|February 2nd, 2008||#1|
Whole Hog Sausage
Join Date: Jun 2007
The Legal Situation In Germany
The Catch-22 Trial: "truth is no defence"
If you defend yourself, you compound your guilt;
if you remain silent, you forego your defence.
From the: National Journal
1. As late as October 2003 Dr Fredrick Töben had a letter from the German authorities wherein it is stated that there is nothing about him on file in Germany, and that he is free to travel within Germany. On 13 April Töben learned at Helsinki Airport that German authorities had on 9 January 2004 imposed a ban on his traveling to Germany and to any EU country.
Dr. Fred TöbenSo, unbeknown to Töben, since 9 January 2004 he has been banned from entering any European Union country because Germany has declared him an undesirable person - on account of the 9 November 1999 Mannheim judgment. Had he been detained by any EU country, for example on 12 April 2004 at Amsterdam, then that would have led to Töben’s deportation, a reason for other countries to hop on the bandwagon and impose a ban on Töben. The New Zealand authorities did this to historian David Irving on account of his framed expulsion from Canada. That so-called democratic countries are criminalizing Revisionists in secret trials is graphically depicted in Ernst Zündel’s almost two year solitary imprisonment in a Toronto detention centre.
2. On 12 December 2000 a Karlsruhe appeal court granted an appeal and ordered that the November 1999 court case be re-heard at Mannheim. Some time during April-May Judge Adam ordered Michael Rosenthal act as Töben’s defence counsel because Z. Rosenthal had been involved in the appeal. Rosenthal refused because he stated in writing that were he to defend Töben, then he, Rosenthal, would also make himself liable because court proceedings in Germany are not privileged, and that at the first stage of the trial where matters of facts are canvassed, it is not possible to mount an effective defence because that would also criminalize the defence counsel. Rosenthal stated to Judge S. Adam that he would adopt the strategy used by defence counsel Ludwig Bock during the November 1999 trial and offer no defence. Bock at that time in another case had been charged with defending Günter Deckert "too vigorously", thereby bringing Bock’s mindset too close to Revisionist thinking ? and that is a criminal matter.
3. The fact that Bock did not offer a defence gave rise to the appeal court granting Töben a re-hearing; and the prosecutor was granted the appeal so that he could argue that German law applies to Internet sites anywhere in the world. The Appeal Court had found that the Mannheim Regional Court had erred in not applying German law to the Internet. This ruling has massive world-wide implications on Internet traffic, and the issue will be aired again during 8, 9 and 11 November 2004.
4. Töben asked Judge Adam to appoint well-known defence counsel Horst Mahler as Töben’s counsel because Mahler is defending himself against the same allegations in a Berlin court - to date quite successfully. Soon after Töben’s request had been submitted, a court in Berlin stripped Mahler of his legal practice certificate thereby prohibiting him from acting as a defence counsel for another person. Judge Adam thus rejected Töben’s request to have Mahler as his defence counsel of choice.
5. On 27 May 2004, Judge Adam issued the Summons and activated the office of the German Public Prosecutor that activated the Australian office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, which in turn had the Australian Federal Police (AFP) serve the Summons on Töben.
6. When the AFP officer handed Töben the Summons, he asked Töben: "Will you be attending this court hearing?" Töben responded in writing without specifically answering the question.
7. It must be stated that if Töben answers "Yes", then he will be breaking the law that since 9 January 2004 prohibits Töben from traveling to Germany. If Töben answers "No", then he foregoes a defence, a defence that will be conducted not by Töben’s counsel of choice. Add to that the fact that an effective defence merely compounds Töben’s guilt, the need to have someone like fearless Horst Mahler as defence counsel is obvious.
8. What happened to Töben in the Federal Court of Australia case is instructive here. A judge granted the Jewish Zionist’s application for a "summary judgment" on account of Töben not finding a defence counsel to assist in mounting an effective defence. On 19 May 2003, however, Töben had a defence counsel who ran the appeal "unsuccessfully" on similar grounds to that mentioned by Michael Rosenthal, i.e. it is not possible to mount an effective defence at the first stage of the legal process where matters of fact are canvassed because truth is no defence. At the appeal stage it is a matter of law - a safe haven for counsels.
The breaking of civilisation.
