Please support THE CITIZEN'S VOICE with a donation HERE!
|
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| Home About Contact | ||
|
||
Please support THE CITIZEN'S VOICE with a donation HERE! | ||
|
|
||
Child-Harming Götz Ulrich (CDU District Administrator of the Burgenlandkreis) and Public Health Officer Ina Treu in Vaccine Mania – Criminals Still in OfficeOn January 26, 2022, District Administrator Götz Ulrich and Public Health Officer Dr. Ina Treu made statements at a press conference of the Burgenlandkreis and systematically pursued what can only be described as continued vaccine mania. Dr. Ina Treu herself described the situation as “quite relaxed.” There were 16 patients on regular wards, compared with a peak of 94. Zero on intensive care units, compared with a previous maximum of 14 COVID patients. The hospitalization rate was far below earlier peaks. The Omicron wave was described as dominant. Despite the absence of severe cases in the hospitals, Ulrich and Treu nevertheless shamelessly promoted further vaccinations. Four vaccination centers were open daily, family vaccination days were offered, and appointments could be booked through the district portal specifically for children aged five and over: This was not neutral information; it was mobilization under the guise of a “relaxed” situation. The Numbers Without Context – The Usual Disinformation from PoliticiansYet the figures presented were once again numbers without context and thus the kind of disinformation that was disseminated every day during that period. Were the patients who tested positive in the hospitals there because of COVID, or had they merely tested positive? What was the bed capacity at the hospitals in the Burgenlandkreis at the time? (More than 1,000 beds.) There were no severe cases. The 5 people who died – did they die from COVID or merely with COVID? How old were these people, and what pre-existing conditions did they have? Naturally, none of this is revealed in the press conference. Statistically, 5 to 6 people die in the Burgenlandkreis every day – generally, certainly due to old age. The question, therefore, would be whether the 5 people who died with a positive test were simply among those who would have died anyway. The report about the “outbreaks” in nursing homes is interesting. It was reported from Zeitz that there were 16 positive cases: 10 residents and 6 staff members. Of the 6 staff members, 5 were vaccinated. 2 of the residents had died and were therefore among the 5 already mentioned. Their ages and pre-existing conditions would have been important information for putting this into context. In another facility in Zeitz, there were 22 cases. Of these, 12 involved residents and consequently 10 involved staff members. One resident had died. She had received a booster. Of the 10 staff members who tested positive, 9 were vaccinated. The schools were also mentioned. The “infection situation” was greatest there, although the testing mania was also being carried out daily. The Burgenlandkreis had approximately 175,000 inhabitants. This figure is, of course, not mentioned. Probably so that nobody gets the idea of putting the few cases into proportion with the population. The Vaccine Zealotry of CDU District Administrator Götz UlrichUlrich explained that family vaccination days meant that children and adolescents could also be vaccinated if their parents consented. For younger children aged 5 to 11, an appointment had to be booked in advance. Novavax would be given priority to groups subject to the institution-based vaccination mandate. Public Health Officer Treu urged people to get vaccinated “in order to get out of the pandemic.” The Media Confusion and the Explanations of Order-Follower Götz UlrichThe district administrator explained that statements made in the media were not legally binding. That was why it was important to him to explain what was legally binding at the time. He said that people could look at the federal and state regulations. However, these had been written in legalese that the average citizen could not understand. Government action is supposed to be predictable and comprehensible to citizens. Precisely for that reason, the language of the law should not be unnecessarily complicated. District Administrator Ulrich recognizes that this was obviously disregarded. However, he managed to reduce these many pages of regulatory texts to two simple graphics. How fortunate, right? He began with quarantine. Once a positive test had been carried out, quarantine lasted for 10 days. After 7 days, one could “test out” of quarantine if one had been symptom-free for at least 48 hours. Contacts of people who had tested positive were also subject to such a 10-day quarantine – unless those people had received a “booster vaccination.” How well such boosters “protected” could be seen from the figures concerning the nursing-home staff mentioned above. Recovered people did not have to remain in quarantine. From day 28 to day 90, one was considered recovered. Why 10 days, why not 12? Why had the period during which someone was considered recovered just recently been cut in half, from 180 to 90 days? CDU District Administrator Götz Ulrich mentions this but does not question it. Quarantine, CT Values, and the Next AbsurdityQuarantine could also be ended if the so-called CT value was above 30. Thus, it had been established that positive test results with a CT value above 30 were not meaningful. Critics pointed out that tests with more than 30 amplification cycles were frequently performed and that an infection was inferred from them. Ulrich explained that there had been cases in which people became ill after vaccination. This does not seem to have caused him any sleepless nights, however. 