Covidistan's Last Stand: in Jan., police deacon Eglau was fired for speaking out against mandatatory injections--he won his suit vs. the Dept. of the Interior

Needless to say, legacy media won't report on any of this, but here you go: a tiny bit of genuinely good news and, who knows, perhaps the tide is about to turn?

Today, I wish to bring you all a snippet of genuinely good news from Covidistan (the moniker for ‘Austria’ I’ve been using since the declaration of the first ‘house arrest for the unvaccinated’ last November).

Way back last November, a group of 50 police officers from Austria’s smallest state, Vorarlberg, wrote an open letter, which was published in legacy media (by, among other things, Der Standard, of all outlets, with my emphases added) and held:

[The open letter] also calls for an end to ‘compulsory vaccination for children and adults’, for rapid antigen tests to be used again instead of 2G as proof of immunity, and for an end to ‘scaremongering and this language of violence’, as well as refusal to engage in dialogue and the obligation to wear masks. Although the letter is not signed, the Vorarlberg State Police Directorate assumes that it is genuine—although they doubt that more than 50 people are actually behind the letter…

Hans-Peter Ludescher, Director of the State Police Directorate, found clear words in his reply: ‘The freedom of opinion of each individual finds its limits when all police officers who faithfully carry out the Covid-19 measures are anonymously accused of ‘losing their democratic and moral compass’. The letter represents ‘a breach of the oath to the laws of the Republic of Austria’ and thus contradicts the culture and values of the Vorarlberg police—because such a letter damages the trust of the population in the executive.

Back then, I tried to explain this egregious allegation of treason and oath-breaking by the Police Director in the following way:

All police being federal in Austria, a number of officers stating that they’d follow their conscience—which is, by the way, a legally protected stance since, and esp. because of WW2—rather than the diktats of the Covidistan régime, that’s a big thing. It’s also quite unheard of since 1945.

For background, you’re referred to my longer piece (dated 27 Nov. 2022):

Brief Update on Austria

The dissenting police officers were supported by their chaplain, one Police Deacon Uwe Eglau. For his moral and spiritual support of the officers—which, of course, is certainly contained in the job description—Deacon Eglau was fired in January 2022.

What is in this letter, by the way, that was so problematic for the régime?

Well, I’m glad you asked—here it is, reproduced courtesy of the Wochenblick (which, although close to the FPÖ, is about the only media outlet that actually reports on this matter). Addressed to the Minister of the Interior, Gerald Karner (ÖVP), the officers wrote:

In view of the situation in our country Austria and as police officers, we see it as our duty to stand up for civil rights and freedoms and to make our concerns known to you on the subject of the planned compulsory vaccination and the division of society. We are not an association, a trade union, or a legal entity. We are neither right-wing nor left-wing extremists. We are by no means anti-vaxxers or even so-called ‘loonies’ [‘Schwurbler’, the slanderous term used by legacy media to dismiss and belittle all anti-mandate protests], or conspiracy theorists. We are a group of several hundred police officers from all over Austria who have come together informally because of the current situation. We are united by our concern for the rule of law, for our freedom of expression, civil rights, and our health. We are both vaccinated against Covid-19 and unvaccinated. We are people from different social backgrounds, and our characters and needs are just as different. And as different as we are personally, we are united on this issue.

The letter continues to decry, in no uncertain terms, the consequences of the Committee of Public Safety’s decision to implement mandatory Covid Passport checks while going to work. This, in the words of the officers, had led to ‘noticeable divisions among police, including internal conflicts and discrimination of unvaccinated colleagues’. Furthermore, police decried the absence of evidence-based, transparent, and factually correct information at the root of the régime’s decisions.

They furthermore hold that healthcare-related decisions must remain individual, esp. in light of the considerable risks associated with these injectable products, to say nothing about the suppression of (early) treatment options.

As police officers, we are duty-bound in all our actions, especially when interfering with civil rights and freedoms, to maintain proportionality and to resort to those measures that serve the purpose in any situation while protecting anyone’s rights as much as possible. In view of all the circumstances, we therefore consider the planned compulsory vaccination to be no longer proportionate. It massively interferes with the fundamental right of bodily sovereignty and can probably not fulfil the purpose of ending the pandemic. All current vaccines or gene therapeutics have only conditional approval, and the effective duration of these products is often unknown. In addition, the side effects have not yet been sufficiently documented and, as has now been scientifically proven several times, they do not offer sufficient protection against infection and transmission. In addition to the lack of proportionality, the circumstance of conditional approvals is particularly noteworthy. As a result, all those vaccinated against Covid-19 to date are currently participating in ongoing medical trials that will last until 2024, depending on the vaccine. According to the Nuremberg Code, participation in a medical trial must take place without the use of force, fraud, trickery, pressure, pretence or any other form of persuasion or coercion. We therefore wish to make it clear that we do NOT wish to participate in any such trial or study.

