......
May 10, 2020, “Protest against corona rules Again thousands at demo in Stuttgart," swp.de
“In Stuttgart, several thousand people protested again against the corona restrictions on Saturday. The police paid particular attention to compliance with infection protection.”
“Another call to demonstrate against the coronavirus restrictions was followed by several thousand people in Stuttgart on Saturday. Police reported a brisk influx of people on the demonstration site, a police spokesman said. It got pretty crowded. The police could initially not give an exact number of participants. The police made sure to keep the infection protection and the required distance. There were no major problems. The requirements were mostly met, it remained peaceful.”
............
Above, “participant with a syringe on his hat”
.........
.........
Four images above from swp.de
Added:
May 11, 2020, “Demo in Stuttgart: collective anger at the Cannstatter Wasen [Park/Festival area],” swp.de, by Dominique Leibbrand
Added:
May 9, 2020, “Again thousands expected at a demonstration against Corona rules on Cannstatter Wasen [park area],” swp.de
.........
The next
demonstration against the coronavirus Restrictions on Saturday (15:30)
in Stuttgart will once again thousands of people expected. The
initiator Michael Ballweg originally registered 50,000 participants for
the demonstration on Cannstatter Wasen, which was described as
non-partisan. However, the city of Stuttgart put a stop to this: Ballweg
was required to limit the meeting to a maximum of 10,000 participants. A
spokesman for the city said that more could not be done for the city
and the police. It was crucial that no one should be infected at the
meeting, the city had previously announced.
Demos are very popular
Last weekend, several thousand people came to Wasen to demonstrate for what they saw as limited fundamental rights.The organizer spoke of 5000 participants. The Stuttgart police expect that there will be at least as many as a week ago on Saturday. “For us, the number 10,000 is quite realistic,” said a police spokesman. You will not stand and count at Wasen. The top priority, however, is to keep infection protection and distance.
Behind the protest is Ballweg’s “lateral thinking” initiative. His regular demos have recently been well received. Similar demos take place nationwide. Critics fear that conspiracy theorists and right-wing populists will take it.”…
……………………………………
Added: 93 page report drafted by experts at the request of German government:
“The 93 page report titled “Analysis of the Crisis Management” has been drafted by a scientific panel appointed by the interior ministry and composed by external medical experts from several German universities.
The report was the initiative of a department of the interior ministry called Unit KM4 and in charge with the “Protection of critical infrastructures”.
This is also where the German official turned whistleblower, Stephen Kohn, work(ed), and from where he leaked it to the media.
The authors of the report issued a joint press release on May 11th, berating the government for ignoring expert advise, and asking for the interior minister to officially comment upon the experts joint statement.”…
………………………………………………. Demos are very popular
Last weekend, several thousand people came to Wasen to demonstrate for what they saw as limited fundamental rights.The organizer spoke of 5000 participants. The Stuttgart police expect that there will be at least as many as a week ago on Saturday. “For us, the number 10,000 is quite realistic,” said a police spokesman. You will not stand and count at Wasen. The top priority, however, is to keep infection protection and distance.
Behind the protest is Ballweg’s “lateral thinking” initiative. His regular demos have recently been well received. Similar demos take place nationwide. Critics fear that conspiracy theorists and right-wing populists will take it.”…
……………………………………
Added: 93 page report drafted by experts at the request of German government:
“The 93 page report titled “Analysis of the Crisis Management” has been drafted by a scientific panel appointed by the interior ministry and composed by external medical experts from several German universities.
The report was the initiative of a department of the interior ministry called Unit KM4 and in charge with the “Protection of critical infrastructures”.
This is also where the German official turned whistleblower, Stephen Kohn, work(ed), and from where he leaked it to the media.
The authors of the report issued a joint press release on May 11th, berating the government for ignoring expert advise, and asking for the interior minister to officially comment upon the experts joint statement.”…
Added: The German government officially scorned the 93 page report, claiming it was the unauthorized opinion of one government employee with possible involvement of “third parties” outside government. On May 11, 2020, ten German scientists and physicians (undersigned) among those involved in the 93 page report published a press release in response to the government:
May 13, 2020, ““Don’t ignore expertise”: [German] Scientists criticize [German Ministry of Interior] BMI for handling corona paper,” deutsch.rt.com
“Joint press release by the external experts on the 93 page Corona paper from the Federal Ministry of the Interior:”
“May 11, 2020”
“We, with astonishment, the doctors and scientists involved in the preparation of the aforementioned corona paper, take the press release of the Federal Ministry of the Interior (BMI) from May 10:
“BMI employees disseminate private opinion on corona crisis management – elaboration was carried out outside of responsibility and without a mandate and authorization.”
