Intro to, ‘THE NARRATIVE ON TRIAL’

This Is a Depopulation Narrative

 

Plaintiff Experts: Dr. Mike Yeadon, Sasha Latypova, Dr. Joseph Sansone & Catherine Austin Fitts

 

Intro by John R. Houk, Blog Editor

Original post by Seba Terribilini

Intro © October 6, 2026

 

Anti-Globalists and anti-Big Pharma activists will be interested in a Substack Seba Terribilini post from October 4 entitled, “THE NARRATIVE ON TRIAL: A Landmark Civil Lawsuit in The Netherlands”.

 

This civil suit is interesting because it is taking place and moving forward in the Globalist Tyranny dominated European Union (EU) and specifically in the nation of Netherlands. I was surprised such a civil suit was allowed to proceed in that legal venue. AND I’ll fall out of my chair in surprise if there is any success in exposing the harm the public was exposed to from the mRNA jab and the WEF’s so-called Great Reset.

 

AT THE VERY LEAST the discovery evidence will become public knowledge. To which the World’s masses, typically denigrated as useless eaters by Globalist Elitists, will become aware of the culling mindset of self-appointed (often unelected) cultural and health leadership.

 

The Terribilini post is a bit lengthy and includes links to two lengthy Youtube videos. You should at least read through the post-text. While typing this, I’m listening to the first video which is 53:01-Minutes long. The first video is largely soundbites from the expert witnesses involved with the civil suit. I’m fairly certain I will not dip into the second video which is 4:35:54-Hours long. According to the title and description, the second video focuses on the legal aspects of the litigation. If that’s your cup of tea, then knock yourself out. In the Seba Terribilini cross below I will embed the videos where the post just has a Youtube link.

 

Globalist Elitists do NOT care about your wellbeing. They care about the wellbeing of a niche few. If you are not in that niche, watch your back. When the few tells you that you will OWN NOTHING and be happy, it is Newspeak for your demise. Be WATCHFUL and BE VIGILANT.

 

JRH 10/6/26

ALWAYS FREE TO READ yet READER SUPPORTED!

PLEASE! I need more Patriots to step up. I need Readers to chip in $5 - $10 - $25 - $50 - $100 (PAYPAL or CARD - one-time or recurring). YOUR generosity is APPRECIATED. PLEASE GIVE to Help me be a voice for Liberty:

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

Big Tech Censorship is pervasive – Share voluminously on all social media platforms!

Our Senior Citizen Family Supplements our income. Diana & I endorse Magic Functional Coffee and Matcha Tea. It’s MAGIC because there is a weight loss or weight control emphasis among other wellbeing benefits.  Clicking the Diana Wellness Store will take you to the online store. CLICK  or SCROLL to the BUY tab (Agara Coffee or Agara Matcha Tea). DRINK COFFEE or MATCHA:

 

https://dianawellnessstore.com

************************

THE NARRATIVE ON TRIAL

A Landmark Civil Lawsuit in The Netherlands

The Narrative on Trial (ST PHOTO)

 

By Seba Terribilini

October 4, 2026

(Substack) Seba Terribilini

 

The Case at a glance

 

A definitive, historic legal proceeding marking an unprecedented confrontation over global pharmaceutical and institutional accountability.

 

The historic civil lawsuit in the Netherlands is brought by seven Pfizer “vaccine”-injured individuals, represented by attorney Peter W.H. Stassen, seeking individual accountability from global figures like Bill Gates, Albert Bourla, Mark Rutte, along with the State of The Netherlands. and no fewer than thirteen high-ranking defendants from politics, business, media, and science.

 

This lawsuit marks an unprecedented confrontation between citizens and global institutions. While defendants cling to the official narrative of “safe and effective” mRNA injections, the plaintiffs’ case presents an uncompromising clash of hard facts substantiated by expert evidence. The divergence is so profound that the plaintiffs' pleadings formally characterise the rollout as the greatest genocide in history, putting the establishment’s preferred pandemic narrative directly on trial.

 

The core argument in the proceedings is as brief as it is clear: COVID-19 is not a disease but a project known as “Covid-19: The Great Reset.” The defendants in these civil proceedings are being held personally liable with their private assets on the grounds of tort. Through their actions and omissions, they unlawfully misled the plaintiffs, as a result of which the latter received a Covid-19 injection, causing serious damage to their physical integrity and their mental and physical health.