3G, 2G, 2G-PlusTo keep the confusion at a high level nevertheless, District Administrator Ulrich (CDU) explained the applicable regulations ranging from 3G to 2G-Plus. Anyone could enter supermarkets – elsewhere in retail, indoor restaurants, and accommodation establishments, 2G applied. For public festivals, sporting events, and private indoor gatherings with more than 20 people, 2G-Plus was mandated. Why the risk in a supermarket was supposedly not as great as at public festivals is now known. It was simply a matter of arbitrary political decisions. The CDU district administrator did not question this. Götz Ulrich explained that these rules allowed 50 percent of the population access. The other 50 percent were therefore excluded and had their fundamental rights curtailed. But apparently this did not trouble Ulrich either. “Are Daily Tests a Danger to Our Children?” – The District Administrator’s Answer Is Pure Cowardice and Downplaying!A woman asked this question. Instead of taking responsibility, Götz Ulrich (CDU) evaded it: This was supposedly not a matter for the district or the public health department. The federal institutes and the state were responsible. The tests came from the ministries of education and health – one “relied on” everything being lawful. Ulrich, who had enforced the testing regime locally, made himself into a mere order follower. Responsibility? Zero. Then came the downplaying: He was “not aware” of any serious problems. Nosebleeds or injuries could occur if the tests were used incorrectly, but he knew of no such cases. The children were now “so well practiced” that they could “handle it well.” Ulrich himself admitted that every morning he “dreaded it a little” and that it was unpleasant – but “not a catastrophe.” What cynicism: The district administrator dreads it, yet the children are still expected to endure it every day. He subjects minors to coercion and hides behind ministries. This is not responsible administration; it is cowardly exercise of power at the expense of the most vulnerable. Is Wearing a Face Covering for Six to Eight Hours Not Also a Danger to Children?Ulrich’s answer to this second question is just as cynical and irresponsible. Ulrich, who is not an expert, does not believe there is a medical danger. At the same time, he admits: It is “already quite a burden” for the children, uncomfortable, and “not particularly helpful” for lessons and concentration. Then he qualifies this: It was not a continuous requirement, after all; during breaks outside, they could take the mask off and “breathe properly.” Then it was back to wearing a mask in class. “Not nice,” but necessary until the Omicron wave had passed. FFP2 masks were not mandatory in schools; medical masks were sufficient – he even recommended them because they were easier to breathe through. Again, the same pattern: The district administrator clearly recognizes the burden, calls it a burden, and acknowledges concentration problems – and nevertheless continues it. Children are supposed to sit for hours with fabric over their faces, learn, and concentrate, while Ulrich himself admits that it causes disruption. The breaks serve as a fig leaf. Responsibility? Again, zero. He refers to state-wide regulations and the wave that still had to be “allowed to pass over us.” Just as with the tests: He imposes measures on children whose disadvantages he himself recognizes and hides behind “higher-level” directives. A burden remains a burden – especially when it is imposed on the most vulnerable while simultaneously admitting that it harms learning. The Vaccination Only Protects Against Severe DiseaseThis occurred against the backdrop of a statement Public Health Officer Ina Treu had already made on November 4, 2021: The vaccination only protects against severe disease. An organized mass vaccination campaign – let alone pressure on healthy children – is therefore ethically and legally impermissible. The state may not coerce citizens into undergoing medical interventions, especially not with substances that were being administered under conditional authorization and whose long-term risks were unclear, merely to obtain an alleged individual protection against severe disease. Yet that is precisely what happened: social exclusion, 2G/3G rules, an institution-based vaccination mandate, and the systematic promotion of vaccinations for children aged five and over. The necessary assessment of how high the individual risk of severe disease actually was had not been carried out by Ulrich and Treu. Administrative action necessarily requires such assessments before regulations are issued and measures imposed. The Nuremberg Code of 1947, which emerged from the doctors’ trials concerning Nazi crimes, states as its first principle that the voluntary, informed consent of the human subject is required – free from coercion, pressure, or deception. It prohibits experiments that cause unnecessary suffering or in which the benefits do not clearly outweigh the risks. Ulrich and Treu acted as part of an apparatus that trampled this ethical standard underfoot by creating pressure and involving children. Today it is undisputed: Children were neither significantly