Interview avec Suzette Sandoz, Professeure de droit et ancienne Conseillère Nationale, qui nous parle de la dimension humaine et de l’éthique, qui est un élément fondamental de l’application du droit. L’éthique est un point commun entre la science et le droit, sans quoi un des deux sera tyrannique. Dr. Klaus Schustereder, spécialiste en médicine interne générale, a mené cette interview.

Vous avez expressément la permission de copier et diffuser cette vidéo où vous le souhaitez.

In diesem zweiten Interview hatten wir erneut das Privileg, mit Pascal Najadi zu sprechen, einem pensionierten Schweizer Bankier und Geschäftsmann, der sich nachdrücklich für Transparenz und Reformen in der globalen Bankenbranche einsetzt. Najadi ist auch bekannt für seine Kampagne für Gerechtigkeit und Rechenschaftspflicht in Malaysias Banken- und politischen Systemen nach der Ermordung seines Vaters Hussain Najadi im Jahr 2013.

Während des Interviews teilte Najadi seine Besorgnis über die Verteilung des unzureichend getesteten COVID-19-Impfstoffs auf globaler Ebene, die er als Menschenrechtsverletzung ansieht. Er betonte die Notwendigkeit für Entscheidungsträger auf nationaler und internationaler Ebene, mit Fürsprechern wie ihm in Dialog zu treten, um sicherzustellen, dass die Öffentlichkeit umfassend informiert ist und dass politische Entscheidungen im besten Interesse der Bevölkerung getroffen werden.

Als prominente Persönlichkeit in der Finanzbranche hat sich Najadi nachdrücklich für Transparenz und Reformen eingesetzt. Er hat unermüdlich daran gearbeitet, das Bewusstsein für mutmaßliche Korruption und Fehlverhalten in der globalen Bankenbranche zu schärfen und Finanzreformen und Transparenz zu fördern. Seine Kampagne für Gerechtigkeit und Rechenschaftspflicht in Malaysias Banken- und politischen Systemen hat ihm den Ruf eines furchtlosen und unverblümten Fürsprechers für Veränderungen eingebracht.

Wir sind dankbar für die Gelegenheit, erneut mit Najadi zu sprechen, und wir hoffen, dass dieses Interview das Bewusstsein für die Bedeutung von Transparenz, Rechenschaftspflicht und ordnungsgemäßer Prüfung und Bewertung von Medizinprodukten weiter schärfen wird. Indem wir von Führungskräften wie Herrn Najadi lernen, können wir auf einen fundierteren und durchdachteren Ansatz für die öffentliche Gesundheitspolitik hinarbeiten und sicherstellen, dass nie wieder unzureichend getestete medizinische Produkte auf globaler Ebene angewendet werden.

Aufgenommen am 14. Februar 2023

Sind sie auch besorgt über die Rechtsverletzungen im Kontext von SARS-CoV-2 ?  Verpassen Sie nicht dieses exklusive Interview mit Rechtsanwalt Philipp Kruse und Dr. Klaus Schustereder.  Informieren Sie sich jetzt und schützen Sie sich.

Interview avec Pascal Najadi, un ancien banquier international, qui a déposé une plainte pénale contre le Président Suisse Alain Berset en lien avec la campagne vaccinale.

Pascal Najadi est un banquier international de grand succès, qui a été vacciné trois fois. Il regrette sa décision depuis qu’il a réalisé que le narrativ sur lequel elle répose est faux. Dr. Klaus Schustereder, spécialiste en médicine interne générale, a mené cette interview.

Vous avez expressément la permission de copier et diffuser cette vidéo où vous le souhaitez. Des versions anglaise et allemande sont également disponibles.

Lien vers la version française téléchargeable :
https://www.doctorstalk.ch/filez/DoctorsTalk.ch--Interview_w_Pascal_Najadi_(French_Version).zip

Link zur herunterladbaren deutschen Version:
https://www.doctorstalk.ch/filez/DoctorsTalk.ch--Interview_w_Pascal_Najadi_(German_Version).zip

Link to downloadable English Version:
https://www.doctorstalk.ch/filez/DoctorsTalk.ch--Interview_w_Pascal_Najadi.zip

The Repeal of Human Rights - Pascal Najadi

In this second interview, we again had the privilege of speaking with Pascal Najadi, a retired Swiss banker and businessman who has been a vocal advocate for transparency and reform in the global banking industry. Najadi is also known for his campaign for justice and accountability in Malaysia's banking and political systems following the murder of his father, Hussain Najadi, in 2013.

