Transcription of Pro. Dr. Stefan Homburg, Leibnitz University in Hanover, Germany

This Is A Detailed Description Of The Insanity In Germany Between 11 March, 2020 and 26 April, 2023.

First I would like to thank

Sasha Latypova

for her post regarding the German CDC leak that can be read in its entirity here. In the post you will find the video that I have transcribed to the best of my abilities. I have corrected gramar, punctuations, spelling and poor English in a few cases while staying as true to what the professor wants to convey as possible. I have also made a few notes while transcribing which can be found at the bottom of the post.

Here is the transcript:

Thank you very much for the invitation. This is my second lecture in this circle, and compared to last year we are significantly progressed it must be said. Because we in Germany were lucky that there is a whistleblower who has provided us with data that the whole world envies us for.

This is the RKI-Leak. Please do not mix it up with RKI-files which referes to redacted protocols. The RKI-Leak encompasses much more. Almost ten gigabytes. Namely, ALL protocols. Not just some of them. All are completely unredacted, and we obtained a lot of additional material such as letters. For example a letter from President Macron to Germany, suggesting that both countries should conduct lock-downs in a similar fashion.

We also got Excell-sheets, E-mails, PowerPoin presentations and so on. The significance if the RKI leak is not so much that it reveals something new that has not been said by critics. Rather, these documents are probative. Hence, at first they have been admitted as evidence in a court that has based its decision on the RKI-Leak.

Clearly, if anyone writes on Facebook that something is not right, then this basically has little effect. Even scientific articles are often dismissed and refuted by opposing articles. However, if RKI internally affirms certain facts, then these facts can be used as evidence before the courts.

As lockdowns and the enire Corona policies were internationally coordinated, what we found here in Germany is important for all countries and not just Germany. The most important question posed in the preceding years was: Has RKI, who’s statements were authoritative and used by the courts, has it worked independently, or was it politically influenced?

In March, our Federal Minister of Health made a crystal clear statement, and I quote: “Media speculates that RKI has received political instructions rather than worked scientifically and independently. This is wrong. The redacted parts are mainly employees’ names, to protect them from hate.» This is a typical victim/offender reversal. When making his allegation, Lauterbach had published only a few protocols, and not a single one from his own term in office, and that is still true today, and the protocols were redacted maximally as you can see here.

The documents were not telephone books, but simply protocols with only a few names. No one believes that only names were redacted. However, Minister Lauterbach got away with his allegation for months. As usual, newspapers simply repeated his lies in articles and editorials.

This continued until 23 July of 2024 when the following happened: At 4 AM about 10 Gigabytes of information were unlocked on the internet. At 6 AM a press conference in Berlin was announced, which was attended by about 30 journalists. It started at 10 AM, and the journalists learned what we found after thousands of people had already downloaded the RKI-Leak.

We arranged matters so as to avoid arrests or home searches by police. Of course the leak was certainly important for authorities, but police did not react since they knew it was pointless. Shortly after the unredacted protocols were discussed in public, our Federal Minister of health changed his opinion. I quote: ”Lauterbach admits that corona experts were politically influenced.”

So he kept up his allegation for five months, and then he said exactly the opposite of what he had said originally but, as always, his lie had no consequences.

In which respect has RKI been influenced politically? I will now show you som examples. The following slides are designed so that on the left you find the RKI protocols, and on the right what was happening in the real world at the same time.

Let’s start with examples of political influence. On 5 May, 2020 RKI writes, and I quote: “If RKI does not meet policy makers’ demands, there is a risk that policy makers themselves develop indicators and/or that RKI will no longer be integrated.” You see a typo here since these are all literal quotes including typos and comma mistakes.

We learn that the institute thinks that either we do what we are told to do, or policy makers will put us on the sidelines. Two days later we read: “Testing, testing, testing is basically an implicit strategy that was dictated by politics. Overall tricky, because politics has set guidlines.”

