A German “Citizens Council” has submitted recommendations to the German Ministry of the Interior calling, among other things, for the potential criminalisation of “disinformation”. The council was assembled by the Bertelsmann Foundation, Germany’s most influential public policy think-tank, in partnership with the Ministry of the Interior itself, and it was tasked with formulating recommendations on how best to combat “disinformation”.
The project as a whole, known as “Forum Against Fakes”, included both a “council” of 120 German citizens, ostensibly selected to represent the diversity of German society, and an online survey. The “Citizens Report”, which was handed over to Minister of the Interior Nancy Faeser on September 12th (see photo above), includes a recommendation titled “Consideration of criminal prosecution and/or penalising of the dissemination of disinformation”. The text (p.37) reads:
The German Government should consider whether criminal prosecution or other types of penalties are possible based on the definition of disinformation.
The “justification” of the proposed measure continues:
Preserving freedom of speech is important to us. Nevertheless, the creation and dissemination of disinformation has to be deterred and the perpetrators’ sense of wrongdoing heightened.
The “Citizens Council” also recommends supplementing the EU’s Digital Services Act, the centrepiece of the EU’s efforts to suppress ‘disinformation’, with a new law, which would require “Very Large Online Platforms” (VLOPs) to reserve 1% of their global turnover for the purpose of “combating disinformation”. Among others, Facebook, X, YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, Amazon and Wikipedia have been designated as VLOPs by the European Commission.
The relevant text (p.32) says:
They [the online platforms] must use 50% of this budget to ensure that, once a month, every user is shown a post explaining disinformation, which works like a timed ad. (The post must be viewed for a certain amount of time and only then can be closed.)
The remaining 50% of the budget is to be contributed to an “independent agency for financing campaigns against disinformation”, which is discussed elsewhere in the document.
Furthermore, the relevant section proposes the formulation of “minimum legal requirements” which “oblige the platforms to programme their algorithms in such a way that possible disinformation is not disseminated and not recommended to users”.
The Bertelsmann Foundation is affiliated with the privately-owned German media conglomerate Bertelsmann. Indeed, under the ownership structure created by the late Reinhard Mohn, the foundation itself became the majority owner of the corporation, with the Mohn family retaining a minority stake. Penguin-Random House, the largest book publisher in the English-speaking world, is a fully-owned subsidiary of Bertelsmann.
(Translations from German by the author.)
Robert Kogon is the pen name of a widely-published journalist covering European affairs. Subscribe to his Substack.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The author wrote ‘Whether VE was 22% or 37% — that’s a mediocre vaccine‘
Minus the dead and injured from the stabs and the VE is -ve 22 or -ve 37.
Even the flu quackcine has an ‘efficacy’ of 10-30%, after countless years of fake engineering and not accounting for people who get sick or worse from it (‘thank Lord Vaxx I was stabbed it would have….’)
The entire quackcine industry from rabies to Rona and all diseases in between is a scam. HIV for eg. is a $500 Billion market – drugs for a virus that does not exist.
Now that the Israelis are sure the quackery does not work, they can look at murders in the same old age home system with midazolam and morphine.
Yes, one flu vaccine left me very poorly – the Monday after the vaccine I got on the Tube and started to sweat… and sweat.. and sweat. By the time I got to work I looked like I’d run a marathon. I had to wring my cotton shirt out in the loo! I was tired for the better part of two years after. I’ve never been jabbed with anything since. All my faith in the medical industry beyond old-school ‘sawbones’ work has been shattered.
”Second, vaccination of the frail elderly with updated Covid vaccines should be halted.”
I’m at a point now, given all that I’ve learnt about vaccines generally, where I think elderly people should not be vaccinated with anything, period. We’ve all seen the evidence by now, such as the fraudulent sham that is the flu vax, for instance. These poor people, particularly the more advanced aged in care facilities, are just sitting ducks for Big Pharma. We are no longer living in cold, dirty, unsanitary slums where elderly people do not have even their most basic of needs taken care of and you will never acquire good health via a syringe.
What this demographic need is an emphasis on good nutrition/hydration ( often a challenge in elderly care ), with supplementation of Vit D, fish oils, get out in the fresh air and sunshine as often as possible and to have stimulation from being in a social environment, as contact with others is essential for mental health and wellbeing, even if that person cannot communicate their needs adequately. Just emphasise the basic things that humans have always needed to live optimally, which crappy pharmaceuticals will never be a substitute for.
And a low sugar diet with as little processed food as possible.
Totally agree – and not only is this more likely to prolong life than “vaccination”, but that life will have a better quality and surely quality of life has to count as a “public health” goal.
Neither safe nor effective, in other words. In line with the view of the HART Group here: https://www.hartgroup.org/did-injections-save-lives/
This is an understandable and plausible method and conclusion.
I have never been a big believer in the healthy vaccinee argument with regard to the general population, but (only) here it is surely very applicable and its effect very obvious.
Interesting to see though that the raw VE result calculated by the author is close to the ones obtained by the study’s author through skipping the deaths occurring shortly after a vaccination.
Again, that might/should be unique to these circumstances and be different when analysing the general population (s. Fenton).