endangered by COVID-19 nor “drivers of the pandemic.” The STIKO recommended vaccinations for healthy children in this age group only to a limited extent or, later, with caution; severe cases were extremely rare. At the same time, cases of myocarditis and pericarditis occurred following mRNA vaccinations – particularly among young men and adolescents, and in some cases also among children. Studies and PEI reports demonstrate an increased risk. Anyone who knowingly exposes children to such risks even though the individual benefit against severe disease in healthy children was minimal is blatantly disregarding the welfare of children. These “vaccines” had not been fully tested, and adverse effects, including deaths, were reported. At the time, the EMA (European Medicines Agency) already had several hundred thousand reports of suspected adverse reactions. This should have meant an immediate halt to all vaccination campaigns. Institution-Based Vaccination Mandate Is Being Prepared as RequiredA journalist asks specifically about the institution-based vaccination mandate: How are the public health authorities supposed to monitor the facilities, and can they even manage it with the available staff? Ulrich’s answer is revealing. He confirms that the public health authorities are already working “at the limit” and can only continue functioning with personnel from other offices, the Bundeswehr, and RKI scouts. The task beginning on March 16, 2022, would occupy the entire second quarter – hearings, requests for information, proceedings. A working group under Dr. Ariane Körner, including members of the legal office and public health department, had urgently been established to prepare the whole thing in an “orderly” manner. This is not an all-clear; it is an admission: The apparatus is already overwhelmed, and yet a new coercive measure is being imposed on top of it, complete with bureaucracy and controls. Instead of asking whether such a mandate is sensible and proportionate given the vaccines’ limited effectiveness (protection only against severe disease), Ulrich is organizing its enforcement. Responsibility for the consequences? Again, none. They prepare, they monitor, they conduct hearings – those affected in nursing care and medicine will have to see how they cope. And then Public Health Officer Treu immediately uses the opportunity for the next vaccination appeal: The pandemic can only be overcome with as many vaccinated people as possible. Medical and nursing staff should “reconsider” their decision, focusing on severe disease – for themselves, for those entrusted to their care, and for their fellow human beings. At precisely the moment when the authorities’ staffing overload is admitted, pressure is once again being applied. Not a word of qualification, no reference to ethical limits, no admission that the vaccines do not reliably prevent transmission. That was the typical logic of that period: Admit being overwhelmed, organize coercion anyway, and ultimately call for the jab once again. Ulrich and Treu do not act as critical public officials, but as willing enforcers of a system that places control and vaccination pressure above proportionality and the welfare of children and employees. This answer once again exposes the vaccine mania and the unwillingness to take responsibility for the consequences. They Knew!Current findings from the United States fit seamlessly into the picture. David Morens, a longtime senior adviser to Anthony Fauci at NIAID, pleaded guilty in August 2026 to concealing emails and circumventing FOIA requests – in connection with the origin of the virus and EcoHealth Alliance. He used private accounts to conceal communications and was in close contact with Fauci circles. Fauci himself later acknowledged that protection against infection and transmission was limited and not long-lasting – contrary to early, exaggerated public claims. Those responsible knew early on about the vaccines’ limitations, yet kept the vaccine mania and the narratives going. Why Did CDU District Administrator Götz Ulrich Force the People of the Burgenlandkreis to Participate in the Vaccine Trial?At the district council, I asked District Administrator Ulrich the direct question this year: Why was it so important to him that the people of the Burgenlandkreis participate in the trials of these “vaccines”? Why did he disregard the Nuremberg Code? Ulrich had his deputy, Dr. Ariane Körner, answer the question. There was no genuine engagement with the issue. Körner essentially explained that anyone who had been vaccinated and subsequently suffered health problems should, as a consumer of these vaccines, contact the PEI (Paul-Ehrlich Institute) or the manufacturers. This is cynicism in its purest form. While every positive test was meticulously recorded in order to use the resulting incidence figures for fearmongering, the district administration has no interest whatsoever in who suffered harm from participating in the trials of these vaccines. Former Federal Health Minister Jens Spahn admitted on December 15, 2025, before the Bundestag’s Enquete Commission: “The goal of vaccine research and procurement is to have a vaccine that protects against severe disease. It was never the goal, including for the WHO, in vaccine development, to provide protection against infection for third parties.” He continued: The vaccines had been tested in studies and “are still being tested in the market, so to speak, to this day.” That