Last week, the Robert Koch Institut (RKI), the German equivalent of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), released over 2,500 pages of internal records documenting the meetings of the “Covid Crisis Team” from January 2020 to April 2021. These documents, which were made public in response to ongoing litigation by journalists at Multipolar, provide a revealing glimpse into the decision-making process behind the pandemic response in Germany.
The release of these records is comparable to the Fauci email releases earlier this year, as it takes us directly into the internal discussions of the pandemic managers during the 2020 lockdowns and the early stages of the vaccination campaign. While the documents are heavily redacted, they still offer valuable insights into the pandemic circus and its coordinators.
One of the most intriguing revelations from the documents is a discussion that took place on March 16, 2020. The minutes show that preparations were made to raise the overall pandemic “risk assessment” from “moderate” to “high” as soon as a certain individual, likely Health Minister Jens Spahn, gave the signal. This decision occurred just one day after Neil Ferguson and his Imperial College team published their influential paper calling for rolling lockdowns. This suggests that Covid measures were a prior political decision that required exaggerating the danger.
Another important point highlighted in the documents is the acknowledgement by the RKI that Covid was less dangerous than they publicly portrayed. On December 16, 2020, at the start of the second lockdown in Germany, they discussed the consequences of lockdowns in Africa and noted that they could be “in part worse than the consequences of Covid itself.” On March 19, 2021, they emphasized that Covid-19 should not be compared with influenza because normal influenza waves kill more people, although Covid-19 is worrying for other reasons.
The documents also reveal skepticism about the effectiveness of FFP2 or N95 respirators. On October 30, 2020, the RKI stated that FFP2 masks should be used only by healthcare professionals and would have no effect when used by untrained personnel or without correct fit. They even suggested making the public aware of this, but mask mandates were still implemented months later.
Other notable discussions in the documents include questioning the narrative of herd immunity via vaccination when vaccines became available, acknowledging that restrictions for the unvaccinated and uninfected were not technically justifiable, and wondering why no mortality-reducing effects were visible after vaccinating 7 million vulnerable Germans.
These revelations confirm what many skeptics have been saying all along. The public was dismissed and even vilified for doubting the severity of Covid, the effectiveness of lockdowns and mask mandates, and the justification for excluding the unvaccinated from public life. However, the internal discussions of the RKI show that these doubts were shared by the very individuals responsible for guiding the pandemic response.
It is disheartening to know that nothing substantial will likely come out of these revelations. The release of these documents may shed light on the questionable decision-making process during the pandemic, but it is unlikely to lead to any significant changes or accountability. The public health managers and politicians who pushed these policies will likely escape any consequences, while those who dared to question them continue to face censorship and ostracization.
In conclusion, the release of internal records from the RKI provides a glimpse into the decision-making process behind the pandemic response in Germany. These documents reveal inconsistencies, doubts, and political motivations that were concealed from the public. While it is disappointing that little will likely come out of these revelations, they serve as a reminder to critically examine the narratives presented by authorities and to question the true motivations behind pandemic policies.
