against Virology — April 26, 2023 in Hamburg, Germany

Marvin Haberland & Katie Sugak: On the Court Case Against Virology — April 26, 2023 in Hamburg, Germany

by Katie Sugak
April 23, 2023

 

Dear friends, here is the recording of my very interesting conversation with Marvin Haberland. Marvin is an engineer and he comes from Germany. As a result of a tragedy in his family, he decided to investigate the subject of medicine. This investigation led him to virology, and he eventually discovered that the foundations of virology were based on anti-scientific misconceptions. After realizing this, Marvin decided to act.

Our conversation today will focus on his upcoming trial in Germany on April 26, 2023, in Hamburg. This trial will be the second trial in history designed to disprove virology and demonstrate the lack of real science behind it.



References cited in the interview with Marvin Haberland.

Marvin’s letter to the court and his Freedom of Information request: 

English

https://docs.google.com/document/d/15VkP5pouOE5uQ2c4ivOoRwUf6j4-lFQm17q424Jxn80/edit 

Russian https://docs.google.com/document/d/11ulOf18ZCMgPbkQ1oNpdtzeAUIEGt1EG7Pdjqq2CAbQ/edit 

German
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MKGo6-0ltZ4_1airsQ6eDzkuKmijd0rE/view?usp=drivesdk   

Isolation and rapid sharing of the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) from the first patient diagnosed with COVID-19 in Australia https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7228321/  

Interview with Stefan Lanka from 2022 – Measles virus trial, control experiments and the final exposure of the coronavirus farce https://rumble.com/vmqkff-measles-trial-control-experiments-and-the-final-exposure-of-coronavirus-far.html 

Video on the Measles Virus Trial (2016)
https://rumble.com/vsla5a-stefan-lanka-measles-trial.html 

Other videos, interviews and articles can be found on Kate Sugak’s telegram channel https://t.me/katesugakofficial 

Tehran Next Level channel (German)
https://t.me/NextLevelOriginal   

Next Level website https://www.wissen-neu-gedacht.de/ 

Connect with Kate Sugak


Transcript of first 25 mins. prepared by TCTL editor:

 

Katie:

Hello everyone. My name is Katie and today my very special guest is Marvin Haberland.

Marvin is an engineer and he comes from Germany.

As a result of a health tragedy in his family, he decided to take a deep look at medicine. That exploration led him eventually to virology and, as a consequence, he discovered that the foundations of virology are based on anti-scientific misconceptions.

Marvin decided to do something about this realization.

Our today’s conversation will revolve around his upcoming court case in Germany, which as far as I am aware, will be the 2nd court case in history that aims to disprove virology and demonstrate the lack of real science behind it.

So, Marvin, I think it would be great to talk about your story.

What got you interested in the subject of virology and how did you start noticing there is something wrong with it?

Marvin:

Yes, thank you for the invitation.

Katie:

You’re welcome. Thank you for coming.

Marvin:

So, like you said, basically due to a tragedy in my family. So my grandmother, she died when I was studying in the US.

And that got me quite interested in the topic; as she, before she was diagnosed with the cancer, she always asked me, ‘Marvin, you’re always so smart. You’re always researching things. Can you help me?’.

And I was always saying, which I now regret, ‘Grandmother, look, I don’t know. I have no knowledge on this topic. Please go consult the doctors.’ And so on.

I was kind of ignorant, which from today’s perspective, of course, I regret. But this is the way it is.

So when she died, this triggered something in me and I started to then really research the topic of chemotherapy. And I found out that basically it’s not really based on evidence. There are very, very low-quality studies without any control groups. There is always comparing chemotherapy to another chemotherapy, or chemotherapy to chemotherapy plus a new drug. But there is never the zero control group, without any therapy, or very rare to find that.

And actually if you research the real figures, the efficiency of the five-year survival rate is about 2.3% only, which is basically zero because the statistical fluctuations.

So when I found this out it was very surprising to me. And then from that point, I also looked right and left of this topic to nutritionist sciences where I found very, very similar results. And also infectious disease and germ theory. And that got me interested in the field.

Katie:

From when you started your research, what was the first thing that you started to research the virology topic?

Marvin:

Yeah. So first was basically chemotherapy/ cancer, then nutritional sciences. And from that I moved on to virology and I found out about Stefan Lanka’s work.

So basically, first was the measles virus and the early scientific practices, or unscientific practices, of Enders and Peebles in 1954. And then I also researched, of course, Pasteur and Robert Koch, from the really early beginnings of germ theory and vaccinations.

