Reiner Fuellmich: The Abduction

750 words

Abduction

I.
Reiner Fuellmich and his wife Inka were living in Mexico because they had been refused entry into the USA. (Inka, who apparently is still in Mexico, will know some minor details where my account may be slightly mistaken or need confirmation.)

My information, which contradicts another narrative, is that they had visited Peru so that Inka could obtain spiritual guidance there. They booked a flight to the USA but, on trying to book in at the airport, were told that, without explanation, their visas (or Reiner’s) had been cancelled during the night. So they travelled to Mexico. These details are unimportant. The significant fact is that they were denied entry to the USA although they owned a ranch in California, had lived there for countless years and although Reiner was accredited as, and had worked for decades as an attorney in California.

They settled in or close to Tijuana, which is located south of the border at San Diego, USA. This enabled friends to bring their dogs to them.

II.
Their passports went missing. One account is that the passports had just been misplaced and were found the next day, but that the Consulate recommended nonetheless to go ahead with the replacement procedure.

In order to replace the passports they contacted the German consulate. There is also an account that Reiner had been asked by Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer to provide at the consulate a signature on a legal document connected with the "Corona Investigative Committee." There is a narrative that this was a ploy to deceive Reiner into attending the consulate. Justus Hoffmann and Antonia Fischer have allegedly admitted this.

I have read different accounts of exactly what happened, but what is certain is that they travelled, either voluntarily or strong-armed, to the airport, where Reiner was placed under guard on a flight to Germany. He was accompanied by six uniformed Mexicans, whose flights and return flights must have been paid by the German government.

There may or may not have been an intermediate stop at Mexico City and the aircraft may or may not have landed briefly in the USA, it is speculated in Arizona or New Mexico. This stop, if it took place, may have significance for retrospective legal action.

On arrival at Frankfurt airport Reiner was arrested and a week later transported to the high-security prison at Rosdorf, which is located close to his former home and offices in Göttingen.

III.
Inka Fuellmich was also detained at Tijuana airport. She spent a very unpleasant night in jail in disgusting conditions and without knowing what would happen to her. If there was any reason for objecting to Reiner’s papers, then the same applied to her. In fact, she was released the following day and allowed to remain in Mexico, where apparently she remains to this day.

IV.
This abduction — or kidnapping — was certainly illegal in several respects.

Under § 144 of the Mexican Immigration Law, Article 144, the only basis for expulsion from Mexico are:

• Entering the country with false documents

• Illegally re-entering the country after having previously been deported

• Being convicted of a crime which endangers national security, or

• being under investigation for any such crime.

None of the expulsion conditions listed are applicable.

Had the German Agency for the Protection of the Constitution or the prosecutor's office asked for his extradition in order to legally arrest him in Mexico, Fuellmich and his lawyers would have been heard by the Mexican authorities during extradition proceedings.

The accusations of public prosecutor John and the Federal Criminal Police Office and the Lower Saxony State Criminal Police Office would have emerged during the extradition proceedings in Mexico as fabricated, as too would have the fact that the entire operation was staged.

The extradition would never have taken place. The German Agency for the Protection of the Constitution and the German authorities generally would immediately have been discredited internationally.

It is generally recognized that the kidnapping of an accused, organized by law enforcement authorities of one state [in this case, the Göttingen Public Prosecutor's Office in co-operation with the Agency for the Protection of the Constitution, the Lower Saxony State Criminal Police Office and the Federal Criminal Police Office] on the territory of another state constitutes an offence contrary to international law, which obliges the abducting state [Germany] to return the abductee at the request of the injured state [Mexico].”

(In this case, the "injured" state cannot be expected to make any such request since it was itself active in implementing the abduction.)