The German prosecution machinery is responsible for appr. 10.000 thought-crime persecutions and hundreds of imprisonments a year. Masses of people are incarcerated for nothing else but expressing politically incorrect opinions. One of the BRD's most prominent victim was the innocent Günter Deckert who had been incarcerated for five years. Deckert's crime was that he abbreviated the word holocaust with "holo" and that he smiled when uttering the word "holo" - the price of a smile in democratic Germany. On the 9th of April 1999 the German persecution system had the Australian historian Dr. Toben arrested by the infamous thought-crime prosecutor Hans Heiko Klein in his Mannheim office. Dr. Toben's crime was that he intended to discuss controversial scientific-historical questions on the holocaust. He wanted to know from Mr. Klein how to secure holocaust research, without being persecuted if findings did not match with the politically and judicially approved Holocaust narrative. Whilst asking, Dr. Toben was hand-cuffed. The late Jewish leader in Germany, Heinz Galinski, imposed his will years ago, prohibiting the discussion of the holocaust if the old holocaust dogma was likely to be undermined: "We will not allow an unlimited discussion on history." ("Papers for German and International Politics" - Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik -, Bonn, January 1987, Page 20-24.) Galinski's will seems to be Germany's command - still today!
|February 2nd, 2008||#2|
Whole Hog Sausage
Join Date: Jun 2007
Re: The Legal Situation In Germany
Germany holds the world to ransom
Any individual anywhere in the world will
be hounded down for expressing thoughts,
not in line with the German political holocaust dogma
"The right to know is like the right to live.
It is fundamental and unconditional,"
wrote Nobel-Price winner George Bernard Shaw.
From the National Journal
"Democratic Germany" denies this fundamental human right to its people although it adopted Article 19 of the United Nations Human Rights Charter as superior and overriding to its own law. Article 19 of the United Nations Human Rights Charter reads: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
On Dec. 12, 2000 the German Supreme Court (BGH, Bundesgerichtshof, case nr. 1 StR 184/00) ruled that any information, differing from the German political holocaust version or from its general political dogma "threatens internal peace in the Bundes-republik", hence it constitutes a major crime in "Democratic Germany".
Any person, whether living in Washington, Cape Town or Timbuktu will be hunted down, persecuted, arrested and indicted (when entering Germany) by the Bundesrepublik's persecution machinery, if they verbally or literally broadcast criticism against Jewry, the political holocaust-dogma and the German government.
This madness is based on fear of the truth because post-war Germany was founded on allied propaganda lies which became constitutionally established. The results of this lie, siege mentality, has now resulted in a law involving the internet. Simplified it declares that everybody on our globe represents a potential criminal to the German system. I.e.: "A democratic American, sitting by his computer in Ohio writes and posts an article on the internet which displeases the German authorities, will be persecuted by the German system." Even though he is technically in no position to exclude Germans from being able to access his internet posting due invisible extending borders in the world-wide-web-system, he will be arrested when entering "Democratic Germany". Exception: If the author is of Jewish origin there is no fear of persecution or harassment.
Until the 12th of December 2000 Germany restrained itself to the persecution of the free thinkers within its own borders. Now it is the world. This latest strike against universal human rights by the German system has reached a new peak of madness. It is a declaration of war against free thinking to everyone, anywhere in the world.
"Adenauer [postwar Germany's first Chancellor] thought the Germans were a 'sick people'." (Die Welt, Nov. 30, 2000, page 3)
According to the Annual Reports of the 'German Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution' (George Orwell could not have invented a more sinister title) the German persecution machinery prosecuted the following totals of citizens for expressing politically incorrect opinions in Germany:
Thought-crime offences 1994:///2,083///innocent persecuted victims
Thought-crime offences 1995:///1,601///innocent persecuted victims
Thought-crime offences 1996:///5,635///innocent persecuted victims
Thought-crime offences 1997://10,257///innocent persecuted victims
Thought-crime offences 1998:///9,549///innocent persecuted victims
Thought-crime offences 1999:///8,698///innocent persecuted victims
Thought-crime offences 2000://13,863///innocent persecuted victims
Thought-crime offences 2001:///8,874///innocent persecuted victims
Thought-crime offences 2002:///9,807///innocent persecuted victims
Thought-crime offences 2003:///9,295///innocent persecuted victims
The figures are based on statistics provided by the Federal Criminal Office (BKA)
Civil Rights In Germany
|February 2nd, 2008||#3|
The paranormal silent type
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Where you least expect
It is nearly impossible to fire a teacher for incompetence or arbitrariness. But, if
...that teacher gets accused for expression violations, the matter gets immediate disciplinary attention.