is exactly what happened. Ulrich and his apparatus pushed the population of the Burgenlandkreis – including children – into this ongoing large-scale experiment. No Responsibility, No ConsequencesMorally, the actions of District Administrator Götz Ulrich and Public Health Officer Ina Treu must be classified as irresponsible, authoritarian, and hostile toward children. They created pressure where protecting the vulnerable and genuine proportionality should have been required. They promoted vaccinations for children even though their own public health officer had already identified the limited benefit (only severe disease) months earlier and the hospital situation was relaxed. Ulrich continues to accept no responsibility, refuses to apologize, and remains in office. This Is Not a System Failure – This Is the SystemIt is a morally corrupt system that the political class has arranged for itself over the past decades. A system in which they protect themselves, cover for one another, and shift every genuine responsibility elsewhere. Irresponsible politicians and civil servants who do not care at all about people’s welfare – especially that of children. People who obey orders, push through directives from above without resistance, and hide behind jurisdictions, ministries, and “state-wide regulations.” A system in which nobody is liable, nobody apologizes, and nobody faces consequences – while those affected have to bear the damage. Ulrich and those like him are not outliers. They are this system. In a genuine democracy with a truly independent public prosecutor’s office, such actors would not simply be allowed to continue. There would be investigations on suspicion of coercion, negligent or intentional bodily harm (resulting in death) in office, disregard for fundamental medical-ethical principles, and endangerment of child welfare. There would be access to files concerning the decision-making processes, communications with higher authorities, and assessments of the risks to children. There would be public hearings at which Ulrich and Treu would have to explain why, despite the statement made in November 2021, they continued to push mass vaccinations and include children aged five and over. In a genuine democracy, it would not be the critic who was treated as inherently suspicious, but the public officials who forced experimental medical measures on the population and on children. Instead, those responsible remain in office. The children who were exposed to adverse effects, and the families who suffered under social and administrative pressure, remain without redress. That is the real scandal: Not only the vaccine mania, but the continuing refusal to accept responsibility. Götz Ulrich and Ina Treu are emblematic of a system that neither admits nor punishes mistakes – and that remains dangerous precisely because of this. The Unscrupulous CDU District Administrator UlrichIf one watches the press conference, one can get the impression of how unscrupulously Götz Ulrich (CDU) acts as an administrator. In earlier periods of German history, he probably would have acted in much the same way. Bureaucratic, obedient. Children suffer from the measures, people die from the “vaccines” – well, that is simply “not nice” and “unpleasant,” but necessary. If one observes Dr. Ina Treu and how fidgety she appears during this charade, one might get the impression that she perhaps does have a conscience after all. Nevertheless, she stayed in line, did not object, and supported the vaccine mania. Anyone Who Continues to Vote for the Pandemic-Driving Parties CDU/CSU, SPD, Greens, FDP, and Left in Future Elections Is Legitimizing This Very SystemThey are legitimizing irresponsibility. They are legitimizing politicians protecting themselves, covering for one another, and never truly being held accountable. And they are legitimizing the same actors going many steps further during “future pandemics” or other states of emergency caused by political decisions. Because that is precisely what they have already announced in their committees and commissions: They want to “learn lessons from the pandemic” – not in order to better protect citizens’ rights, but in order to act against citizens even more quickly, comprehensively, and effectively in the future. Anyone who votes for these parties makes themselves an accomplice. Author: AI-Translation - АИИ & Michael Thurm | |
|
| Other articles: |
 | When will landowners be expropriated for the IKIG?The amended statute for the establishment of the inter-municipal industrial zone (IKIG) near the A9/B91 at Weißenfels is to be passed in the upcoming district council and Lützen ... zum Artikel |
 | The Rule of Law Consists Solely of Legal Tricks – The Case of Julia Neigel vs. the Free State of SaxonyDo you still believe in the rule of law? In an independent judiciary that protects citizens from state overreach? Forget it. The case of musician Julia Neigel against the Free Stat... zum Artikel |
 | Great Despair! Forgotten Ancestors?Today, it’s historical – and a bit desperate. Reese explains how to research your ancestors, where to find the best sources, and why it would sometimes be helpful if history te... zum Artikel |
|
Support the operation of this website with voluntary contributions: via PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/evovi/12 or via bank transfer IBAN: IE55SUMU99036510275719 BIC: SUMUIE22XXX Account holder: Michael Thurm Shorts / Reels / Kurz-Clips Imprint / Disclaimer |