Covid-Whistleblower: Failure in Risk Assessment Led to a Global False Alarm

A high-ranking whistleblower in the German Federal Ministry of the Interior  warns of  wrong risk assessments and massive collateral damage. And crushingly, «the state has proven to be one of the largest fake news producers in the corona crisis.»

by Flo Osrainik

(from Rubikon/CC 4.0)

For some it may be surprising, for others not: as of yet, no damage analysis has been made in the Federal Ministry of the Interior (BMI) regarding the corona protective measures that have been initiated and implemented in Germany. But a high-ranking employee in the «Unit KM4: Protection of Critical Infrastructure» made several internal attempts to talk about his analysis, but only met with disinterest and rejection. He was even threatened with dire consequences.

After the employee, a highly qualified risk analyst and member of the «Unit KM4″, had made several unsuccessful attempts internally, he asked support from a “specialist network» of university institute and clinic managers, in order to make a professional and reliable assessment of the medical damages resulting from the lockdown.

In his place of employment, the main tasks of the civil servant included «Implementing the National Strategy for the Protection of Critical Infrastructure, «Working with Operators of Critical Infrastructures, Associations and Other Affected Institutions», «Coordination in the Area of Security and Precautionary Laws», and «Security Research», as well as «participation in the protection of information infrastructures».

The conclusion of his analysis paper is:

The damage from the corona-restrictions – and please note only from a medical point of view – that is, without the social, political and economic damage associated with them – is already greater than what the corona virus can cause in total. Meanwhile, government actions, not the virus, endanger the life and well-being of the general population and cause people to die in our country every day.

There were about 2.5 million operations, follow-up treatments, and early detection or care appointments that were not carried out during the corona crisis. All these measures should never have been implemented, because «the corona infection never had the potential to cause a national disaster with a threat to the general public,» as even the figures from the official Robert Koch Institute would show.

The employee sent his analysis by email on May 8, 2020 at 2:34 p.m, with the subject «Results of the internal evaluation of the corona crisis management», through official channels – or in other words: to numerous internal departments of the Interior Ministry.

The email begins with the words:

«Dear Colleagues, I hereby send you the results of the analysis of the corona crisis management from Unit KM4. – For a summary and list of collateral damages to public health, see below.»

And further:

“In anticipation of an evaluation to be carried out after the crisis, KM4 has undertaken an intensive analysis and evaluation of the crisis management from the perspective of our responsibility for the protection of critical infrastructure. Serious deficits in the regulatory framework for pandemics were diagnosed, as well as failures in the professional implementation of crisis management. In addition, the observable effects and consequences of Covid-19 do not provide sufficient evidence that – looking at the health effects of Covid-19 on society as a whole – is anything but a false alarm. You receive the information in advance, with a request for your attention and that you share it».

At 3:34 p.m., the Interior Ministries of the respective federal states were also contacted. However, as of yet, there are no reactions.

The summary of the analysis, which was controlled for scientific plausibility and essentially does not contradict the data from the official Robert Koch Institute, states, among other things, that the crisis management has «so far not set up adequate tools for risk analysis and assessment».

The status reports, in which all important information would have to be collected, “only deal with a small section of the possible range of risks in the current crisis. On the basis of incomplete and unsuitable information in the situation pictures, «an assessment of the danger is fundamentally not possible”, which is why adequate and effective planning of measures are not possible.

This methodological deficit would have an impact on a higher level, which is why, according to the whistleblower, politicians has so far had a greatly reduced chance of «making the right factually correct decisions.» In addition, «the new virus probably did not at any time pose a risk to the population that went beyond normal“, where the usual death rate in Germany is the number being compared to.

Corona essentially kills people because they have reached the end of their lives and, with a weakened body, can no longer cope with everyday stress, and with 150 viruses currently in circulation, can no longer resist them.

«The danger from Covid-19 was overestimated», with approximately 250,000 deaths with Covid-19 claimed worldwide in a quarter year, compared to 1.5 million deaths in the 2017/2018 influenza wave. We were «in all likelihood dealing with a global false alarm that has remained undetected for a long time.»

Because of a lack of instruments for crisis management that could trigger a warning and initiate an immediate halt to the measures as soon as either a pandemic warning turns out to be a false alarm or it was foreseeable that «the collateral damage – and in particular parts that destroy human life – are at risk of becoming greater» than the deadly potential of the disease itself, the presumed false alarm remained undetected for so long.