Here, is a case where a teacher gets fired for alleged acts which have not yet been proved. He is accused to have raised his hand in a Hitler salute and other similar infractions based on what perhaps unsatisfied students organized to invent. He is a mathematics- and physics teacher.
In Germany, the result of a mathematics task is less important than the orderly written out form of the calculation itself. In physics, I'm sure the methods are likewise. In the American system, it's the result which determines correctness.
That's why the American methods facilitate learning through a practically-based approach.
I wouldn't be surprised that his possible rigid teaching methods are the initial cause for the organized defamation:
|February 10th, 2008||#4|
Re: It is nearly impossible to fire a teacher for incompetence or arbitrariness. But,
Police seize discs from far-right party in Germany
Posted : Fri, 08 Feb 2008 18:28:01 GMT
Berlin - Berlin police who searched the national office of Germany's main far-right group, the National Democratic Party (NPD), said Friday they seized digital music suspected of breaking German laws against Nazis. The 50 recordings appeared to be seditious, and a separate inquiry had been opened into distributing anti-democratic propaganda.
Police also seized an unauthorized electro-shock weapon during the nine-hour hunt Thursday of the suburban Berlin offices, which have been violently attacked by leftist groups in the past.
German authorities have sought various ways to close down the party, which has no seats in the federal parliament but has seats in two eastern German states.
The national treasurer, Erwin Kemna, 57, was remanded in custody Friday in his home town, Muenster. He is accused of misappropriating funds from the party, which receives automatic government subsidies based on its voter support.
A prosecutions spokesman, Wolfgang Schweer, said Kemna confirmed payments to himself but asserted these were repayments of money he had earlier lent to the party or of cash loans by supporters.
He is alleged to have taken 627,000 euros (909,000 dollars) to bolster the balance sheet of his fitted-kitchens company.
An NPD spokesman voiced concern Friday that the party might be penalized for accounting irregularities by the treasurer. He said, "Our financial position has been perilous since the start of 2007."
The NDP denies it is Nazi, but its nationalist, anti-foreigner message and its outreach to overtly neo-Nazi groups have made it a pariah for Germany's mainstream parties.
|February 13th, 2008||#5|
If We Can't Ban 'em, Let's Bankrupt 'em
Germany's interior ministers have faced frustrating setbacks fighting the far-right in court. A new tactic under consideration involves hitting organizations that support the party where it really hurts -- in the wallet.
German politicians want to cut all public funding to these guys.
For four years, ever since a 2003 push to ban the neo-Nazi party NPD failed in Germany's high court, political leaders have been looking for a strategy to combat the country's extremist right wing. But ideas -- most of them centering on a renewed attempt at prohibiting the party -- have been wanting, and action has been virtually non-existent.
On this Thursday and Friday in Berlin, though, interior ministers from Germany's 16 states will discuss a plan to weaken the NPD by eliminating state funding from foundations and organizations that espouse the party's right-extremist views. It is time, many believe, to move beyond a commitment to banning the party and begin looking for ways to make the lives of Germany's neo-Nazis more difficult.
"We have to publicly stigmatize people who fund the NPD and the associations that support it," Schleswig-Holstein Interior Minister Ralf Stegner (SPD) told the Süddeutsche Zeitung. "We should name by name the trade organizations that recruit using their right-extremist ideology and that prefer to give apprenticeship positions to young neo-Nazis. We should not stand back and be polite about this."
The problem, say many, is that the NPD, as a legal political party in Germany, receives federal and state funding based on election results. NPD representatives in the state parliaments of Saxony and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, for example, got a combined €1.38 million for campaign costs in 2006.
Germany's Social Democrats are still in favor of a second attempt at banning the NPD, but have not pushed hard for the idea at the federal level. The Christian Democrats under Chancellor Angela Merkel fear that a second failure in German courts could give the NPD a boost and are against pursuing a ban.
"If we wage a second attempt, we have to be sure that we're going to accomplish our goal," Saxony's Interior Minister Albrecht Buttolo (CDU) told Deutschlandradio Kultur on Thursday.