Note. The Ministry writes in this press release: “To the best of our knowledge, the drafting has also involved third parties outside the BMI.” We assume that with third parties we, the undersigned [list of 10 undersigned below], are meant.
We comment on this as follows.
We assume that the BMI has a great interest in ensuring that its specialists, who are entrusted with the extremely important task of recognizing critical developments and averting damage to Germany through timely warnings, act both on a specific order and on their own initiative. The relevant employee of the BMI contacted us when preparing the risk analysis to assess the medical collateral damage caused by the “corona measures.”
Supported by responsibility, we support the committed BMI staff in examining this essential question to the best of their knowledge and belief, in addition to our actual professional activity. Renowned colleagues, all of them excellent representatives of their field, gave factual statements on specific questions based on the expertise requested. This resulted in a first comprehensive assessment of the medical damage that has already occurred and the threat of it, including expected deaths.
The BMI employee made an assessment based on our work and forwarded the result to the responsible bodies. You can find the relevant document in the attachment to this press release. There is no question that this can only be the beginning of an even more extensive examination due to the short time. But in our opinion, our analysis offers a good starting point for the BMI and the interior ministries of the federal states to carefully weigh the possible benefits of the protective measures against the damage they cause. In our opinion, the addressed civil servants would have to initiate an immediate reassessment of the protective measures based on this paper, for which we also offer our advice.
The BMI clearly states in the press release that it will not take this [our] analysis into account. It is incomprehensible to us that the responsible Federal Ministry would like to ignore such an important assessment based on extensive technical expertise.
Due to the seriousness of the situation, it must be a matter of dealing with the existing factual arguments–regardless of the history of its origin.
Therefore we ask:
*Why did the BMI not support the employee’s request and why does the BMI not include the extensive analysis now available on the basis of high-quality external expertise in its assessment of the relationship between the benefits and harm of the corona protective measures?
The BMI continues in its press release:
“As a result of the risk of corona infection, the Federal Government has taken measures to protect the population. These are continuously weighed up within the Federal Government and coordinated regularly with the Prime Ministers of the federal states.”
We ask the BMI:
*to tell us in a timely manner how exactly this weighing up is taking place.We ask you to prove this on the basis of data, facts and sources. We would like to compare this with our analysis. In view of the currently sometimes catastrophic patient care, we would be reassured if this analysis leads to a different assessment than ours, which we currently find difficult to imagine.
The BMI also write:
“The infection rate in Germany has so far been relatively low in international comparison. The measures taken are effective.”
In accordance with the international specialist literature, we only partially share this statement regarding the effectiveness of the protective measures. We therefore ask the BMI for transparency:
*to disclose the sources according to which this determination is made.
Conclusion:
Overall, at the request of a courageous BMI employee, we have shown the varied and serious undesirable effects of corona protective measures in the medical field, and these are serious. The entire process gives us the impression that, after a certain difficult initial phase of the epidemic, the risks [of government mandates] have not been considered to the necessary extent and, in particular, not in a comprehensive risk assessment. With regard to the reporting on this process, we ask that you place the value of our analysis at the center and report appropriately on us, in office and in person, to the serious situation.
The disease COVID-19 triggered by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is serious for many people in the known risk groups. As with any serious infectious disease, it is important to find the best treatment for the patient and prevent infection routes. But therapeutic and preventive measures must never be more harmful than the disease itself. The aim must be to protect the risk groups without endangering medical care and the health of the general population, as is unfortunately the case right now. We in science and practice as well as many colleagues experience the consequential damage of the corona protective measures to our patients every day. We therefore ask the Federal Ministry of the Interior to comment on our press release and hope for a relevant discussion that will lead to the best possible solution for the entire population with regard to the measures.
......
Drawn:
Prof. Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, University Professor of Medical Microbiology (retired), University of Mainz
Dr. med. Gunter Frank, general practitioner, member of the permanent guidelines commission of the German Society for Family Medicine and General Medicine (DEGAM), Heidelberg
Prof. Dr. phil. Dr. rer. pole. Dipl.-Soz. Dr. Gunnar Heinsohn, Emeritus of Social Sciences at the University of Bremen
Prof. Dr. Stefan W. Hockertz, tpi consult GmbH, former director of the Institute for Experimental Pharmacology and Toxicology at the University Hospital Eppendorf
Prof. Dr. Dr. rer. nat. (USA) Andreas S. Lübbe, Medical Director of the MZG-Westphalia, chief physician at the Cecilien-Klinik
Prof. Dr. Karina Reiss, Department of Dermatology and Allergology University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein
Prof. Dr. Peter Schirmacher, professor of pathology, Heidelberg, member of the National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina
Prof. Dr. Andreas Sönnichsen, Deputy Curriculum Director of the Medical University of Vienna, Department of General Medicine and Family Medicine.
