Lawyer Suing Gates & Bourla for Covid VAX Injuries Arrested and Imprisoned in Netherlands

Todayville

Published

1 month ago

12 minute read

By John Leake

The Netherlands goes Full Fascist in a Gestapo-reminiscent late night arrest of attorney Arno van Kessel one month before trial against Gates et al. began.

In a stunning expression of the Globalist-Fascist takeover of the Netherlands, the Netherlands police have arrested attorney Arno van Kessel, the lead attorney suing Bill Gates, Albert Bourla, Mark Rutte et al. for COVID-19 vaccine injuries.

The civil process was scheduled to begin on July 9; Mr. van Kessel was arrested in a Gestapo-reminiscent early morning raid by paramilitary police in the early morning of June 11, where he was reportedly blindfolded, bound, and taken into detention, where he remains almost two months later.

Readers will note my tardiness in reporting this stunning story. The reason is because both the European and the American press have completely ignored both the civil trial against Gates, Bourla, Rutte et al. and van Kessel’s arrest.

I knew nothing about van Kessel’s arrest until last night, when my co-author, Dr. Peter McCullough, forwarded to me a report by INFOWARS journalist, Adan Salazar. Once again, the so-called “conspiracy theorist” Alex Jones has proven to be one of the first guys to report the shocking reality of what is going on.

Salazar’s report prompted me to do a Google Netherlands search with the key words Arno van Kessel gearresteerd — that is, “Arno van Kessel arrested”—and I got one search result for a June 27 report in an independent online journal called Der Andere Krant (The Other Newspaper). The following is an English translation.

Arno van Kessel will be held in custody for an additional ninety days because the Public Prosecution Service continues to designate him as a “suspect in an investigation into a criminal network,” yet without presenting any evidence. This means the Leeuwarden lawyer will definitely not be present at the public hearing on July 9th in the Leeuwarden District Court, where the first substantive hearing in the internationally high-profile case against, among others, the State of the Netherlands, Mark Rutte, and Bill Gates is scheduled. His partner, Peter Stassen, is on his own, but says he will “appear fully equipped.”

In early June, this newspaper reported that there was finally some progress in the internationally high-profile lawsuit by Leeuwarden lawyer Arno van Kessel https://deanderekrant.nl/nieuw-hoofdstuk-in-rechtszaak-tegen-bill-gates-en-mark-rutte/ and his Eindhoven colleague Peter Stassen. In 2023, the legal duo announced they would file legal proceedings against Bill Gates, Mark Rutte, and the Dutch State, among others. On behalf of their clients, they want to force the judge to issue a clear ruling on the question: was the COVID-19 mRNA injection a vaccine for the benefit of the population’s health, or a bioweapon? Van Kessel said: “It’s one or the other, and there’s no in between.”

The Northern Netherlands District Court, Leeuwarden location, announced in early June 2025 – finally – that the first substantive hearing of the case is scheduled for July 9th. On Wednesday morning, June 11th, there was a completely unexpected turn of events. Arno van Kessel was dragged from his bed early in the morning by a special intervention team with a considerable display of force. The lawyer, his daughter, and his wife were even briefly held at gunpoint.

A day later, the police published a report on the website politie.nl linking Van Kessel to “a criminal network.” According to a press release issued by the Public Prosecution Service, eight people were arrested that morning for “adhering to anti-institutional ideology and possibly intending to use violence.” One of them was quickly released, while the other seven were held in restricted custody for two weeks, meaning the suspects were not allowed any contact with the outside world. Van Kessel – as was announced last week – was being held in a cell in Vught.

In recent weeks, several stories have appeared in the mainstream media about a network of so-called sovereigns. These “anti-institutionalists” may have been planning something related to the NATO summit. Weapons and explosives may have been found, but any hard evidence or substantiation remains lacking to this day. The suggestion that Van Kessel is also part of a dangerous criminal group has been raised. The charges have since been partially withdrawn. The AD newspaper reported last week that the Public Prosecution Service has been unable to substantiate a plan to disrupt the NATO summit. “We have investigated whether there is an imminent threat. This has not been proven.”

On Thursday, June 26, the Public Prosecution Service released more news after a long silence. One suspect has been released, but “six suspects in the investigation into a criminal network, in which a large proportion of the arrested suspects espouse anti-institutional ideology and may have the intention to use violence, will remain in custody for an additional 90 days,” the Public Prosecution Service announced. Van Kessel is one of those suspects who will remain in custody for another 90 days. The Public Prosecution Service states that it needs more time for the investigation and that “given the state of the investigation, it is not possible to respond substantively to questions about the progress, suspicions, and findings,” according to the Public Prosecution Service.