 

After Bill Gates lost his initial jurisdictional challenge, the court ordered the case to move forward into a highly significant substantive merits hearing scheduled for 22 October 2026. This landmark case marks the first time global architects of the Great Reset are legally compelled to present a formal defence against substantiated allegations of institutional deception and public harm in an open court of law.

 

Powerful, compelling and pexplosive (sic) evidence has been submitted to the Court in these proceedings (September 22) by Sasha Latypova, Dr Mike Yeadon, Catherine Austin Fitts and Joseph Sansone.

Banner – The Narrative on Trial (ST PHOTO)

 

Get straight into the case with a concise overview and an explanation of the issues at the heart of the substantive hearing in Leeuwarden on 22 October. We recommend reading this first before exploring the full Case File!

 

https://thenetherlandscase.com/case-overview

The Truth Left Unseen.... (ST PHOTO)

 

The Case They Don't Want You to See

 

Bill Gates. Albert Bourla. Mark Rutte. The State of the Netherlands. Mass Media. And a Dutch civil case putting the "pandemic" narrative itself on trial.

 

This case is unique in its pursuit of individual accountability through unprecedented tortious claims, supported by explosive evidence.

 

As the 22 October substantive hearing approaches, discover the extraordinary case unfolding in Leeuwarden — the evidence and the attempts to silence expert testimony.

 

Watch. Listen. Decide for yourself.

 

Fiona Rose Diamond (ST PHOTO)

 

Youtube VIDEO: BILL GATES: DEFENDANT IN DUTCH LAWSUIT!

[Posted by Mass Non-Compliance

Published Oct 2, 2026

…MORE DESCRIPTION]

Blind Justice Statue - Narrative on Trial (ST PHOTO)

 

The Narrative on Trial: Our Purpose

 

We are the independent, official media and public-facing operation for this extraordinary case in the Netherlands — producing its international media operation, Press Conference and public case platform, and bringing the evidence to a global audience. 

 

Whatever the eventual outcome, we believe the eyes of the world must be on these proceedings. Our role is to bring this case out of the courtroom and into public view—providing the information, key Case File documents, expert evidence, interviews and independent media coverage needed to understand the case and follow it as it unfolds, as well as organising the Press Conference and delivering the official livestream of the Press Conference on 22 October.

 

Their weapon is the shadows.

 

Ours is the light.

 

We intend to bring this case firmly into that light—ensuring that the defendants, the judiciary and everyone involved know that the eyes of the world are watching.

 

By visiting this website, sharing our content, supporting the project, and watching and sharing our official livestream on 22 October, you can help bring vital international attention to this case. A link to watch live will be available here on the website ahead of the hearing.

 

http://www.TheNetherlandsCase.com

 

Independent scrutiny is essential, and you can help ensure that the evidence presented, the questions raised and the significance of these proceedings are seen, heard and examined far beyond the walls of the courtroom. You can help us ensure that the eyes of the world remain fixed on the judiciary, keeping global attention on these proceedings.

 

We are also organising the press conference taking place immediately after the hearing on 22 October 2026. As experienced event and conference organisers, we understand the importance of delivering an event of this significance professionally and effectively, creating the strongest possible platform for the case to reach the international audience it deserves.

 

Our time and work to date have been given on a voluntary basis. Alongside the organisation and administration behind the project, we have built this free information hub and produced media and documentary material to help tell the story of the case.

 

Over the past several months, we have invested a significant amount of time and energy with one overriding goal: to bring this case out of the shadows and into the light.

 

We hope you find this resource valuable, continue to follow the proceedings, and help us ensure that the eyes of the world remain on this case.

 

Questions or queries? Contact us on contact@thenetherlandscase.com

 

Help Us Bring This Case to the World

🟪 Your donations will also assist the cost of litigation!

https://buymeacoffee.com/thenarrativeontrial

 

The Defendants

 

The 17 defendants: identities, positions and professional roles. 

Defendants- Bourla, Gates & Rutte (ST PHOTO)

 

https://thenetherlandscase.com/the-defendants

 

The Lawyer

 

The attorney representing the plaintiffs: Peter W.H. Stassen.

Peter W.H. Stassen - Plaintiffs’ Lawyer (ST PHOTO)

 

https://thenetherlandscase.com/the-lawyer

 

The Experts

 

The expert witnesses presenting evidence in the proceedings.

Plaintiff Experts (ST PHOTO)

 

https://thenetherlandscase.com/the-experts

 

The Case File

 

Explore the Case File, proceedings timeline and key court documents. 

