Covidistan Annals XV: Corruption Exposed, Constitutional Court asks for Data, the Régime rescinds some mandates

Gee, pressure from many sides appears to work: private 'side-letters' appeared last week testifying to backroom-dealings of the régime--just as the vaxx mandate was to be promulgated

I’ll be a few more days until the Norwegian authorities will release their latest weekly update, hence we may well be talking more about Covidistan in the next couple of days.

The big news this weekend was that while the Committee of Public Safety didn’t like to countenance anything resembling changing the current mandates, to say nothing about ending (some of) them by the end of last week, they abruptly appear to change course. And the régime did so by calling for an unplanned press briefing by its civil-military advisory panel, which convened unexpectedly on Saturday shortly before lunch.

The brief press briefing afterwards was telling: from today (31 Jan.) onwards, the ‘unvaccinated’ are ‘allowed’ to venture into the open again, from Saturday (5 Feb.) onwards, many tourism-related activities would be ‘opening’ up to the ‘unvaccinated’—and those who refuse to get a booster jab—again, and from 19 Feb. onwards, the odious and exclusionary policy to forbid anyone who can’t produce proof of either vaccination or recovered status (2G, plus photo ID) is ended.

This all sounds like ‘sanity’ and ‘reason’, two goddesses of what once used to be known as the collective west, were visiting Covidistan again after almost two years. It might also make you feel warm and fuzzy about those caring politicians who are just there to keep us all ‘safe’. Perhaps it might even incentivise one or the other to plan a tourist visit to the Alps in February. Incidentally, if you’re inclined to believe so, I’d have a couple of things to sell you; just contact me via email, and I’ll show you a couple of bridges and unicorns.

Alas, it’s not what it seems.

The Usual Corruption, Exposed

Instead, what has been seeping through the cracks in these past days is the typical corruption of the self-declared masters of discourse masquerading as politicians, as media has revealed the hitherto private ‘side letters’ of the past two governments. In other words, media is partially all over the fact that there are public governing agreements between the ÖVP (the large conservative party) and its two most recent coalition partners, the Freedom Party (2017-19) and the Greens (2020-), and there are ‘private’ arrangements in which these people detail who takes a turn at the public’s trough. In a hysterical fashion typical of faux-liberals and self-righteousness, the Greens have been caught engaging in the same shameful politicking that they (rightfully) decried before entering the government.

Sustained Mass Protests (and legacy media bed-wetting)

Then there is sustained mass protest against the heavy-handed Covid-19 policies by the Committee of Public safety. As is typical of the backbone-lacking legacy media, last Saturday’s (29 Jan.) protest was characterised as ‘up to 10,000 people’ marching through Vienna again. Here’s a 9:07 minute clip of ‘the few irresponsible’ who are against the regime over at Eviltube. (For those who don’t know the location, the big building is the State Opera, located at one of the main intersections in downtown Vienna; keep in mind that the government-aligned legacy media will have you think that all protesters are far right-wing tinfoil hat-wearing ‘domestic terrorists’. I’d invite you to take a look and think for yourself.)

Sidenote: incidentally, over the weekend, both state and de facto state media were reporting on ‘a few hundred’ of protesting truckers in Ottawa, Canada. Here’s a link to a reference in the pro-Green and self-identifying as left-liberal daily Der Standard, if you’d care to check these references.

As if Covidistan media wasn’t bad enough already, here’s further proof of the utter delusion and outright corruption that characterises legacy media. Without anything resembling honesty, integrity, or shame, Der Standard’s Bert Eder posted the below junk on Saturday evening (around 9 p.m., 29 Jan., European time), i.e., just as the Canadian truckers got ready to protest:

Caption reads: ‘I bet that this picture will also be used showing “the Canadian Freedom Convoy”, with the text below indicating it’s actually truckers queuing at the Covid test centre on the border of Chine and Bolivia.

Note that state media ORF also ‘reported’ on the Canadian truckers, and while they did so in a somewhat less dismissive tone, the amount of information that remained unmentioned is, simply put, staggering: it’s noted that ‘numerous truckers’ are protesting, cheered on by ‘thousands of Ottawans’.

As an aside, here’s a post by Steve Kirsch and here’s some more by Jessica Rose on these protests; and here’s a less-dated piece by El Gato Malo, if you care about more truthful reporting.

Also, why would we need massive public spending on these state and de facto state media for…well, it’s not reporting; it’s propaganda BS. Hint: we don’t. Let’s get the public’s money back, shall we?