It’s remarkable that the mainstream media continues to use the “sovereign” frame. This is despite the fact that it was already clear in the first days after the arrest that Van Kessel is not a sovereign. As a lawyer, he is following the institutional path with his case. Van Kessel is also not known for being violent. He openly and unashamedly proclaims his faith in Jesus Christ everywhere, which implies that he opposes violence. The media writes nothing about this. They also ignore the story of Van Kessel’s partner (see box).

Peter Stassen – who is temporarily acting as head of Van Kessel’s law firm – told De Andere Krant that he, too, has not had any contact with his partner since June 11th. According to Stassen, restraining a suspect is one of the most severe measures the Public Prosecution Service has at its disposal, “so they have to produce very strong evidence.” So far, he has seen nothing. The Public Prosecution Service told this newspaper that “the Public Prosecution Service realizes that this is a very serious instrument and should not be used lightly,” but declined to comment further on the case.

The Eindhoven lawyer has since received word from the chairman of the Dutch Bar Association, the body responsible for overseeing the legal profession, that suspension proceedings have been initiated against Van Kessel. One way or another, it is therefore certain that Van Kessel will not be present on July 9th. Stassen did, however, make it very clear that despite his inadequate preparation, he “will be fully equipped.”

Stassen will also give a lecture in Groningen on July 1st about the latest developments. “It will go ahead as planned. I will explain a great deal in it, including addressing the State’s defense, in which they very clearly make personal attacks on the experts we want to speak,” says Stassen. More information about this can be found at Rechtoprecht.online.

Many suspect that attorney Van Kessel has gotten too close to the truth in the coronavirus case. This has led to the case being associated with the prosecution of German lawyer Reiner Fuellmich. We will discuss the case in more detail in the next edition of De Andere Krant.

The case strikes me as another example of how Globalist gangsters no longer even try to conceal that they have gone Full Fascist. Arresting a plaintiffs attorney in a late night raid of his home and detaining him for months on vague accusations of “espousing an anti-institutional ideology” is so crassly totalitarian as to be almost beyond belief.

Not surprisingly, the hopelessly fallen New York Times hasn’t reported van Kessel’s arrest. Once widely regarded as the thoroughbred of U.S. news reporting, the Times now resembles an old, swayback donkey covered with manure. The English language is insufficient for me to express the depth of my contempt for that useless rag, unworthy of being used as ersatz toilette paper in a subway station public restroom.

The German press is no better. A Google Germany search for niederländischer Anwalt Arno van Kessel verhaftet (“Netherlands attorney Arno van Kessel arrested”) yielded not a single report from a single major German newspaper. How is this possible?

I thought I’d grown accustomed to being presented with evidence that a cabal of globalists and their puppets—such as former Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, who is now Secretary General of NATO—run the world, but it occurs to me this morning that this story beats them all. Please forward this critically important report to your friends.

Author’s Note: If you found this report interesting and informative, please consider being a paid subscriber to the Focal Points. For just $5 per month, you can support us in our efforts to investigate and report the reality of what is going on in our world. During these languid days of summer we have lost many of our paid subscribers who have—understandably—grown fatigued with many of the themes we’ve been reporting since we started our newsletter in October 2022. I hope the above story will serve as a reminder of the importance of supporting independent, investigative reporters like us.

Subscribe to Focal Points

Share

Up Next

Russiagate was a lie—and the media helped sell it

Don't Miss

Turns out that there is a business case for exporting LNG to Europe

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Down the Charlie Kirk Murder Rabbit Hole

Business / 5 hours ago

Health-care costs for typical Canadian family will reach over $19,000 this year

Alberta / 6 hours ago

Yes Alberta has a spending problem. But it has solutions too

Censorship Industrial Complex

Decision expected soon in case that challenges Alberta’s “safe spaces” law

Published on September 13, 2025

Todayville

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announces that the Alberta Court of Appeal will soon release its decision in a case challenging whether speaking events can be censored on the basis of potential “psychological harm” to an audience, infringing Charter-protected freedoms of expression (section 2(b) and peaceful assembly (section 2(c).

This case stems from the University of Lethbridge’s January 30, 2023, decision to cancel a speaking event featuring Dr. Frances Widdowson, who has frequently challenged established narratives on Indigenous matters.

In written argument filed in 2024 the University claimed it cancelled the event, in part, because it had obligations under Alberta’s Occupational Health and Safety Act to ensure a workplace free of “harassment” and free of hazards to “psychological and social wellbeing.”

Lawyers argue that these provisions (which might be described as a “safe spaces” law) compel employers to censor lawful expression under threat of fines or imprisonment.

Constitutional lawyer Glenn Blackett said, “Safe spaces provisions are a serious threat to Charter freedoms. Employers who don’t censor ‘unsafe’ speech are liable to be fined or even jailed. This isn’t just the government censoring speech, it is the government requiring citizens to censor one another.”