In May 2020 it was obvious that there were no medical risks, and only rising PCR numbers were employed to prolong the notion of a pandemic. The directive from then Minister Spahn was key here. He ordered testing of not only sick people, but also the healthy, which had never been done before. And a media journal added that people with health insurance have to bear the financial burden.

My second example of political influence is from 5 March, 2020: “It would be good to get the oral orders from the Federal Ministry of Health in written form.” This is what the wise official demands when he receives illegal instructions and fears disciplinary action or criminal prosecution. If the “public servant” has written instructions from the ministry, then he is largely off the hook. (1.)

Conversely we see from the material that the ministry hesitated in issuing written instructions. Next quote from 26 May, 2020: “How should RKI deal with political orders from, for example Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Labor, etc.?” Here we learn that there were not only orders from the Federal Ministry of Health, but from other ministries that interfered with the work of RKI.

….., and now I present the most disturbing quote from the entire RKI-Leak, 28 September, 2020: “An approval of the mRNA vaccine by the FDA before US elections is not desirable. The same holds true for European authorities.” This quote reveals it was all about politics rather than health. They told the public that they wanted to save as many lives as possible via vaccination, but it was even more important for them that Biden would win the US presidential election.

Recall that Trump sponsored Project Warp Speed and tied his fate to an early mRNA admission, desirably before the US election. He wanted an admission on 1 November, 2020, but the political forces behind the Corona scam wanted Biden. We then read on CNN, after the votes were counted and original ambiguities in vote counting were resolved that the FDA granted EUA for Phizer-BioNTech in December.

A second important point relates to the possibility of a medical emergency. We find already in March of 2020 some remarkable quotations. The first relates to findings of AGI, a working group within RKI that monitors infectious diseases and has statistics over years and decades, unlike these new PCR statistics, and I quote: “AGI results suggest that SARS-CoV-2 does not circulate widely.” This report is from the second day of the first lockdown. One day later they write: «The trends are best not formulated (or communicated) because otherwise it would become dificult to justify further measures.»

This demonstrates how RKI thought. A way that is visible in all protocols. They subordinated themselves to politics, and tried to promote measures. The measures were the true objective, and they knitted together justifications to legitimize them. (2)

Next quote: “The number of free and occupied beds are almost equal.”, meaning 50% vacancy in our hospitals, and RKI adds that usual vacancy is less than 10%. …., and now comes a red sentence that was removed from the official protocols. We found it as a residual, i.e. as the original version of the protocol, which was forgotten. This protocol from 25 March, 2020 was finally redacted in 2023, notably by an employee of the legal department, which herself had not taken part in the meeting, and was responsible for rejecting requests under the Freedom Of Information Act.

The employee says she did not change the file, but stored it only by accident. As RKI does not have a registration system complying with legal requirements, this can neither be proven nor disproven. I quote: “It’s daring to say that causality exist (between measures and the decline of the wave). After all, we are at the end of the flue season.”

In addition, ladies and gentlemen, the RKI saw the following graph, the most important graph of the entire Corona crisis, in my view. However, it is somewhat complex. Therefor I explain in detail and emphasize that the graph was not made afterwards. So, this is not a matter of hindsight bias. They had the graph at their disposal at the beginning of the first lockdown, and they saw the folloing:

On the abscissa are the calendar weeks, from mid-year to mid-year, and on the ordinate are the influenza like illnesses. These are colds with fever, so somewhat stronger colds. Every single curve represents a specific year, and you recognize the same pattern every year: At first the number of colds is low, i.e. mid-summer. This number then grows until winter, and in the months of January and February these colds explode, and then return to the original value. That is why people speak of cold or flue waves.