Constitutional Court ‘Asks’ the Régime to Hand over Data

Yet, to me, the biggest ‘incentive’ behind the Committee’s abrupt change was, without question, the Constitutional Court’s decision to ask a series of hard-hitting questions about all matters Covid-19.

I don’t claim any originality about it. On Saturday, I was contacted by a fellow writer and concerned parent if the information that appeared on a Twitter feed and a somewhat obscure blogspot entry by Chris Veber were, in fact, true and authentic. I did some due diligence, e.g., checking the court’s website (here, but the registry is only current as of 18 Jan. 2022), hence I wrote an email to the presumptive signee and the court’s public liaison official, but I haven’t heard from either. I did find liberal-conservative alternative media outlet Tichy’s Einblick reporting on Veber’s posting on Saturday, but not much more.

You can find my transcript of the Court’s enquiries here.

Yet, More BS from Mückstein and the Legacy Media

On Sunday, however, the first state and de facto state media outlets began mentioning the court’s enquiry, hence it was, in fact, an authentic document.

These brief comments are only noteworthy for two facts (which also explains why I don’t discuss them to deeply):

On the one hand, they are almost completely dismissive. State broadcaster ORF, for instance, reported that (my emphases):

‘primarily, the Supreme Judges wish to learn about the degrees to which the lockdown [omitted: of the unvaccinated] and the 2G rule [proof of recovered or vaccination status required] were justified. They are mainly interested in the pressures on the healthcare system, which were used to justify these mandates.

It is common that the Constitutional Court asks the legislator [even though ORF seems to be confused about the separation between the executive and legislative branches], hence also in this case ‘to prepare for potential oral arguments’.

Here is Der Standard on this (which appeared online about three hours after ORF mentioned it); note that this piece is partially verbatim the same as the ORF article, which begs the further question as to why the taxpayer is funding both, but I digress.

The Standard piece is a bit more informative, though as it mentions that the Constitutional Court is ‘interested whether or not there ever was the threat of a system overload in the healthcare sector. True, that piece quotes part of the questions of the Court’s enquiry (and, after some commenters asked for the full piece to be added, the Standard obliged the readers and added the full text, which you may also find here), for instance:

The Constitutional Court therefore requests information as to whether the ministerial decrees are based on hospitalisation (incl. ICU admission) and death data were based on hospitalisation and death ‘of’, as opposed to ‘with’, Sars-Cov-2. If [the latter] way of counting was used, why was this done? [emphases in the original]

While this is, of course, a reasonable and perfectly acceptable question, Der Standard dismisses it—and omits the rest of the question, which you can find under sub-header 1) in my transcript—and continues with the following opening sentence in the following paragraph:

It [the Court’s enquiry] continues in this tone. Thus are requested precise data on deaths ‘of’ or ‘with’ Covid, incl. data on hospitalisation and age of those affected. Furthermore, the Court requested information on the virus variants as of 1 and 25 Jan. 2022, and right now [presumably 18 Feb.], as well as the percent-share of infected hospitalised, and deceased. What is more, also the ‘percent-shares of infections according to their context’ is requested, i.e., where do infections happen, e.g., at home, at work, during spare-time activities.

I’ll spare you the rest of the condescending and, frankly, unbecoming tone of the self-identifying as self-righteous morally pure left-of-centre legacy media. I think you can peruse your imagination to do so.

I will point out something else: yes, in fairness, Der Standard has uploaded the full text of the Court’s enquiry, but they didn’t do so in the first instance, thereby depriving the public of a key document to determine things for themselves.

In addition, the piece continues to ‘inform’ its readers in a highly selective way. Yes, there are two other aspects mentioned, one related to mask mandates (no. 6 in my transcript) and the other to the risk reduction of the currently available Covid-19 ‘vaccines’ (which are in reality experimental gene therapeutics, and this relates to no. 7 in my transcript).

In other words: the legacy media, if they report on the content of the Court’s request at-all, presents three to four out of ten questions.

Still, the Standard piece closes with the following sentence:

Only two days after these questions [on the ‘lockdown for the unvaccinated’, which corresponds to parts of no. 8 in my transcript], the government ended these restrictions.

Now, I’m not inferring causality where correlation would suffice, still—if that thought ever entered the Standard’s mind, you’d struggle to learn about it.

Final word for now: for whatever reason, Der Standard doesn’t add a name to its piece on this.

*** more on the implications of the court order soon ***

Still, I encourage everyone to look at the transcript of the court order and compare it with the BS legacy media—of both state and de facto state origin—writes about it.