‘The world was very much under the impression that we were to take the phrase ‘Never Again’ to heart’

‘With the Second World War ‘won’, the world was very much under the impression that we were to take the phrase ‘Never Again’ to heart. Unfortunately, those in charge of forming Western policy and geopolitical strategy post-WWII could not have disagreed more.’
— Cynthia Chung, The Empire on which the Black Sun Never Set

In her book “The Empire on which the Black Sun Never set,” Canadian Researcher Cynthia Chung has included a chapter about the Continuity of Nazi and other Fascist Elements in positions of Military and Political Power.

Chung, who is a co-founder of the Rising Tide Foundation (together with her husband Matthew Ehret) recounts how the term “Iron Curtain”, which came to be famous as a defensive asset against Communism after Winston Churchill’s speech on March 5th, 1946, was indeed coined by Nazi Foreign Minister Count Schwerin von Krosigk almost one year earlier shortly before the Capitulation in May of 1945, when Nazis were preparing their survival after the war. It was clear that “the Red Scare” would be applied in order to facilitate a transition into post-war structures.

Chung continues to lay out how NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, which supposedly was formed to thwart the Soviet Threat in western defensive solidarity, has seen a long stretch of former Nazis in charge of NATO’s Command: “The Position of NATO Commander and Chief of Allied Forces Central Europe was a position that was filled SOLELY by ‘former’ Nazis for 16 YEARS STRAIGHT, from 1967-1983.”

It is in this context that a news report from the German state parliament of Brandenburg’s investigative special committee on the Covid pandemic seems to merit a closer inspection.

As Multipolar-Magazine reported, in January of 2020, German General Hans-Ulrich Holtherm was charged to head the newly formed department of Health Security at the German Federal Ministry for Health. Holtherm had previously worked for NATO as Commander for the Deployment Health Surveillance Capability (DHSC) based in Munich.

.

Whilst this in itself need not be an issue of concern, the matter becomes a sensitive one amidst the backdrop of the NATO General in his position of Chief Medical Officer for Germany being directly superior to the German Centers for Disease Control-equivalent, the Robert-Koch-Institute (RKI). The Head of the RKI, Lothar Wieler, was the German “face of science” during the pandemic, much like his US-counterparts Robert Redfield and Tony Fauci. Thus, at least for Germany, “the science” was subject to orders from a NATO-General. Let that sink in.

It is thus very noteworthy that Wieler, who was released from his duties as Head of the RKI earlier this year, was accompanied to his appointment to testify in front of the Brandenburg special committee, by Heiko Rottmann-Grossner, who had been one of Holtherm’s subordinates at the German MOH, and who during the early days of the pandemic had “advised” German authorities they should prepare for extended periods of curfew and a shut-down of the economy. It was Rottmann-Grossner who infuriated Legislators during the testimony of Wieler, when he repeatedly tried to interfere and restrict Wieler in his testimony about what happened during the pandemic.

Wieler, according to the Multipolar report, complied and tried to make it appear as though the RKI had acted merely as an “adviser” and interpreter of data, whilst decisions were taken independently by the administration.

This contrasts starkly with how courts perceived the RKI when they had to rule on cases filed against the “containment measures” by citizens, businesses and NGO’s. In these judicial proceedings it was routinely held that the RKI, aka “the science”, was in the driving seat, as they were “objectively and impartially concluding” that what was done was necessary, based on scientific evidence.

The evidence, as is known from researchers such as Denis Rancourt, or from even the submitted studies by “vaccine manufacturers” never showed an excess mortality, let alone safety or efficacy of the injections. Scientific dissent and discourse was suppressed and censored as “misinformation”. And, at least for Germany, this was conducted under the command of a NATO-General.

As such, it may be interesting to learn more about the reasons why the RKI did not follow up on reports of vaccination status of patients, which are essential and required by law, in order to calculate vaccine effectiveness. Tom Lausen, data analyst and observer during Wieler’s testimony, reports:

“He [Wieler] said they used all the reported data to calculate vaccine effectiveness, including with modeling calculations. The problem with this is: you calculate vaccine effectiveness by measuring whether certain “endpoints” still appear after vaccination. These are “disease,” “ICU stay,” or “death.” These three endpoints must necessarily be measured in order to calculate effectiveness. This is also regulated by law and regulation. According to the Infection Protection Act reporting rule, every positive test on admission to the hospital or even in the hospital had to be reported within 24 hours, from the hospital to the health department, from there to the state health department, and from there automatically to the RKI. This means that in a state like Brandenburg or Saxony-Anhalt – in this case I have the data at hand – 25,000 corona-positive cases admitted to hospital should also have been reported with a vaccination status. Unfortunately – and this is what happened in Saxony-Anhalt – only 40 percent were reported with a vaccination status, namely 9,960. The other 60 percent without a vaccination status were not followed up [by the RKI].”

Were there orders to not follow-up on sloppy reports?

When asked “Did the RKI receive instructions from Dr. Holtherm?” the question was objected and not allowed, says Lausen. The question which subsequently was allowed was “Okay, was General Holtherm able to give you instructions? – Answer by Wieler: sure.”

Cynthia Chung, based on research of Daniele Ganser, Alex Krainer and Richard Cottrell, highlights the dubious and anti-democratic involvement of NATO in operations designed to kill even elected officials such as French President Charles de Gaulle in 1961 (failed) or Italian Prime Minister Aldo Moro (successful in 1978). Swedish Premier Olof Palme’s death in 1986 is also highly suspicious. These operations were carried out by secret forces which were set up with Know-How by prominent Nazis, such as former SS-officer Otto Skorzeny, who was involved in setting up what would become known as “Operation Gladio” in the 1990s.

Whilst these past crimes do not constitute proof of any crimes being committed in the present, the public should understand the need to thoroughly question what happened during the “pandemic”.

In November of 1990, NATO first denied that the confessions of Italy’s former Prime Minister Andreotti about NATO involvement in the Gladio terrorist operations against the public were false, only to retract that statement as “false” one day later. NATO has never since commented “official secrets”.