There are numerous ideas on the table for cutting funds to the right. In Saxony, for example, the law requires that subsidies be paid to foundations and organizations if the party they are affiliated with has been represented in the federal or state parliament for two legislative periods. Since 2004, NPD has held seats in Saxony's state assembly and has founded an "Educational Institute for Homeland and National Identity."
Berlin Interior Minister Ehrhart Körting, who is heading the conference in Berlin, proposes seeking countrywide legislation that forbids states from providing financial support to organizations "opposed to the constitution." If organizations can be shown to promote such positions, state funding could be choked off.
Some interior ministers have also voiced their support for using this tactic on other groups. "That must also be valid for left extreme or radical foreign establishments," Bouffier said. Such a foreign establishment could include the Church of Scientology, which German politicians have labelled as a money-making cult and denied it recognition as a legitimate religious institution.
Körting also proposes hitting these organizations in the wallet in an additional way. If possible, he would like to see if the non-profit status of some far-right organizations could be revoked, thereby denying them the tax breaks such status offers.
The hurdles for such an approach remain high, as pointed out by Hesse Interior Minister Volker Bouffier (CDU). "I don't see any chance of depriving the NPD of support funds by means of a special law," he told the AP on Thursday. "The law isn't applied based on taste; the constitution prescribes a strict equality of treatment for all parties."
There may, however, be ways around the legislative approach. If such measures fail, some hope to fight the NPD and allied organizations with the time-tested tool of bureaucratic harassment. According to the Süddeutsche Zeitung, mayors and municipal councils in Rhineland-Palatinate are already making things difficult for the NPD by, for example, requiring a few more toilets in a NPD-related construction projects so as to raise building costs. The state has also put together brochures for municipalities on how to deal with NPD members who come to municipal council meetings. According to the state's Interior Minister Peter Bruch, requests for the brochure "come from all over the country."
|February 13th, 2008||#6|
The paranormal silent type
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Where you least expect
The NPD has enough skilled tradesmen, like the one accused of embezzling campaign funds, to install any fixture for code compliance.
What's important here, is the readiness of authorities to use any flaw to shut down an opposition party. That's why it is of utmost importance for the NPD and others to screen active members who hold sensitive positions.
Imcidentally, the suspected embezzler is also in charge of the party newspaper
|February 18th, 2008||#7|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Lutheran pastor Johannes Lerle
|February 25th, 2008||#8|
Home-school Germans flee to UK
A 1938 law designed to ensure state control of all children has provoked a family exodus to Britain
Charlie Francis-Pape and Allan Hall in Berlin
Sunday February 24, 2008
Families are fleeing to the UK from Germany to escape a law introduced by Hitler that could lead to their children being taken into care if educated at home. One father, who arrived in Britain with his wife and five children last month, has told The Observer that his family had no choice after being warned that their children would be taken into foster care unless they enrolled them at local schools. Another, who fled in October, said he believed the 70-year-old law was creating hundreds of refugees and forcing families into hiding to protect their children.
Home-schooling has been illegal in Germany since it was outlawed in 1938. Hitler wanted the Nazi state to have complete control of young minds. Today there are rare exemptions, such as for children suffering serious illnesses or psychological problems. Legal attempts through the courts - including the European Court of Human Rights - have so far failed to overturn the ban.
Klaus Landahl, 41, who moved in January from the Black Forest in Germany to the Isle of Wight with his wife, Kathrin, 39, said they had no option but to leave their home, friends and belongings in order to educate their five children, aged between three and 12, legally and without fear. 'It feels like persecution,' he said. 'We had to get to safety to protect our family. We can never go back. If we do, our children will be removed, as the German government says they are the property of the state now.'
The family now live in Shanklin, surviving off savings while Landahl seeks work to support them. His wife said they chose home-schooling to spare their children from bullying and to allow them to focus on their individual interests. 'In school in Germany they expect you to be like everybody else; you cannot be different,' she said. 'If you don't have the correct clothes, like Nike and Adidas, or if you wear the wrong colour, other children will not accept you.'
Jonathan Skeet, who is British-born, said that he, his wife and five children, aged between two and 11, were driven from Lüdenscheid after the authorities froze their bank account, removed money from it and confiscated their car. The former aid worker fled in October and chose the Isle of Wight because of its large home-education network. In Germany, he said, the family were blackmailed and threatened with the loss of their children in an attempt to force them back into mainstream school education.