Dr. med. Til Uebel, resident general practitioner, specialist in general medicine, diabetology, emergency medicine, teaching physician at the Institute of General Medicine at the University of Würzburg, academic teaching practice at the University of Heidelberg
Prof. Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, University Professor of Medical Microbiology (retired), University of Mainz
Dr. med. Gunter Frank, general practitioner, member of the permanent guidelines commission of the German Society for Family Medicine and General Medicine (DEGAM), Heidelberg
Prof. Dr. phil. Dr. rer. pole. Dipl.-Soz. Dr. Gunnar Heinsohn, Emeritus of Social Sciences at the University of Bremen
Prof. Dr. Stefan W. Hockertz, tpi consult GmbH, former director of the Institute for Experimental Pharmacology and Toxicology at the University Hospital Eppendorf
Prof. Dr. Dr. rer. nat. (USA) Andreas S. Lübbe, Medical Director of the MZG-Westphalia, chief physician at the Cecilien-Klinik
Prof. Dr. Karina Reiss, Department of Dermatology and Allergology University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein
Prof. Dr. Peter Schirmacher, professor of pathology, Heidelberg, member of the National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina
Prof. Dr. Andreas Sönnichsen, Deputy Curriculum Director of the Medical University of Vienna, Department of General Medicine and Family Medicine.
Dr. med. Til Uebel, resident general practitioner, specialist in general medicine, diabetology, emergency medicine, teaching physician at the Institute of General Medicine at the University of Würzburg, academic teaching practice at the University of Heidelberg
Prof. Dr. Dr. phil. Harald Walach, Prof. Medical University of Poznan, Dept. Pediatric Gastroenterology, visiting professor. University of Witten-Herdecke, Dept. Psychology 4
Attachment:
KM 4 – 51000/29 # 2Overview of the health effects (damage) of the state-imposed measures and restrictions in the Corona Crisis 2020 (as of May 7, 2020 fin)
Methodological preliminary remarks
Risks are listed that have been considered plausible by 10 high-ranking experts / scientists in the respective disciplines. The experts were chosen at random, so the result cannot be representative.
It is important for the future systematic recording of collateral damage in the health of the pandemic to consult at least specialists from the scientific disciplines involved. Otherwise, a realistic overall inventory is not possible.
1. Deaths
a) Operations postponed or canceled due to limitations in hospital availability (and treatment options):
b) Follow-up treatment of patients (e.g. cancer, stroke or heart attack) postponed or canceled due to limitations in hospital availability (and treatment options):
Overall, we had a total of approximately 17 million fully inpatients with ORs in 2018. That is an average of 1.4 million patients per month. In March and April, 90 percent of all necessary surgeries were postponed or not carried out. That means 2.5 million people were not cared for as a result of government measures. So 2.5 million patients were not operated on in March and April 2020, although this would have been necessary. The expected death rate cannot be assessed seriously; Experts assume that there are numbers between 5,000 and up to 125,000 patients who will die / have already died due to the postponed surgery.
The negative effects of interrupted care structures in tumor patients, whether cancer follow-up or interrupted cancer prevention programs, such as breast cancer, are obvious, because these measures have proven their usefulness in long studies and have been established on this basis.
It can also be assumed here that millions of treatments are treated annually. In some cases, the availability restrictions of the clinics will also lead to the premature death of patients. It is difficult to predict this effect. Experts who commented on the fact that up to several thousand additional deaths were expected to die or will die in March and April 2020.
c) In the case of care for those in need of care (a total of 3.5 million people in DEU), the level of care and the quality of care (in care facilities, in outpatient care services as well as in private / intra-family care) decrease due to restrictions imposed by the state. Since the good level of care in DEU has been proven to save many people from premature death (which is why so much money is spent on this), the drop in levels enforced in March and April 2020 will have triggered premature deaths. For 3.5 million people in need of care, an additional death rate of one tenth of a percent would result in an additional 3,500 deaths. In the absence of more precise estimates, it is not known whether there are more or fewer.