And then from there I moved on to HIV.

I bought the book — I have it here — the ‘Virus Mania’ book from Engelbrecht… and other authors, which got me very interested in HIV also.

And then I discovered there is a pattern in virology. It’s always the same.

So, measles, HIV, SARS-CoV-1… These are repeating patterns which I found very interesting.

And then when covid or corona came up, I immediately did the research.

I remember in January 2020 when this came up, I went to GISAID [China National GeneBank] and other platforms where they upload the genomes. And I tried to figure out — OK, maybe this time they did the correct isolation, the correct scientific procedures.

And I figured out, OK, this is the same like with the swine flu, with the bird flu, with the SARS-1.

So from very early on, I was interested again.

I decided to start to be more active in speaking out and do work in this field to spread the misconceptions and the scientific fraud, basically.

I thought this was important because many people don’t know about this and I felt responsible to share.

Katie:

Let’s talk about the court case and what motivated you to go there, to do it. And what did you do?

This is important. What did you do to get there? And why are you doing it? And what is your goal?

Marvin:

First of all, I got motivated to do it, basically, also by Stefan Lanka who had a court case in 2015 about measles virus.

So little different strategy than mine, but pretty similar.

And he was saying in the beginning of covid, ‘OK, people of Germany, if you get these fines because you’re not wearing the mask or because you are meeting with other people during the lockdown, and so on, just…’. He laid out the basic strategy how to go to court.

And what I did is I just didn’t wear the mask. I had a mask zone directly in front of my house, so I couldn’t even exit my door without wearing a mask, which I didn’t want to do.

And after receiving the fine, I just objected it and I sent the court specific abstract from the law, which is basically the first paragraph, in Germany, of the infectious disease law, which says that every virologist, every institutional authority, has to work according to the status quo of science, scientific practice.

And I am basically saying that in virology this is not at all the case. And they are not following the scientific method. And not any sort of scientific method that is required.

And I sent proof to the court from several different Freedom of Information acts…

I sent one to the University of Melbourne in Australia and several others.

So my argumentation is basically the law is is not fulfilled, and these are my proofs. And this is why I am not willing to pay the fine.

Basically this is just the strategy. And we will see how this goes.

It will be on the 26th of April.

After my first invitation got cancelled. It was originally scheduled the 19th of October last year, but then I received a cancellation letter because the judge apparently got sick.

And now I have the second invitation. So we will see.

And there are many others that do this in Germany, so I have already consulted three other people with the same strategy and all three of these cases got closed.

So basically the people didn’t have to pay anything. But the court did not really issue a official statement. They just closed the case.

So what I want to achieve is official statement by the court. Because if they close my case, basically I cannot do anything about it. I have to accept it. But it has not the effect that I would like to have — basically to have an official statement ‘Yes, indeed, paragraph one of the infectious law of diseases is broken. Virologists are not working according to the scientific method.’
This would be my goal.

Or something else they could say, which is also possible, they could say that the law states that they should work according to the scientific method, but they don’t have to, right?

If the court says something like this and I have to pay the fine, it’s OK for me.

But then I have the official statement ‘Virologists are not obliged to work scientifically’. Which would be fine. This is just about our goal to to share the the situation — how it is.

Katie:

So let’s talk a little bit more about the main problem of virology, so people who are completely new to this, they can understand better the lack of scientific method behind it.

Let’s talk about all of this — about controls and about your Freedom of Information requests.

Marvin:

Sure. So basically, in science how it works is, you observe something in nature and then you come up with a hypothesis on how this could work. And then you try to come up with an experiment to test this hypothesis. And if the experiments support the hypothesis, then the hypothesis turns into a theory, and the theory gets tested over and over and over again. And all experiments support it. OK?

But if the experiment, the outcome, is against the hypothesis, then you falsify the hypothesis. This is basically how it works.

And in virology the hypothesis is fair. OK?

You say that you get sick from some viruses infecting you, coming from the outside. Infectious disease are being spread and so on.

And the experiments should be that you bring together sick and healthy animals or people and you show that you can really transmit this.

Or you try to extract these particles, these viruses, and then you take them and put them in the food or you spread them in the air of the animals or of the humans. And you show, by doing that, that you can replicate the symptoms.

That has never been done in virology.

What they are doing instead of doing it in the way I just stated, is they try to come up with some sort of excuse. They say that they cannot really do it in the correct way because the viruses are too small. Or too little in quantity. Or they only can live inside the cell and so on.