Note, most importantly, that the Nuremberg Code is not an official law, but its provisions have been incorporated into Austrian law, as a letter written by the current Minister of Justice, Alma Zadić (Greens), earlier this year, spells this out in no uncertain terms, and she does so in an official document:

The ‘Nuremberg Code’ was crafted in the aftermath of the Nuremberg Doctors Trial, which saw the dispensation of justice against members of the National-Socialist medical establishment. I resent the fact that the fate of the countless victims of these [Nazi] crimes and misdeeds is ex post, and inappropriately so, brought up in comparison with those people who are not vaccinated against Covid-19.

As regards the particular questions that fall into the DoJ’s responsibility, it shall be noted that, according to both Austrian Criminal and Civil Law, medical interventions may only be undertaken with the consent of the fully capable patient, irrespective of whether he or she may be an adult, a minor, or a disabled person (§§ 173 and 252 ff ABGB [the Austrian Civil Code], § 110 StGB [Criminal Code]).

Please find more particulars etc. following this link:

Covidistan Annals XXIV: Mückstein flip-flops, all advantages are with the ÖVP now--and the DoJ reminds the régime that forced injections are criminal

Deacon Eglau Was Fired, Sued—and Won!

For lending his support—and, crucially, his name—Deacon Eglau was fired by the Ministry of the Interior in January 2022. Feeling on the right side of things, though, Deacon Eglau then sued his (former) employer, the Minister of the Interior.

I’m quoting again from Wochenblick, as legacy media won’t report on this matter (my emphases):

On 29 June, the hearing took place before the Labour and Social Court in Vienna. The courage of the committed chaplain was rewarded. In the court hearing, the conclusion was reached that the dismissal by the Vienna Police was unlawful. Hence, the dismissal was ordered to be revoked. The deacon nevertheless drew his own conclusions: at his request, the employment relationship was terminated at the end of June, as he tells Wochenblick. The question inevitably arises whether the Church will also realise its mistake and rehabilitate Eglau as a police chaplain.

‘I would like to thank everyone who has supported me all these months. The common struggle continues unabated’, the deacon remarked defiantly. All these months, he has received support from many people, with a lot of support—still forthcoming—from the ranks of the police and fellow faithful. ‘I am happy about this judgement. It shows that there is justice after all. We can all do our bit.’ For Eglau it is clear that everyone has to answer for themselves and is responsible for their actions.

So, there you go: a tiny bit of good news.

And now for the bad implications: legacy media reported on both Deacon Eglau’s termination back in January (see, e.g., here) and the Archdiocese of Vienna’s revocation of his police chaplaincy (here).

What legacy media doesn’t do, however, is reporting on the outcome of these court proceedings.

Note, though, that the official Catholic Church was, is, and continues to be complicit with the official régime (which is hardly surprising given the Pope’s embrace of these injectable products as ‘an act of charity’). In other words: while the official church has been useless for quite some time, this stance with the powerful over the powerless—a position that fundamentally contradicts the Christian faith—will render the official church irrelevant in due course.

Yet, if you wish to support the righteous, dissenting voices within Covidistan’s clergy, you may do so over at ‘Initiative Priester 22’, an association of Austria priests and deacons who refuse to remain silent in the light of oppression and, yes, evil.

These courageous men of the cloth stand for the following issues (emphases in the original, my translation; source here):

The Catholic Church has the fundamental task not only to respect but to defend the freedom of conscience of the individual, ‘for conscience is the most hidden centre and sanctuary in man, where he is alone with God, whose voice is heard in this his innermost being’ (Gaudium et spes 16).

In its quoted note, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith confirms the prominent position of conscience: ‘At the same time, it is obvious to practical reason that, as a rule, vaccination does not constitute a moral duty and that it must therefore be voluntary’ (n. 5).

And the text goes on to say that one may very well ‘for reasons of conscience refuse vaccines produced from cell lines derived from aborted foetuses’.

We, the undersigned priests and deacons, therefore oppose the illegal compulsory vaccination and in this way want to protect the faithful entrusted to us from encroachment by the state.

Stay strong, and do not waver.

P.S.: while I grew up in a Catholic household, I’ve long since left the Church of Rome over the egregious discrepancies between the Gospel it preaches and the deeds it does. The above is as good an example of my decision to do so, even though my faith in our fellow humans is restored, to certain degrees, when I read about this initiative.

As it is held repeatedly in Good Book, with which I find myself in agreement more often than I feel comfortable with at times:

Do not be afraid.