d) increases in suicides (previously an average of 9,000 per year); Reasons for the increase in suicides: long-term significant impairment of all living conditions, which can become critical for mentally unstable personalities; but numerous suicides as a reaction to the economic destruction of livelihoods can also be expected [see next paragraph]; Diverse professional groups that do not feel able to cope with the burden of social and personal changes and their personal (joint) responsibility.”…
[Ed. note: 3/29/20. “German minister commits suicide after ‘coronavirus crisis worries’,“ AFP via AsiaOne, Frankfurt
“Schäfer had been living under considerable worry and stress because of the current COVID-19 pandemic. “His main concern was whether he could manage to fulfill the huge expectations of the population, especially in terms of financial aid,” Bouffier said on Sunday. “For him, there was clearly no way out.”…He leaves behind a wife and two children….Seven days ago the German chancellor went into quarantine after a doctor who gave her a vaccine tested positive for the virus. The country has banned public meetings of more than two people and
imposed tight border restrictions in an attempt to slow the spread of
the outbreak.”…“Mr Thomas Schaefer, the finance minister of Germany’s Hesse state, has committed suicide apparently after becoming “deeply worried” over how to cope with the economic fallout from the coronavirus, state premier Volker Bouffier said on Sunday (March 29). Mr Schaefer, 54, was found dead near a railway track on Saturday.”] (continuing): “e) Additional deaths from heart attack and stroke. Over the past years and decades, integrated concepts have been developed that have successfully influenced morbidity and mortality and are based on the fact that care is provided as early as possible (in the course of the disease), as quickly as possible (time to care) and as competently as possible. These inter-sectoral /-disciplinary chains are damaged in many ways (outpatient care, deprivation of resources) and also suffer at the most from the fact that due to one-sided and exaggerated information policy, those affected unjustifiably fear Corona more than these diseases and suppress and fear warning signs with them. Diseases in the current corona fixation are not being treated well in hospital. As a consequence, many affected people are currently not visiting the doctor/too late,
2. Other damage to health (associated with suffering for those affected and high cost effects for the social security systems, the health system and the labor market)
a) Old people/people in need of special care, especially in their [family] contacts, are affected by the measures and often suffer severely from them. The measures taken (border closings, quarantine regulations, bans on contacts, etc.) adversely affect the previously critical outpatient / inpatient care situation (thus also optimal care in relation to corona)
b) Psychoses requiring treatment (more severe), neuroses (fears, obsessive-compulsive disorders, …) due to long-term significant impairment of all living conditions, which will trigger illnesses for mentally unstable personalities; Long-term medical treatments and rehabilitation services are necessary to compensate for these impairments, and there are health-related lost days. 1 to 2 percent of the German population as a whole experience psychosis at least once in their life. If there is a disposition or vulnerability, there is an increased likelihood that this will manifest itself under the general conditions of the corona crisis.
c) more disputes and personal injuries as a result of strong contact restrictions and contact bans; Domestic violence, child abuse
d) widespread communication disorders (through psychological effects, see above, and also e.g. through the compulsion to wear face masks, through which gestures and facial expressions are severely restricted as a means of communication (leads to misunderstandings, mistrust, …)
3) (depending on economic/economic development): Loss of life expectancy. In the long term, this is likely to cause greater damage to the crisis. Since the 1950s, DEU has seen a significant increase in life expectancy due to positive economic developments (average life span 13 to 14 years longer). The constantly rising level of prosperity made it possible, among other things, to increasingly implement costly health care and care. With a strongly negative economic development and a corresponding reduction in the level of prosperity, the development goes in the opposite direction: life expectancy will decrease. (The RKI has shown that high unemployment lowers life expectancy.) With over 80 million inhabitants, a correspondingly high volume of life years of the population have been destroyed by state protection measures (not by the virus).
Most of the above-mentioned effects have in common that even after the restrictions have been lifted, it will take a very long time for these measures and treatments to return to the previous level, since all the interlinking elements must be functional again, the resources must be (re) allocated and patient confidence also needs to be restored. For the rest, there can sometimes be opposite, at first glance, paradoxical reactions. The damage phase is therefore likely to last much longer than the actual interruption. If life expectancy is shortened in the future, the damage will only start in the future.
Since, in theory, at least in part, one must also anticipate opposite effects-that is, at first glance, paradoxical reactions – precise numerical estimates of expected damage events have not been made. Size dimensions are shown with the numbers mentioned.”
………………..
More on the topic –Bill Gates and the hour of fact managers
Added:
93 page report by German science experts explains how German government’s draconian policies against Covid-19 are more deadly by far than the virus. The report is leaked by a whistleblower who’s now an ex-employee of the German government:
May 29, 2020, “German Official Leaks Report Denouncing Corona as ‘A Global False Alarm’,” Strategic Culture, Pozzati Daniele
“Germany’s federal government and mainstream media are engaged in damage control after a [93 page] report that challenges the established Corona narrative leaked from the interior ministry.
Some of the report key passages are:
*The dangerousness of Covid-19 was overestimated: probably at no point did the danger posed by the new virus go beyond the normal level.