What is interesting now is the black curve which represents the year 2020. First you see that the number of feverish colds, including SARS-CoV-2, i.e. independent of the specific virus that causes the colds was abnormally low in 2020, for that time of year. More importantly, it started declining in February where you recognize the peak of the black curve.In February, however, politicans told us that Corona was harmless, or a conspiracy (my edit: theory) of the right-wingers. They also told us that we should celebrate Carnival. Three assertions were made until the end of February. (3)

It was only in the first week of March that the political mood changed for unknown reasons. When the mood changed, the number of common colds was already in free fall. That also means that excuses such as, “Yes, of course, colds already receded before the lockdown, but only because school closures worked, or prohibitions of large gatherings worked.” All these excuses are inconsistent with the data, as all these measures started from the 10th week onwards. …., but colds receded, as you see in the graph, already in the 6th calendar week.

The next topic concerns vaccination. I have several slides here because these protocols were particularly heavily redacted. We first read on 15 April, 2020, when we learned from newspapers that no vaccines are available at all, and that there will be none for a long time (4), since development takes ten years, and if vaccination becomes possible, it will be voluntary.

We read the following in April of 2020: “There is currently no experience with RNA and DNA vaccines, EMA and Phizer are considering whether to skip phase 3 trials.”

Two weeks later: “A number of vaccines will become available that have been tested in quick succession. Relevant data will be collected post-marketing.” Put differently: Let’s first vaccinate the entire population, and then afterwards let’s learn whether the stuff helps or harms. That was the plan, and that’s how it was implemented.

On 27 December, 2020 vaccination started in Germany. On 8 January, 2021, in the very early phase we read: “Vaccine effectivness is not yet known. The duration of protection is also unknown.” That just repeats what we could read in the EMA approval, namely, that only protection from a positive PCR test was really confirmed. (5) Everything else like protection from severe illnesses, death and the like was not confirmed in the admission process.

In March (2021) we find the first signs of scepticism: “It is not yet clear that after vaccination, fewer old people are dying. Do vaccinated people die?” On the right side you see material from state TV, demonstrating how vaccine development works normally: R&D takes upto 17 years. This time it was conducted in just a few months. The result, as we know now, was devastating.

What about protection against transmission? This question is extremely important because vaccination mandates were base don the claim that vaccinated persons also protect others. If it was just about self protection, then legal obligation had been out of the question. (emphasis mine)

What did RKI think about protection of others? Very early, in February 2021 we read: “It is to be expected, (but not certain, because it has never been shown) that vaccines protect from severe illness, but they cannot stop local proliferation of viruses”.

In August we read: “The benefit of 2G (a scheme excluding unvaccinated people from social life) is not greater protection of others, but greater self-protection.”, and in 2022 we read: “There is no indication that vaccination has an effect on excretion, no change in evidence.” In sum there existed a crystal clear and consistent position, in accordance with the literature, and especially with Phizer’s approval study that made no respective claim: “There exists no protection of others.”

What did that mean for communication? Public communication had it that “The whole country is held hostage by these people, that is, the unvaccinated”. Karl Lauterbach threw this at the other members of the Bundestag in a debate about comprehensive vaccination mandates. His proposal, as we now know, failed narrowly, and if we are honest, it failed only since government and CDU/CSU had different ideas of how to implement comprehensive vaccination mandates and blocked each other in their respective suggestions. It was a very narrow decision. Overall this slide proves that what was communicated to the outside world totally contradicted what was known internally.

The next slide concerns vaccine safety. Now things are getting serious, and if you have weak nerves, just og outside for a moment. I start with 29 March, 2021, at which time vaccination had been going on for almost three months: “Astra Zeneca, a lot of hype in general. Now twelve cases of sinus vein thrombosis. Paul Erlich Institute, pharmacovigilance offices can’t keep up well. Sinus thrombosis, also in men have a 20 fold higher incidence.” This means that if you have been vaccinated with Astra Zeneca, you had a 20 fold higher risk than an unvaccinated person of developing sinus vein thrombosis, a really severe and life threatening illness.

17 May: “Side effect reports, Paul Erlich Institute had 45.000 in the last weeks, myocarditis in young men, sinus vein thrombosis, and so on.”