'It was crippling,' he said. 'When we lived in Germany we wanted to live a very inconspicuous and quiet life. But instead we ended up in direct confrontation with a very powerful state.'
The 43-year-old nursing home worker said they wanted to home-school because they were worried about the state of the German education system. 'We were concerned that the atmosphere in schools in Germany had become very rough and ready. We thought our children were too young to deal with that. '
About 800 families are believed to educate their children at home illegally. Stephanie Edel, who runs the Schulbildung in Familieninitiative, a German organisation that aims to support those who educate at home, said that last year some 78 home-schooled children fled Germany with their parents. 'It is very dangerous to home-educate here,' she said. 'Home-educators have to learn to expect anything and have to be ready to leave overnight.'
In 2006 the UN sent a special rapporteur to assess Germany's education system. He reported that necessary measures should be adopted to uphold parents' rights to educate children at home where necessary and appropriate.
Last year, in an extreme example, 15-year-old Melissa Busekros was removed from her family. Her mother, Gudrun, said more than 15 policemen took her to a psychiatric unit for psychological tests. After refusing to be tested, Melissa was placed in a foster home. She escaped on her 16th birthday and has since been left alone by the authorities.
Her mother said: 'All of the supposed independent experts are paid by the government, so they say what the social workers tell them to say in court.'
Both domestic and EU courts have ruled in the German state's favour on numerous occasions in recent years.
|February 25th, 2008||#9|
2007 German horror tale
Earlier this month, a German teen-ager was forcibly taken from her parents and imprisoned in a psychiatric ward. Her crime? She is being home-schooled.
On Feb. 1, 15 German police officers forced their way into the home of the Busekros family in the Bavarian town of Erlangen. They hauled off 16-year-old Melissa, the eldest of the six Busekros children, to a psychiatric ward in nearby Nuremberg. Last week, a court affirmed that Melissa has to remain in the Child Psychiatry Unit because she is suffering from "school phobia."
Home-schooling has been illegal in Germany since Adolf Hitler outlawed it in 1938 and ordered all children to be sent to state schools. The home-schooling community in Germany is tiny. As Hitler knew, Germans tend to obey orders unquestioningly. Only some 500 children are being home-schooled in a country of 80 million. Home-schooling families are prosecuted without mercy.
Last March, a judge in Hamburg sentenced a home-schooling father of six to a week in prison and a fine of $2,000. Last September, a Paderborn mother of 12 was locked up in jail for two weeks. The family belongs to a group of seven ethnic German families who immigrated to Paderborn from the former Soviet Union. The Soviets persecuted them because they were Baptists. An initiative of the Paderborn Baptists to establish their own private school was rejected by the German authorities. A court ruled that the Baptists showed "a stubborn contempt both for the state's educational duty as well as the right of their children to develop their personalities by attending school."
All German political parties, including the Christian Democrats of Chancellor Angela Merkel, are opposed to home-schooling. They say that "the obligation to attend school is a civil obligation, that cannot be tampered with." The home-schoolers receive no support from the official (state funded) churches, either. These maintain that home-schoolers "isolate themselves from the world" and that "freedom of religion does not justify opposition against the obligation to attend school." Six decades after Hitler, German politicians and church leaders still do not understand true freedom: that raising children is a prerogative of their fathers and mothers and not of the state, which is never a benevolent parent and often an enemy.
Hermann Stucher, a pedagogue who called upon Christians to withdraw their children from the state schools which, he says, have fallen into the hands of "neo-Marxist activists," has been threatened with prosecution for "Hochverrat und Volksverhetzung" (high treason and incitement of the people against the authorities). The fierceness of the authorities' reaction is telling. The dispute is about the hearts and minds of the children. In Germany, schools have become vehicles of indoctrination, where children are brought up to unquestioningly accept the authority of the state in all areas of life. It is no coincidence that people who have escaped Soviet indoctrination discern what the government is doing in the schools and are sufficiently concerned to want to protect their children from it.
What is worrying is that most "free-born" Germans accept this assault on their freedom as normal and eye parents who opt out of the state system with suspicion.
The situation is hardly better at the European level. Last September, the European Court of Human Rights supported Hitler's 1938 schooling bill. The Strasburg-based court, whose verdicts apply in the entire European Union, ruled that the right to education "by its very nature calls for regulation by the State." It upheld the finding of German courts: "Schools represent society, and it is in the children's interest to become part of that society. The parents' right to educate does not go so far as to deprive their children of that experience."
