Please support THE CITIZEN'S VOICE with a donation HERE!
|
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| Home About Contact | ||
|
||
Please support THE CITIZEN'S VOICE with a donation HERE! | ||
|
|
||
Götz Ulrich (CDU District Administrator) and the Contradictions, Arbitrariness, and Scientific Emptiness of the COVID-19 PoliciesThe press conference held by District Administrator Götz Ulrich (CDU) and public health officer Dr. Ina Treu on February 2, 2022, in the Burgenland District exposes the contradictions, arbitrariness, and scientific emptiness of COVID-19 policies at the local level. While the incidence was rising steeply, facilities were reopened. Figures were quoted without context. Vaccination was praised as a cure-all – even though Treu herself had acknowledged months earlier that its effectiveness was limited. From today's perspective, beyond the mainstream narrative that still clings to the “pandemic of the unvaccinated” and the benefits of mass vaccination, these statements read like a textbook example of political steering rather than evidence-based medicine. Numbers Without Context: The Art of Relative RelaxationUlrich reported 26 patients in regular wards (16 the previous week; peak of 94 in December) and two in intensive care (none the previous week; peak of 14). The hospitalization rate was around 11 (maximum 45.5). The situation was said to be “relaxed and under control.” The incidence had risen to 720 (453 the previous week), but was below the Saxony-Anhalt state average of 874 and was the second-lowest in the state. Neighboring districts and areas of Thuringia were in some cases higher and in others lower.What was completely missing? The population of the Burgenland District (at the time around 175,000–177,000 inhabitants). Without this reference, an incidence of 720 remains an abstract figure – over the course of a week, it corresponds to approximately 1,260 “cases.” Even more serious: there was no information on available beds or hospital occupancy (Asklepios Weißenfels, SRH Naumburg, and Zeitz). 26 out of how many regular beds? Two out of how many intensive-care beds? The peak figures of 94 and 14 say nothing about actual capacity or occupancy by non-COVID patients. Such isolated figures create artificial panic or artificial reassurance – depending on what is politically required. At the same time, positive rapid tests at schools increased massively (Monday: 100 students + 3 teachers, Tuesday: 37 + 1, Wednesday: 50 + 1). Treu explained the high incidence among children and adolescents (over 2,000 among 7–12-year-olds, over 1,000 in other age groups) primarily by intensive testing in schools and daycare centers (three times a week). There were outbreaks in 31 daycare centers and 22 schools. The testing strategy itself drove the figures – and therefore the justification for measures. Particularly revealing were the death figures: Treu reported “fortunately only four deaths from or with Corona” in the previous week – one woman and three men, all over 60 or over 70 years old. What we are not told is how many people normally die in the Burgenland District during a January/February week of this kind. Was there excess mortality? Were these four additional deaths, or could they (given their age and possible pre-existing conditions) also have died without the positive test? Absolute figures without a population reference, without seasonal comparison values, and without differentiation remain meaningless. This lack of context was systemic: it allowed any figure to be presented either as a threat or as an all-clear. Reopenings Despite Rising Incidence: The Pragmatic ShiftDespite the rising figures and the “grip of Omicron,” Ulrich announced the reopening of the adult education center, district music school, and swimming pools (including recreational and leisure pools) from February 7 under 2G rules. Bars and nightclubs remained closed. The justification: The situation was below the state average, there was no overloading of critical infrastructure, and the hospitals were relaxed. This followed the district's “principle”: stricter rules only when the situation was worse than in the state and neighboring districts.Here lies an obvious contradiction. Months earlier, high hospital occupancy and incidence figures had led to closures. Now, relative “relaxation” was sufficient for easing restrictions – despite rising case numbers and massive test positivity among children. At the same time, students and children continued to be tested extensively and kept in quarantine for longer periods. This is not a consistent assessment of risk, but situational opportunism: When the numbers become politically inconvenient, suddenly only hospitalization matters; when closures need to be justified, incidence is what matters. Vaccination: From Limited Effectiveness to an Instrument of CoercionThe reference to Treu's earlier statements is particularly revealing. On November 4, 2021, the public health officer had stated that “vaccination” only protected against severe disease and that mass vaccination was therefore out of the question. At the February 2, 2022 press conference, things sounded very different: Vaccination protected against severe disease and death; the unvaccinated were “significantly more infectious” and had higher viral loads; the statistics showed this “clearly.” Booster vaccinations and vaccination programs (including for children aged 5–11) were heavily promoted. The vaccination rate was 68.17% for the second dose and 47.09% for booster vaccinations.Nursing homes presented a mixed picture: At Luisenhaus Naumburg, 10 employees (5 vaccinated/5 unvaccinated) and 11 residents (only 2 unvaccinated) were “infected”; similar distributions were found elsewhere. Two unvaccinated people were in intensive care; regular wards contained a mixture. Treu referred to a 16-year-old student who had to be treated in hospital. How many children and adolescents under 18 live in the Burgenland District? How high – or minimal – is the risk for children and adolescents? Again, we are told nothing. Treu spread fear and emphasized “personal self-protection.” From today's perspective (as of 2026, beyond the mainstream narrative), the discrepancy is glaring. The goal of “vaccine development” was never protection against transmission. This has been confirmed. The vaccination rate combined with the high test-based incidence figures should also have made this clear to CDU District Administrator Götz Ulrich and public health officer Treu. But Ulrich did not question it; he administered and implemented it. Independent analyses and studies show that the effect against transmission was limited. “Breakthrough infections” was the term used for cases in which vaccinated people nevertheless tested positive or even became ill. Mass vaccination of young, healthy people and social pressure (2G, planned facility-based vaccination mandate) bore no reasonable relationship to the limited benefit. This was essentially what Treu had acknowledged in November 2021 – only to continue pushing