Thank you Dr Shahar for highlighting this issue as few others, especially the MSM, seem willing to put their heads above the parapet to question vaccine/boosters for the elderly in care homes. My 88 year old Mother who had Alzheimer’s and had lost mental capacity died from the side effects of the Spring 2022 Moderna booster, as did another lady in her care home. I understand all the residents who received the booster became ill within 24 hours. I have been trying since August 2022 to get the MHRA to investigate the case but it has failed to do so, writing it off as coincidence because my Mother and her fellow residents were elderly and ill anyway. How can any reasonable person accept that mass ADRs within 24 hours of the Moderna and two deaths from those side effects do not constitute some sort of safety signal? How many other elderly deaths in close proximity to a COVID vaccine have been similarly dismissed outright as coincidence by the MHRA and therefore not investigated?
In my research these past few months I’ve been shocked to discover that clinical trial/safety evidence is missing for the use of Moderna in frail elderly with unstable health conditions and co-morbidities including chronic neurological disease. 70% of those in care homes in the UK have Dementia. Moderna’s Risk Management Plan highlighted the potential risk that such people may experience a different outcome from vaccination. The MHRA has failed to provide any safety evidence for giving multiple boosters to the over 75s in care homes in amongst COVID infection. COVID outbreaks in care homes still happen despite vaccination. Mum had COVID 4.5 months before the booster as did many other residents and I have since learned from various scientific studies that there seems to be a correlation between prior COVID infection and worse side effects from subsequent vaccination. The MHRA has also admitted it does not have safety data on all the various vaccine/booster permutations and that boosters have been rolled out to this vulnerable cohort ahead of such evidence.
The MHRA’s risk-benefit assessment for this cohort is focused solely on the risk to the individual of COVID-19 to the exclusion of all other risks and considerations. It has failed to heed the caution advised by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health after vaccine deaths in care homes in 2021 that “for those with the most severe frailty, even relatively mild vaccine side effects can have serious consequences”. My Mother’s death is a clear example of this. The Moderna caused vomiting and fever. Mum inhaled vomit and died from Aspiration Pneumonia which her hospital doctor told me is more dangerous than COVID. Vulnerable elderly who cannot look after themselves should not be given any drug that is highly likely to make them sick.
The JCVI, DHSC et al are not interested that the MHRA is failing to investigate cases such as this one and that their decisions for future boosters are therefore based on potentially significantly incomplete real world safety information. The one size fits all booster policy, the lack of information to enable informed consent, paying GPs by numbers to vaccinate care home residents, and care homes themselves requiring/preferring all residents (and visitors) to be fully vaccinated, all combine to act against the best interests of the individual.
Vulnerable elderly have died and will continue to die before their time because the MHRA is not doing its job. No-one with the power to ensure analysis of what is actually happening in care homes as a result of all the COVID vaccinations is bothering to do anything about it. Meanwhile my brother and I have to live with the fact that, in trying to protect her, our decision to allow Mum to have the booster led to her death. We would not wish that on anyone.
I hope that, in time, it will appear that your Mum and so many others like her did not die in vain, and that you and your brother find some peace.
Old people, even poorly old people, have a right to life too. Forget that and we’re done for as a society, even as simple functioning human beings.
Thank you TJN for your kind support, it means a lot. We lost Dad to end stage Dementia – his decline accelerated due to the social isolation of lockdowns – in October 2020, at home, in awful circumstances, and yes Midazolam was involved but I can’t go there. Sometimes the only thing that keeps me going is my campaign to get TPTB to wake up to the serious failings in pharmacovigilance and consequent policies. But after almost a year of battling the MHRA and contacting JCVI, Ministers, DHSC, my MP etc, I’ve got nowhere. My brother says that at least our concerns will be on record and hopefully one day the truth will out but that does not help other vulnerable elderly and their families who may not be aware, as we were not aware, of the risks from Moderna. I realise now the vaccine’s inherent side effect profile is wholly unsuitable for vulnerable elderly especially those who have lost mental capacity. To keep jabbing the vulnerable elderly without taking any account of this and their individual medical history, especially ref actual COVID infection, and on the basis of so little safety evidence, and without making the risks clear to people is immoral.
You are so right TJN to highlight that the elderly have a right to life too but as a society I fear we are in danger of forgetting that. The way the elderly have been treated since COVID started is a disgrace, whether in care homes, hospitals – though so many were denied access to treatment – and in their own homes. It boils down to a lack of respect and a lack of kindness and compassion. The elderly seem to be blamed for a raft of problems from overburdening the NHS because they are living longer and/or ill, to hogging houses too big for them, to Brexit and more. The promotion of so called ‘intergenerational unfairness’ by lobbyists and the MSM is poisoning relations between young and old. Maybe, in the interests of fairness, these lobbyists and their supporters would care to be bombed and machine gunned as Mum was during WW2, and endure years of rationing, and watch a young schoolfriend die of Tetanus because there were no antibiotics. It is facile to try and compare one generation with another. Mum used to say one can tell how civilised a country is by how it treats its most vulnerable. The answer is clear to me.
I thank the Daily Sceptic and similar for challenging the mainstream narrative and providing access to other views and evidence so that I can make up my own mind and stay sane. The comments posted by others make for enjoyable reading too! Wishing you all a great weekend!
There is one striking benefit of the pandemic, which is that published research has been subjected to rigorous analysis by real experts. I have peer-reviewed a large number of papers but am statistically undereducated, as I suspect are most clinicians. Nonetheless I have encountered many papers where even I have understood that the statistics are flawed, ranging from exclusion bias to use of the wrong tests. Articles such as this provide the necessary knowledge and show the extent to which papers require proper analysis before they are let loose. Systematic review of stuff recorded in the Daily Sceptic from coronavirus to climate science leads me to conclude that the one thing necessary in today’s research world is a fundamental change in the review system prior to any sort of publication.