In the only hearing that has taken place so far, by the Brandenburg’s investigative committee, the security department head of Paul Erlich Institute, Dr. Keller Stanislawski testified: “There were people who only cared for the deceased, and also people who only took care of myocarditis cases. We had much more work than ever before, only through this vaccine.”

Now, before looking at the most shocking slide, please recall the dates: In March, April and May of 2021, the devastating effects of the Astra Zeneca vaccine became clear. Even ordinary citizens who had no access to the scientific literature became suspicious. They had unreliable but convincing information from what they saw in their neighborhood. (6)

How did Germany’s leading politicians respond to these unmistakable warnings? They produced the following headlines: “Federal President Steinmeier vaccinated with Astra Zeneca”, “Chancelor Merkel and Vice Chancelor Scholtz vaccinated with Astra Zeneca”, “Karl Lauterbach vaccinated with Astra Zeneca”, and finally in May: “Health Minister Joseph Spahn gets vaccinated with Astra Zeneca”. Never before have I heard of politicians announcing what modical treatment they receive. With Mrs. Merkel, that is the highlight, even showing her vaccine certificate. My interpretation of that is that they wanted to avoid Astra Zeneca being left in storage and then become accused of wasting taxpayers’ money. (7)

People were still afraid of that back then. Meanwhile it has become common that billions are spent every year on vaccine doses that are thrown away later, but back then politicians were still afraid. Whether they really got vaccinated, everyone can decide for themselves. If you have an IQ above 90 you can only come to one conclusion.

Now to the topic of children.

On 11 March, 2020 we read: “School closures in areas that are not particularly affected are not recommended”. Five days later politicians shut down all schools, daycare centers, and kindergartens. Also on 11 March, 2020 another crisis team had already made a decision. Hence on 16 March all schools etc. closed against RKI’s advice.

21 March, 2021: “Pediatrics proffessional associations are reluctant to vaccinate children. Politicians are prepairing vaccination campaigns.” A little later, almost pleadingly: “Children, when compared with other respiratory diseases, have a lower risk of severe disease progression”. We recognise an internal resistance that, however, was never communicated to the outside world.

At the end of 2021, we read: “The Health Ministry plans a booster scheme for children although there is no recommendation, and partly no approval. The Health Minister posted the following: “In children 12 to 15, BioNTech was 100% effective against Covid without side effects. (So again, allegedly free of side effects!) Everything speaks in favor of vaccinating children”. If you are not blocked, like me, you can open Lauterbach’s post and click on his source. You will find a blog sharing a press release from Phizer and BioNTech. So, the minister is acting as an advertising agency of the pharmaceutical industry. No scientific article is behind his post.

Let me conclude. This last slide, the most complex, is divided into three parts, and it is also the most important one. It first shows the so-called RKI risk level, on which our lives depended for three years. Green bars indicate that we were allowed to live like people have done the last hundreds of thousands of years with viruses. Yellow and especially red bars indicate lockdowns, school and kindergarten closures, curfews, 15 kilometers restrictions, mask requirements and direct and indirect forms of compulsory vaccination. (8)

In March of 2020 RKI sudenly increased the risk level. The bars changed from green to yellow. This remained so until the beginning of 2023, when the bars returned to green.

Now let’s take a look at statistics from RKI and the Federal Ministry of Health, showing ICU bed occupancy in Germany. The green line below is the recommended occupation of intensive care units. You can see the following: In 2020 we had a significant under utilization. Totally abnormal. (9) This is what RKI stated in its protocol for total clinical occupation. At the time billions of dollars had to be earmarked to avoid hospital bankruptcies. This was also the time when dances were performed by hospital staff, which circulate everywhere on the internet.

Then you see that in 2021, 2022 and 2023 the total ICU bed occupation hardly fluctuates anymore, and that has now no longer to do with any special actions. The most interesting thing in this graph is the dotted line at the bottom. These are the PCR cases. They include people who have contracted Covid, as well as people who, for example, have arrived after a traffic accident and were required to take a PCR test at admission. (Edit: I would call these fluctuations varying numbers of false positives, but I’m not a doctor. I don’t even play one on TV.)