vaccination months later. The question of testing numbers among vaccinated versus unvaccinated people remained unanswered. Without systematic, stratified testing data (how often were vaccinated people actually tested?), claims about a “higher risk of infection” among the unvaccinated are methodologically worthless. Unknown vaccination statuses were allegedly excluded from the calculations. “From” or “With” – Nobody Knows, and Apparently Nobody Wants to KnowWhen a journalist asked whether – as in Halle – a distinction was made between people who died “from Corona” and those who died “with Corona,” Ulrich and Treu responded evasively. The data were available “for the most part,” but assigning a cause in individual cases was “very difficult.” Treu explained that there were younger people who had died from COVID pneumonia without pre-existing conditions, and often older people whose condition had been worsened by the infection. She did not see any “great benefit” in preventing a retrospective analysis; autopsies would be more important for medical and scientific findings. Ulrich added that death certificates should not be relied upon, particularly in outpatient examinations of the deceased: The doctor issuing the certificate often did not personally know the deceased and was under time pressure – resulting in “randomness” that was reflected in the statistics. For this reason, they were “holding back” and would “not comment at all” on whether all those who had died had died “from Corona.”This is remarkably honest and revealing at the same time: The data are available, the methodological weaknesses of the classification are recognized – and yet a conscious decision is made against transparency. So they do not know exactly, and apparently do not want to know any more precisely. The four reported deaths “from/with Corona” therefore remain a black box. Without seasonal mortality rates for the district, without age standardization, and without a clear assessment of causality, every figure becomes a political statement rather than scientific information. This very withholding of information was a central characteristic of the entire policy: figures were presented selectively, and distinctions were omitted whenever they might become inconvenient. Further Contradictions and Confusion as a SystemTreu justified deviating from the Conference of Minister-Presidents' recommendation (releasing students/contact persons from quarantine after 5 days) in favor of 7 days by citing the protection of children against severe disease, PIMS, and Long COVID – even though data from abroad showed milder courses and the high incidence rates were primarily driven by testing. At the same time, facilities used by children were reopened. The principle of protection was applied selectively.Ulrich explained the “confusion” surrounding the rules by referring to German executive federalism (Articles 30 and 83 of the Basic Law, Infection Protection Act). The federal government enacts laws, while the states and districts implement them and issue regulations. Conference of Minister-Presidents decisions were merely political declarations of intent. This is legally correct – and at the same time exposes the system: arbitrary local special rules under the guise of “local proximity,” while citizens could no longer understand the rules. Uniformity applied only when it suited the authorities. Regarding the facility-based vaccination mandate from March 2022, they indicated that they would implement federal law, but with an eye to maintaining healthcare provision and in anticipation of further federal-state positions. Staff shortages at the public health department were acknowledged. The Actions of District Administrator Götz Ulrich Are Particularly Problematic in This RegardHe demonstratively oriented himself toward the incidence figures of the surrounding districts and the state average, as if the Burgenland District were competing for the “better” numbers. The main thing was not to be at the very top, the main thing was to remain below the average – then reopening was possible again. This was not evidence-based risk management, but a tactical adjustment to the prevailing political climate.The overall tactic was apparently based on disinformation and systematic confusion: The vaccines did not protect against infection – the continued imposition of 2G and 2G-plus is the best proof of that. The test-based incidence figures bore no discernible relationship to the actual burden on hospitals. Ulrich did not question this disconnect, but used it as needed. The risks of vaccination, data on adverse effects including deaths, were not mentioned at all during the press conference – even though, by that time, there were already indications of myocarditis, thrombosis, and other serious adverse events, and Treu herself had acknowledged months earlier that the protective effect was limited (only protection against severe disease in high-risk groups). Ulrich chose the path of least resistance like a compliant system functionary: follow the directives of the federal and state governments as long as the district did not stand out, present figures in isolation, and consistently refrain from inconvenient distinctions (excess mortality, from/with COVID, vaccination risks). He actively participated in a policy of confusion that denied citizens guidance and genuine risk assessment. Anyone Who Continues to Give Their Vote in Upcoming Elections to the Pandemic-Driving Parties CDU/CSU, SPD, Greens, FDP, and The Left Is Legitimizing This Very SystemThey are legitimizing irresponsibility. They are legitimizing the fact that these politicians protect themselves, cover for one another, and are never truly held accountable. And they are legitimizing the fact that the same actors will go many steps further during “future pandemics” or other states of emergency caused by political decisions. Because that is exactly 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, more comprehensively, and more effectively in the future. Anyone who votes for these parties makes themselves an accomplice.Author: AI-Translation - АИИ | |
|
| Other articles: |
 | Call to All: Let Your Voice on Buergerstimme.net See the Light of Day!In a time when our society faces many challenges, it is more important than ever that we share our opinions, thoughts, and ideas. We live in a democracy where every voice counts ... zum Artikel |
 | School and Startup? A department store becomes a education revolution thanks to legal regulations! School attendance is a duty of parental assistance! Parents in the classroom!Escalators, workspaces, and parents right in the middle of lessons: this school turns everything upside down. What sounds like a future project can become reality and cause amazeme... zum Artikel |
 | Gigi D’Agostino and the Little Deer above the A9 at the Rippachtal JunctionThe group around dasrehlein was loudly visible again on May 30, 2024, above the A9 motorway south of the Rippachtal junction.... 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 |