The collateral damage is now «gigantic», and in part only «visible in the near and distant future» and higher than the recognizable benefit. «This statement is not based on a comparison of material damage with injuries to human life! It is only a comparison of previous deaths from the virus with deaths from the state-ordered protective measures.»

Security of [food] supply chains would no longer exist as usual, due to the protective measures. «Our society is now living with increased vulnerability and higher risk of failure of vital infrastructure,» which can have «fatal consequences» if, for example, «a really dangerous pandemic or other threat should occur.»

State protection measures, «have now lost all sense, but are (however) largely still in force», which is why it is strongly recommended that they be lifted completely ASAP in order to avert damage to the population – especially unnecessary additional deaths.»

The errors in crisis management have led to the spread of «incorrect information and thus disinformation of the population», which is why one could make the accusation: «The state has proven to be one of the largest fake news producers in the corona crisis.»

This would mean that «the proportionality of the interference in [citizens] rights” is currently not obvious, because “the state has not carried out an appropriate assessment of the consequences.»

For this reason, the civil servant concludes, the situation reports of the BMI/BMG crisis team and the central government reports to the states should carry out an appropriate danger analysis and assessment, contain a section with meaningful data on collateral damage, get rid of superfluous information, and create and attach key numbers. Otherwise, «the state could be liable for any damage.»

Apparently, the analysis by the Ministry of Interior civil servant was not passed on. Instead, he was released from the task and a work interview arranged with him. And the «participating scientists» in the advisory network received the following message from a member of the BMI/BMG crisis team a few hours later:

“I would like to point out that this is a paper written by a single employee. The employee was neither involved in the crisis team, nor commissioned or authorized to prepare or publish such an analysis.»

The experts then replied. Professor for Research Methodology Harald Walach, for example, wrote that “although we are not experts invited by the crisis team, but are nonetheless proven professionals, it would not only be wise, but also politically and objectively reasonable to allow extraordinary ways in extraordinary times. I take note of your position. I don’t understand it.»

Professor Emeritus [in Microbiology] Sucharit Bhakdi replied “that many very knowledgeable scientists are looking at you and your ministry and that all responses are carefully documented. The truth will surely come to light in the not too distant future. And then those responsible will be held accountable. If you have not recognized the truth, you might want to seriously consider the topic out of your own interest.”

The Toxicologist and Immunologist Professor Stefan Hockertz said that “it would be advisable to deal with the contents of these documents. Formally, it may have been an unusual step for this employee, but it is also extremely unusual times. And these historical times also justify the independent initiative that we as citizens should have expected from our ministries. So now, after this formal statement, which I have taken note of, I expect you to have a substantive discussion – we would be happy to participate in it as experts. ”

On May 10, 2020, the Interior Ministry issued a press release with the title: «BMI employees disseminate private opinion on corona crisis management». The BMI again pointed out that the drafting happened «outside of the scope of responsibility and without mandate and authorization» from the employee at the Federal Ministry of the Interior. It claimed the employee also used the Ministry letterhead (a false factual claim) and «official communication channels». «As far as it is known, the drafting also took place with the participation of third parties outside the BMI.»

The Ministry also declares that the Federal Government has taken measures to protect the population, to interrupt the chain of infection, which was «continuously considered and coordinated within the Federal Government». The civil servant’s approach was «not acceptable and not compatible with the general duties of the civil service», which is why «internal measures» already ensure that the employee «can no longer give the incorrect impression that he is acting for or on behalf of the BMI.»

The employee worries about everyone’s future, but he still took a risk. His dismissal is not unlikely, and his pension rights may even be at risk.

It will soon become clear whether the already scheduled work interview means that he can say goodbye to his career and that he will need legal assistance, or – but c’mon, who really believes that? – the ministry will look at the analysis and conclude that a speedy end to the lockdown is required.

Either way: A corona-gate seems to be in the offing.

Flo Osrainik was born and grew up in Munich. The German-Austrian is now a freelance journalist and author. He lives and works in Munich and Istanbul. He has written articles for RT German, Junge Welt, Telepolis, amerika21, HIntergrund as well as the weblog NEOPresse. He is also a board member of acTVism Munich and a member of Freischreiber e. V., a professional association of freelance journalists. Further information at Translated from Rubikon as Creative Commons 4.0 by Terje Maloy,