Banner 2 - The Narrative on Trial (ST PHOTO)

 

https://thenetherlandscase.com/the-case-file

 

The World Must Be Watching

What matters now, is exposure...

 

In a civil case where the State of the Netherlands, Bill Gates, Albert Bourla, Mark Rutte and others stand formally as defendants, Attorney Peter W.H. Stassen is putting on the judicial record the evidence, arguments and core truths that have been suppressed, censored and shut out of serious public examination throughout the Covid era. He is bringing evidence before the court that has never been assembled and advanced in another claim like this, confronting some of the most powerful people and institutions in the world with it on the record, in their own defence proceedings, where it cannot simply be made to disappear.

 

That is why the world must be watching this case.

 

The evidence must be seen. The arguments must be heard. The defendants’ answers must be witnessed. And, critically, the judiciary’s response to what is placed before it must be subjected to the full glare of public scrutiny. Everyone involved must know that this courtroom is not operating in the shadows and that the world is watching what happens there.

 

There is no other case quite like this. Whatever its ultimate outcome, getting this evidence into the proceedings, speaking these truths in court and creating a permanent judicial record is itself something of enormous importance.

 

Win or lose, the truth is being put on the record. But a truth left unseen can still be buried. Our job now—and yours—is to make sure the world sees it. 

 

Full Video Plea

FULL ORAL PLEA - Narrative on Trial (ST PHOTO)

 

Youtube VIDEO: The Narrative On Trial | Full Oral Plea | English Language Version

[Posted by Mass Non-Compliance

Published Oct 1, 2026

…MORE DESCRIPTION]

 

© 2026 Seba Terribilini

Seba Terribilini HOMEPAGE

SUBSCRIBE/SUPPORT Seba Terribilini

Alarmist “Newspeak” is poisoning the climate debate

I’ve been engaged in some comments on Substack with an individual committed to the Climate Change hysteria. This cross post is inspired by that interchange. Thank you Canada Free Press!

 

JRH 10/4/26

ALWAYS FREE TO READ yet READER SUPPORTED!

PLEASE! I need more Patriots to step up. I need Readers to chip in $5 - $10 - $25 - $50 - $100 (PAYPAL or CARD - one-time or recurring). YOUR generosity is APPRECIATED. PLEASE GIVE to Help me be a voice for Liberty:

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

Big Tech Censorship is pervasive – Share voluminously on all social media platforms!

Our Senior Citizen Family Supplements our income. Diana & I endorse Magic Functional Coffee and Matcha Tea. It’s MAGIC because there is a weight loss or weight control emphasis among other wellbeing benefits.  Clicking the Diana Wellness Store will take you to the online store. CLICK  or SCROLL to the BUY tab (Agara Coffee or Agara Matcha Tea). DRINK COFFEE or MATCHA:

 

https://dianawellnessstore.com

*********************

Alarmist “Newspeak” is poisoning the climate debate

Orwell’s insight was that once language is corrupted, thought follows. If the vocabulary of a debate is loaded with ideological assumptions, even honest inquiry becomes constrained

 

Alarmist ‘Newspeak’ (CFP Photo)

 

By Tom Harris

October 4, 2026

Canada Free Press

 

Two brilliant linguistic mechanisms of control were introduced in George Orwell’s dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four:

 

1. Newspeak, a deliberately restricted language designed to limit the range of human thought

 

2. Duckspeak, speech emptied of meaning and repeated automatically like the quacking of a duck.

 

Both were designed to support only the state’s politically correct messages.

 

While Western societies remain far freer than Orwell’s Oceania, many observers argue that elements of these linguistic mechanisms have emerged here organically through political rhetoric, media ecosystems, and cultural habits. The parallels between Oceania and today’s Western nations are not precise, but they are close enough to warrant serious examination and warn climate realists about what we must avoid at all costs.

 

Newspeak: The Narrowing of Thought Through Language

 

Newspeak’s purpose was to restrict vocabulary, eliminate nuance, and embed ideology directly into the words we use. In contemporary Western discourse, no government has imposed an official Newspeak, but they might as well have since several recent linguistic trends resemble its effects.