Given the University’s defence, lawyers asked the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta to allow an amendment to the lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of the “safe spaces” laws. However, the Court denied the request. According to the Court’s apparent reasoning because the safe spaces law is worded vaguely and generally, it is immune from constitutional challenge.

Mr. Blackett says, “I think the Court got things backwards. If legislation infringes Charter rights in a vague or general way, infringements become impossible to justify – they don’t become Constitution-proof.”

Widdowson and co-litigant Jonah Pickle appealed the ruling to the Alberta Court of Appeal, which heard argument on Monday. A decision from the Court of Appeal is expected soon.

Banks

Debanking Is Real, And It’s Coming For You

Published on September 13, 2025

Todayville

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Marco Navarro-Genie

Marco Navarro-Genie warns that debanking is turning into Ottawa’s weapon of choice to silence dissent, and only the provinces can step in to protect Canadians.

Disagree with the establishment and you risk losing your bank account

What looked like a narrow, post-convoy overreach has morphed into something much broader—and far more disturbing. Debanking isn’t a policy misfire. It’s turning into a systemic method of silencing dissent—not just in Canada, but across the Western world.

Across Canada, the U.S. and the U.K., people are being cut off from basic financial services not because they’ve broken any laws, but because they hold views or support causes the establishment disfavors. When I contacted Eva Chipiuk after RBC quietly shut down her account, she confirmed what others had only whispered: this is happening to a lot of people.

This abusive form of financial blacklisting is deep, deliberate and dangerous. In the U.K., Nigel Farage, leader of Reform UK and no stranger to controversy, was debanked under the fig leaf of financial justification. Internal memos later revealed the real reason: he was deemed a reputational risk. Cue the backlash, and by 2025, the bank was forced into a settlement complete with an apology and compensation. But the message had already been sent.

That message didn’t stay confined to Britain. And let’s not pretend it’s just private institutions playing favourites. Even in Alberta—where one might hope for a little more institutional backbone—Tamara Lich was denied an appointment to open an account at ATB Financial. That’s Alberta’s own Crown bank. If you think provincial ownership protects citizens from political interference, think again.

Fortunately, not every institution has lost its nerve. Bow Valley Credit Union, a smaller but principled operation, has taken a clear stance: it won’t debank Albertans over their political views or affiliations. In an era of bureaucratic cowardice, Bow Valley is acting like a credit union should: protective of its members and refreshingly unapologetic about it.

South of the border, things are shifting. On Aug. 7, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order titled “Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans.” The order prohibits financial institutions from denying service based on political affiliation, religion or other lawful activity. It also instructs U.S. regulators to scrap the squishy concept of “reputational risk”—the bureaucratic smoke screen used to justify debanking—and mandates a review of past decisions. Cases involving ideological bias must now be referred to the Department of Justice.

This isn’t just paperwork. It’s a blunt declaration: access to banking is a civil right. From now on, in the U.S., politically motivated debanking comes with consequences.

Of course, it’s not perfect. Critics were quick to notice that the order conveniently omits platforms like PayPal and other payment processors—companies that have been quietly normalizing debanking for over a decade. These are the folks who love vague “acceptable use” policies and ideological red lines that shift with the political winds. Their absence from the order raises more than a few eyebrows.

And the same goes for another set of financial gatekeepers hiding in plain sight. Credit card networks like Visa, American Express and Mastercard have become powerful, unaccountable referees, denying service to individuals and organizations labelled “controversial” for reasons that often boil down to politics.

If these players aren’t explicitly reined in, banks might play by the new rules while the rest of the financial ecosystem keeps enforcing ideological conformity by other means.

If access to money is a civil right, then that right must be protected across the entire payments system—not just at your local branch.

While the U.S. is attempting to shield its citizens from ideological discrimination, there is a noticeable silence in Canada. Not a word of concern from the government benches—or the opposition. The political class is united, apparently, in its indifference.

If Ottawa won’t act, provinces must. That makes things especially urgent for Alberta and Saskatchewan. These are the provinces where dissent from Ottawa’s policies is most common—and where citizens are most likely to face politically motivated financial retaliation.

But they’re not powerless. Both provinces boast robust credit union systems. Alberta even owns ATB Financial, a Crown bank originally created to protect Albertans from central Canadian interference. But ownership without political will is just branding.

If Alberta and Saskatchewan are serious about defending civil liberties, they should act now. They can legislate protections that prohibit financial blacklisting based on political affiliation or lawful advocacy. They can require due process before any account is frozen. They can strip “reputational risk” from the rulebooks and make it clear to Ottawa: using banks to punish dissenters won’t fly here.

Because once governments—or corporations doing their bidding—can cut off your access to money for holding the wrong opinion, democracy isn’t just threatened.

It’s already broken.

Marco Navarro-Genie is vice-president of research at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and co-author, with Barry Cooper, of Canada’s COVID: The Story of a Pandemic Moral Panic (2023).