So they try to find excuses why they cannot extract the particle. And then they do some experiments in the lab.

So they never do it in a real ‘in vivo’. They only do it ‘in vitro’ in the lab. They take cell cultures and then they mix a lot of different chemicals, antibiotics and other substances together with fetal bovine serum, cell cultures from monkey kidney cells and so on.

They have a big brew of different components and then they observe that this cell culture basically disintegrates or dies. And they say, ‘OK, this is the proof for a virus’.

But this is impossible scientifically because there are so many variables. There are the toxic antibiotics, the fetal bovine serum.

Then they take off the fetal bovine serum so they remove the nutrition.

Then there is different other chemicals involved — trypsin sometimes and several different steps along the way.

So it’s impossible to say that the result is caused by a virus.

And what is on top of that unscientific — and everyone can understand this: They don’t have the control experiment.

So they are just running all these steps and they are doing what is called circular reasoning. And they don’t have any control.

They are trying to find causative results, cause and effect, but it’s impossible to do it. This is just a correlation. They observe that something happens, but they are not really using the scientific method to come up with the cause/effect relation.

The control experiment would be — for the viewers. You do the exact same experiment. You do the cell culture experiment with the chemicals, same antibiotics, same steps, everything the same. But you don’t add the so-called virus. This would be the only variable that should be different from the other experiment.

And the outcome then should be different.

If the virus would exist, and would be the cause of this cell culture disintegration, thy so-called cytopathic effect, then, only then you would prove that this is the determining variable.

But, of course, as they never have isolated the virus in the first place, they cannot even do this control experiment. It’s impossible.

And this is the big scientific problem.

I am willing to say that on some levels this is also fraud because they know. Because we asked them.

The virologists. Most of them know that the control experiments are missing and are important. They are trying to find excuses why they are not doing them, so they know exactly they should do them.

It’s not that they are unconscious. So I can say that this is basically fraud. Maybe not for everyone, but certainly for many virologists. They know exactly about this this issue.

Katie:

So in the court, you are going to point at this exactly — the lack of controls.

Marvin:

The center of the argumentation is the lack of control. And this is the reason why the first paragraph which states that everything should be done according to the scientific method, the recent scientific techniques and so on. And we have the German Association of Science which says that in order to work according to the scientific method, everything has to be controlled, right? Every experimental step has to be controlled and so on.

So this is very easy to then demonstrate to the judge that it has not been done in virology ever.

And I have many proof. Not not only me, many people have done that.

But for my case I have asked the University of Melbourne, in the Doherty Institute, which is their virology institute, basically, and they have published one of the first SARS-Cov-2 isolation publications. And it was the first publication outside of China.

And I asked them very early on if they did the control experiments for every step, including the genome sequencing. And they clearly answered that they did not do it. Very clearly. No excuse. Very, very straightforward. They said no, we didn’t do it for any of the steps.

And then I asked them why did you not perform the controls. And they told me very, very straightforward again. ‘We didn’t have the resources to do it. We were just focusing on the positive culture. And we had to work quickly. And we had no time.’ Basically, this was their answer.

So everyone can see that this is extremely unscientific. And the German Association of Science even clearly states quoting — I’m quoting them basically that they say that nobody should issue any sort of scientific paper, unless they have followed all the scientific steps, even if economic factors, monetary factors or the economic pressure is high. So you should not publish anything before following all the scientific steps.

And I think everyone would agree. So this is, as a proof, is a very good proof. Because usually if you ask virologists around the world, if you ask the official institutions — CDC, RKI, Pasteur Institute and so on — it is very unlikely to to get a straightforward answer like this. It’s very rare to get it. I was very lucky to get this straightforward answer. And this is what I’m using as a main proof. But then I use other proofs as well.

Katie:

Yes. Another question that I had is that there is this group you are working with that is called The Next Level and they help you.

Could you talk a little bit about them, who they are?

Marvin:

So, basically, next level is like a joint venture. We are basically coming out of two different telegram groups or channels that have evolved during covid and we are now working together with different scientists, doctors, engineers (like I am), mathematicians, computer scientists, and so on.

So we are quite a diverse team and what our main focus is basically health topics. So we try to dig deep into virology, germ theory, medications, disease in general, biology and so on. And our focus is the scientific area.

So we try to be very scientific in our articles and our work. And we try to read through papers and explain to the audience why a certain paper, or why a certain scientific document, is methodically not good, or what is the problem with it, why is it not scientific. Or we try to also educate on other health topics. This is what we are doing.