Obviously the PCR curve fluctuates enormously, but without any impact on the total ICU occcupation. The crux of the matter is that the media only showed PCR curves for three years with an alleged exponential growth, and whatever they called it. If you now compare the two, it is completely incomprehensible why RKI indicates high risk whereas the lower graph indicates complete normality. Clearly one cannot understand that, but you will soon understand it using the RKI-Leak.

Here on the left we have the explanation. I quote from 16 March, 2020: “During the weekend a new risk assessment was prepaired”. Before a court RKI stated the assessment was prepared outside, so it was not based on a scientific evaluation. Further quote: “Risk is scheduled to be scaled up this week.” One day later the RKI report stated that there was a high risk, and we went into lockdown.

In June of 2020, not only were the number of colds low, as is typical for the season, but even the PCR numbers approached the zero line. …., and in the prelude to the protocol shown here, RKI members thought that now the official risk level could be reduced again, but then we read about NATO General Holtherm, who was top boss of the RKI (10), two hierarchy levels above Mr. Wieler, the figure head or mouth piece. Holtherm decided on Tuesday that the risk assesssment in the next week must not be changed. Next week sounds harmless, but as you see on the top right it lasted three years.

Then on 25 February, 2022, the Federal Ministry of health prohibited reducing the risk level from very high to high. That was shortly before parliament’s vote on comprehensive vaccine mandates. The only really funny part that I found in the RKI leak is this one from 26 April, 2023. At the start of April the minister had declared that the pandemic was over, as RKI learned from the newspapers, and I quote: “It could be considered to set the risk assessment to low.” That is what they had forgotten to do, and it proves the whole thing was about politics, and not medicine. From start to finish.

The following conclusions emerge:

The RKI case reveals a fundamental problem of the rule of law: According to Montesquieu, courts shall control the executive, but courts mainly dealt with authorities, or believed mainly or only authorities, in almost all trials regarding vaccination mandates, lockdowns, or school closures. RKI and PEI acted as witnesses, and the courts found all restrictions ok. Because all authorities are bound by instructions, the government is its own witness, which is contradictory to the separation of powers.

You have to be lucky and have a good willed whistle blower to achieve better results. So, I will now quote a sentence from a recent court ruling. “This recommendation pro vaccination mandates, based on assessments of the Robert Koch Institute, is now refuted by the published internal protocols of the institute.” This means that the Administrative Courts of Osnabrück, in a trial concerning the vaccination mandate of a nursing employee, has actually refuted the mandate and has submitted the whole case to the Federal Constitutional Court. (Emphasis mine)

In my opinion we have the same problem with other authorities such as the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution and the Federal Environment Agency. They have a say in trials notwithstanding that they subordinate.

Thank you very much for your attention.

1.      We all know by now that the Nürnberg defense (I was just following orders.) is null and void.

2.      I have said time and time again that they needed the pandemic in order to roll out the vaxxine.

3.      A perfect way to poison large crouds so they could transfect on a massive scale.

4.      In my post «This is not you will see that production of vaxxines was well underway at Moderna in 2018.

5.      By now my readers also know that the inventor of the PCR test has explicitly stated that it is NOT for diagnostic purposes. Besides, all other nerds like me who actually read the PCR instructions from top to bottom didn’t have to wait for someone on Substack to tell them this.

6.      Earlier this year my wife and I had a dinner guest who out of the blue just blurted out: «You know, nine of my childhood friends are now dead. Five of them even were in the same class in grade school.» He is seventy years old.

7.      I call it doubbling down.

8.      You may recall the «traffic lights» related to terror threats a decade or more ago.

9.      I believe this is because people were being cautious and carefull due to all things Covid.

10.  Why on earth does Germany have military people at the top of an organization within health care?