 

Politically charged terminology that preframes the meaning of discourse

 

Modern political language often uses ideologically-loaded terms that shape perception before any argument is even made. Climate-related terminology that is in common usage offers some of the clearest examples:

 

§  “Carbon pollution” — Climate activists and their political and media allies use this misleading term to refer to carbon dioxide (CO2), which is neither pollution nor carbon; it is a colorless, odorless gas essential to plant photosynthesis and, therefore, to all life on Earth. Yet the phrase “carbon pollution” evokes imagery of smoke (i.e., typically soot, which is amorphous carbon contaminated with additional organic compounds and trace elements) and grime, compressing multiple ideas—CO₂ emissions, air quality, climate risk—into a single dark, dirty-sounding term. This mirrors Newspeak’s strategy: use simplified language that carries ideological weight and discourages nuance and further discussion. Climate realists, those of us who understand that climate change is largely natural, must call CO₂ from industrial activities what it actually is: “carbon dioxide emissions.”

 

§  “Fossil” fuels — Referring to hydrocarbons (coal, oil and natural gas) as “fossil fuels” reinforces the idea that they are relics of ancient life and therefore inherently outdated or illegitimate, even though abiotic methane (natural gas) exists on Earth and methane is abundant on Titan, a moon of Saturn where no known life exists. The phrase “fossil fuels” collapses a complex category of hydrocarbons into a single conceptual box, encouraging binary thinking: fossil = bad, nonfossil = good. Climate realists must call it what it is: “hydrocarbon resources.”

 

§  “Clean/green energy” — Wind and solar power are often labeled “clean,” or “green” despite requiring coal-powered manufacturing, rare-earth mining, large-scale land disruption, and environmentally intensive supply chains. Wind power is also a major threat to bird and bat populations, which die in the millions in the vicinity of industrial wind turbines. The term “clean energy” compresses a complicated lifecycle into a single moral category, implying unjustified purity and virtue while discouraging discussion of trade-offs. Climate realists must call it what it is: “alternative, intermittent energy.”

 

§  “Climate change denier” — Many people so labeled do not deny climate change; we question its primary drivers, magnitude, or policy responses. The denier term collapses a spectrum of scientific and policy positions into a single stigmatized identity, functioning similarly to Newspeak’s negative identity labels. If anyone could rationally be labeled climate change deniers, it is those who hold the absurd view that our climate was relatively tranquil until the arrival of humans. They seem not to know that half of North America was under a vast ice sheet only 22,000 years ago. Ten thousand years ago temperatures rose as much as 11 degrees F in a single decade — over 50 times faster than the past century’s 2 degrees F warming.

 

The “deniers” label is a particularly heinous smear, as it is an attempt to equate those of us who legitimately question the causes of climate change to Holocaust deniers. It is designed to frighten dissenters into silence. Besides having no place in civilized discourse, it is a fundamental error in reasoning, an “ad hominem” logical fallacy — “against the man” instead of the idea. Climate policy skeptics must call ourselves what we really are: “climate realists.”

 

These examples show how modern terminology can compress complexity into emotionally charged categories, limiting the range of acceptable discussion—precisely Newspeak’s purpose.

 

Climate Realists and the Necessity of Rejecting Alarmist Framing

 

A further dimension of modern Newspeak involves how language shapes not only public perception but also the self-expression of dissenting voices. Individuals often described as climate realists—those of us who acknowledge that climate change is real, has always occurred, and its causes remain scientifically uncertain—face a unique linguistic challenge. We must operate within a discourse saturated with emotionally loaded terminology. If we adopt the vocabulary of climate alarmism, we risk reinforcing the very worldview we question.

 

This is precisely how modern Newspeak is designed to operate: language smuggles ideology into thought. When climate realists use alarmist terminology, we inadvertently validate the conceptual framing that portrays our position as illegitimate. The words themselves become a trap.

 

To avoid this, climate realists must use terminology that reflects scientific rigor rather than political messaging. As I said above, CO₂ emissions instead of carbon pollution; hydrocarbons instead of fossil fuels; alternative energy instead of clean energy; climate policy skeptic instead of climate change denier. These alternatives avoid moralized framing and allow discussion to proceed on empirical, analytical, and policy grounds rather than emotional ones.

 

This linguistic discipline is not cosmetic—it is essential. Orwell’s insight was that once language is corrupted, thought follows. If the vocabulary of a debate is loaded with ideological assumptions, even honest inquiry becomes constrained. Climate realists, therefore, must remain vigilant in choosing words and phrases that reflect our actual position rather than the caricature imposed by polarized discourse. In doing so, we resist the narrowing of debate and preserve the possibility of genuine scientific inquiry—precisely the opposite of Newspeak’s intent.

 

Tom Harris is Executive Director of the Ottawa, Canada-based International Climate Science Coalition at http://www.icsc-climate.com.

 

Content is Copyright 1997-2026--the individual authors | Site Copyright 1997-2026 Canada Free Press