*The people who die from Corona are essentially those who would statistically die this year, because they have reached the end of their lives and their weakened bodies can no longer cope with any random everyday stress (including the approximately 150 viruses currently in circulation).
*Worldwide, within a quarter of a year, there has been no more than 250,000 deaths from Covid-19, compared to 1.5 million deaths [25,100 in Germany] during the influenza wave 2017/18.
*The danger is obviously no greater than that of many other viruses. There is no evidence that this was more than a false alarm.
*A reproach could go along these lines: During the Corona crisis the State has proved itself as one of the biggest producers of Fake News.
So far, so bad. But it gets worse.
The report focuses on the “manifold and heavy consequences of the Corona [lockdown] measures” and warns that these are “grave.”
More people are dying because of state-imposed Corona-measures than they are being killed by the virus.
The reason is a scandal in the making:
A Corona-focused German healthcare system is postponing life-saving surgery and delaying or reducing treatment for non-Corona patients.
Berlin in Denial Mode. The scientists fight back.
Initially, the government tried to dismiss the report as “the work of one employee”, and its contents as “his own opinion” – while the journalists closed ranks, no questions asked, with the politicians.
But the 93 page report titled “Analysis of the Crisis Management” has been drafted by a scientific panel appointed by the interior ministry and composed by external medical experts from several German universities.
The report was the initiative of a department of the interior ministry called Unit KM4 and in charge with the “Protection of critical infrastructures.”
This is also where the German official turned whistleblower, Stephen Kohn, work(ed), and from where he leaked it to the media.
The authors of the report issued a joint press release already on May 11th, berating the government for ignoring expert advise, and asking for the interior minister to officially comment upon the experts joint statement:
“Therapeutic and preventive measures should never bring more harm than the illness itself. Their aim should be to protect the risk groups, without [endangering] the availability of medical care and the health of the whole population, as it is unfortunately occurring”
“We in the scientific and medical praxis are experiencing the secondary damages of the Corona-measures on our patients on a daily basis.”
“We therefore ask the Federal Ministry of the Interior, to comment upon our press release, and we hope for a pertinent discussion regarding the [Corona] measures, one that leads to the best possible solution for the whole population”
At the time of writing, the German government had yet to react. But the facts are-sadly-vindicating the medical experts’ worries.
On May 23 the German newspaper Das Bild titled: “Dramatic consequences of the Corona-Measures: 52,000 Cancer Ops delayed.”
Inside, a leading medical doctor warns that “we will feel the side-effects of the Corona crisis for years”.
Shooting the Whistleblower. Ignoring the Message.
As Der Spiegel reported on Mai 15th: “Stephen Kohn [the whistleblower] has since been suspended from duty. He was advised to obtain a lawyer and his work laptop was confiscated.”
Kohn had originally leaked the report on May 9th to the liberal-conservative magazine Tichys Einblick one of Germany’s most popular alternative media outlets.
News of the report went mainstream in Germany during the second week of May – but already in the third week media and politicians alike stopped discussing the issue by refusing to comment upon it.
Emblematic was the approach taken by Günter Krings, the representative for Interior Minister Horst Seehofer – the whistleblower’s boss:
Asked it he would treat the document seriously, Krings replied:
“If you start analyzing papers like that, then pretty soon you’ll be inviting the guys with the tin foil hats to parliamentary hearings.”
Men in tin foil hats—Aluhut in German--is a term used to describe people who believe in conspiracy theories.
Indeed one article by Der Spiegel addressing the Corona protest movement and the consequences of the leaked report contained the word “conspiracy” no fewer than 17 times!
And no discussions of the issues raised by the report itself.
Outside Germany the news has virtually gone unreported.
The Protest Movement-or “Corona-Rebellion.”
Germans begun demonstrating against Lockdowns as early as April.
And thousands of citizens keep showing up at demos every week-end, even as the government is easing the restrictions.
The demos are not merely against restrictions, which have actually been comparatively mild compared to many other Western countries.
The demos question the entire Corona Narrative, and even more its principals, especially the role Bill Gates is playing, as the WHO second biggest donor (the first one since Trump [reportedly] suspended U.S. contribution).
Indeed the biggest such demos took place in Stuttgart on May 9th, where tens of thousands people assembled to say no – to the NWO.
Germans are saying no to any Orwellian solution the government might one day impose out of a questionable “emergency status”, from mass surveillance Apps to mandatory vaccinations.
The leaked report has proved their fears to be well founded.
At least as far as the fake nature of the “Corona pandemic” is concerned.
The rest might soon follow.”
...........
No comments:
Post a Comment