Katie:

This sounds amazing. And I also noticed that Germany specifically, and German-speaking countries are extremely active in this area.

Like there are so many knowledgeable people, a lot of activists, a lot of channels and people talking about it.

I really noticed in Germany, I even had one of my videos, that was translated in German… I think, around 1,000,000 people watched it in German.

I noticed how this topic is really popular and a lot of people are working towards solutions. So we really need to also take example from them.

Marvin:

I’m not really sure why that is in Germany. As in every other country, in Germany you have a lot of people that are just following the western medicine blindly. But you have a lot of people also that are very critical and trying to dig deep into the topics, and educate themselves, and doing the research.

So I think we have just had a history. Many, many scientists — so-called scientists of the past — of these areas came from Germany. Or from Europe basically.

And, we had — with Doctor Stefan Lanka we had a very prominent biologist/virologist who came out to the public and tried to educate and spread the truth basically about the practices, scientific practices, in virology. So that gave the whole movement a boost, I would say, in Germany.

And also he was working together with the Perth Group in Australia, which in the 80s, 90s, were very, very clearly doing a lot of good work in HIV research. So I think this is also part of the reason why, specifically in German-speaking countries, many people are already aware of these topics.

Katie:

So how people can support you and what you are doing this court case and everything that you require to do?

Marvin:

So one support would, of course, to be there at the day. So for everyone maybe who is around Hamburg could come there and just — at the 26th of April — think it’s at 10:45 am. I can share the address later, but that would be great for sure.

And then, of course, you can support our Next Level, so our work what we are doing. We have a website and we also have a magazine that comes out regularly. So you can do any sort of donation.

You can buy the magazine and you can also interact with other critical thinkers in the online forums — telegram — and just support this community. That would be also very great because we are doing a lot of work.

Basically all of us do this in our free time. So we have all our main jobs, and apart from that, we do this in our free time because we are very passionate about this.

We don’t want a future for our families and friends and children and so on that is continuing with this craziness basically. And with these pandemics over and over again, with vaccinations and medical drugs and so on.

It is all going against, basically, our health and is not based on science.

This people really should understand that this is not really scientific.

If you take your time, some hours, weeks, and you really try to figure it out, you will quickly understand that this is not based on science.

This is based on fraud. Sometimes on misinterpretation. OK? Misinterpretation. Very often, due to lacking control experiments, they misinterpreted the results they get. They don’t know what exactly is cause and effect because they don’t have any controls. So they just take it for granted; and this is also unscientific.


See Related:

Dr. Stefan Lanka & Dr. Tom Cowan: How We Got Into This Mess — The History of Virology & Deep Medical Deceptions


The Path Paved by Dr. Lanka: Exposing the Lies of Virology


Part 1: The New Body Soul Biology (English voice over) Dr Stefan Lanka

 




German Engineer Marvin Haberland Challenges the Existence of Covid Virus in German Court

German Engineer Marvin Haberland Challenges the Existence of Covid Virus in German Court

 

Marvin vs Virology: COVID Taken to Court

by Dr. Sam Bailey
October 11, 2022

 

Many of us know that the virologists have not been following the scientific method and have no evidence that viruses exist. One of their biggest problems is that they don’t perform valid controls in their experiments.

German engineer Marvin Haberland has worked out a way to get a public admission that SARS-CoV-2 has not been shown to exist. When Marvin broke “corona” legislation, the German authorities unwittingly took the bait.

If they want to convict him, they will have to justify the fraudulent nature of virology in a public court.

The virologists better come up with some decent excuses fast…



[Video available at Dr. Sam Bailey Odysee channel.]

References:

  1. Dr. Mark Bailey – A Farewell To Virology (Expert Edition)
  2.  Dr. Sam Bailey – Secrets of Virology “Control” Experiments
  3. Dr. Sam Bailey – The Truth About Virus Isolation
  4. Spanish Flu Video – Secrets of Influenza
  5. Corona Fakten Telegram Channel
  6. German Legislation: Law for the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases in Humans (Infection Protection Act – IfSG) Paragraph 1
  7. DFG Funding, Good Research Practice
  8. Wikipedia – German Research Foundation
  9. Measles Court Case Protocol Findings
  10. Virus Mania – 3rd Edition
  11. The Peter Doherty Institute
  12. Christine Massey FOIA
  13. COVID 19 Fraud & War On Humanity – Part 1 video
  14. The “Settling The Virus Debate” Statement

 

Connect with Drs. Samantha and Mark Bailey