During the interview, Najadi shared his concerns about the distribution of the insufficiently tested COVID-19 vaccine on a global scale, which he views as a violation of human rights. He emphasized the need for decision makers at both the national and international levels to engage in dialogue with advocates like himself to ensure that the public is fully informed and that policy decisions are made with the best interests of the population in mind.

As a prominent figure in the financial industry, Najadi has been a vocal advocate for transparency and reform. He has been working tirelessly to raise awareness about alleged corruption and malfeasance within the global banking industry, and to promote financial reform and transparency. His campaign for justice and accountability in Malaysia's banking and political systems has earned him a reputation as a fearless and outspoken advocate for change.

We are grateful for the opportunity to speak with Najadi again, and we hope that this interview will further raise awareness about the importance of transparency, accountability, and proper testing and evaluation of any medical products. By learning from leaders like Mr. Najadi, we can work towards a more informed and thoughtful approach to public health policy and ensure that never again are insufficiently tested medical products applied on a global scale.

Recorded on February 14, 2023

An interview with Pascal Najadi, a retired international banker, who filed criminal charges against the current president of Switzerland (who also serves as the Health Minister), related to the handling of the COVID-19 crisis.  Mr. Najadi is a highly successful international banker who was vaccinated 3 times.  He now regrets his decision after realizing the false narrative it was based on.  Interview done by Dr. Klaus Schustereder, a specialist in general internal medicine and host of the show.

You are welcome to share this video anywhere you wish. 

Download Original Quality Video here:  https://www.doctorstalk.ch/filez/DoctorsTalk.ch--Interview_w_Pascal_Najadi.zip

Scientism, driven by a psychological need for security, is quite seductive. But it is a dangerous train to jump on because science can never be a moral guide to life.

Michael Esfeld, Professor of Philosophy of Science at the University of Lausanne, Switzerland, analyses how the COVID crisis turned into a post-factual scientism. According to him, there has never been any factual evidence for an extraordinary situation, a real emergency, and COVID policies were utterly arbitrary. We now need to examine how this could have happened.

All the existing standards of medicine and science were thrown overboard, says Esfeld. One major issue is science that is based on models instead of evidence. Models are not reflecting reality, and neither can they make predictions. Scientifically they have no value. He explains the success of models through the psychological need for answers, and the need for certainty. Pessimistic predictions generate attention in media and politics. As a result, there is the danger of abusing them for fear-related political business models by offering protection and security. However, preventive measures come with a cost and collateral damage. You need to assess the proportionality, and you need a faculty of judgment.

The problem is also about language and changing the meaning of concepts. So, for example, the definition of a pandemic is no longer associated with excess mortality but rather infection only. Infection, in turn, no longer means a symptomatic sick person but rather a positive PCR test only. It's completely arbitrary, he says, "I call this post-factual."

Science has brought about substantial progress in modern society and therefore benefits from great credibility. This crisis demonstrated the danger of abusing science for political scientism, whereby science is taking the role religion had in pre-modern times. Under the doctrine "follow the science," science is believed to be capable of imposing norms and telling people what to do. But science has to abstract from subjective values, Esfeld explains. It cannot be a moral guide to life. In scientism, science loses its objectivity. This will backfire on science and destroy its credibility. Science is about to destroy itself.

Asked about the role of media, Esfeld states that the intention of discrediting any critical voices, as he had to experience in his own case, is to intimidate others to speak up. If they tolerate people asking critical questions, the whole regime of "follow the science" will be finished because the public will realize that it is not THE science. But there are always two sides. There are those who intimidate, and there are those who let themselves be intimidated.

We must ask: "What can we do to prevent this from happening again?" We thought we had enough mechanisms built into our political system. The shocking thing is they all failed. The whole judiciary failed. The entire system of checks and balances failed. We have to employ reason to limit the exercise of power. We have to prevent a concentration of power in the hands of the state that various interest groups can seize to further their interests. 

Regarding the vaccination campaign, Esfeld notes that in a free society, a vaccine producer or other interest group would have to convince people to take a product and take liability. They could not seize the state power, force the vaccines on the people, and exempt the producers from liability. Those experiencing adverse effects from the vaccines should sue the doctors who vaccinated them.