While it is disquieting that Europeans have not learned the lessons from their dictatorial past — upholding Nazi laws and sending dissidents, including children, to psychiatric wards, as the Soviets used to do — there is reason for Americans to worry, too. The United Nations is also restricting the rights of parents. Article 29 of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child stipulates that it is the goal of the state to direct the education of children. In Belgium, the U.N. Convention is currently being used to limit the constitutional right to home-school. In 1995 Britain was told that it violated the U.N. Convention by allowing parents to remove their children from public school sex-education classes.
Last year, the American Home School Legal Defense Association warned that the U.N. Convention could make home-schooling illegal in America, even though the Senate has never ratified it. Some lawyers and liberal politicians in the states claim that U.N. conventions are "customary international law" and should be considered part of American jurisprudence.
At present, young Melissa Busekros' ordeal is a German horror story. Could it soon be an American one?
|February 25th, 2008||#10|
Whole Hog Sausage
Join Date: Jun 2007
German-Russian Immigrants Persecuted Again
Hitler’s Ghost Haunts German Parents
Homeschooling In Germany
The Brussels Journal
Of all religious groups Baptists were among the most fiercely persecuted in the Soviet Union. They were not just Christians but they also distrusted the state, preaching an institutional secession from state-run institutions. Many Baptists belonged to the German-speaking minority in Southern Russia and Kazakhstan. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, they emigrated to Germany, the land where their forefathers had originally come from. Today, these Baptist immigrants from Russia, as well as the Low-German Mennonites, are being prosecuted in Germany because they are unhappy with what their children are learning in the German public schools, which they consider too secular. Children are not allowed to opt out of classes or school activities and homeschooling is illegal in Germany since Adolf Hitler outlawed it in 1938.
Last week, a court in Paderborn in the German state of Westphalia ruled that two Baptist couples lose their parental authority over their own children in educational matters. The court said it was interfering “in order to protect the children from further harm.” It stated that the parents had shown “a stubborn contempt both for the state’s educational duty as well as the right of their children to develop their personalities by attending school.” The court appointed the local Paderborn social service as guardian over the children to ensure that they attend public school.
The two couples belong to a group of seven families with a total of fifteen children of elementary school age who do not attend school. The parents were brought to court by the local education board of the county whose director, Heinz Kohler, argued that homeschooling cannot be allowed because it is “a right of the child not to be kept away from the outside world. The parents’ right to personally educate their children would prevent the children from growing up to be responsible individuals within society.” Kohler was backed by the Westphalian minister of Education, the Socialist politician Ute Schäfer, who stated that the obligation to attend a government approved school follows from the “right of a child to free education and maturation.”
Last January, a court in the Westphalian county of Gütersloh sentenced a couple to imprisonent, six days for the mother followed by six days for the father, because the parents had refused to let their children attend a Christmas school play after Grimm’s fairytale “König Drosselbart” (King Thrushbeard), which they considered blasphemous. The prison sentences were demanded by Sven-Georg Adenauer, the Christian-Democrat Landrat (governor) of Gütersloh county, because the parents refused to pay the fine of 150 euros which they had received for not sending their children to the school play.
Upon the conviction Hermann Hartfeld, a Baptist preacher from Cologne who is also an immigrant from Russia, wrote to Adenauer: “These parents did not give in to the intimidations of the Communists. Do you really believe that they will give in to you?” However, Germany’s Christian-Democrats, who are likely to win the coming general elections in September, are as opposed to homeschooling as are the ruling Socialists. The German mentality, even among its so-called conservatives, is very statist. Parents are considered to be incapable of schooling their own children. In this respect the German mentality does not seem to have changed much since the days of Adolf Hitler, when the Germans were expected to look upon the state as a caring parent. Ironically, Sven-Georg Adenauer is the grandson of Konrad Adenauer, the first post-Nazi Chancellor of Germany.
The initiative of the Paderborn Baptists to establish their own private school was rejected by the authorities, who argued that such a school is but a cover for homeschooling and that “the living room is not a class room.” The Baptist families received the support of Hermann Stücher, a 68-year old Christian pedagogue who from 1980 to 1997 homeschooled all his seven children, despite a government prohibition. Stücher runs the Philadelphia School in Siegen, another Westphalian town. The Philadelphia School, which is not recognised by the German authorities, was established to assist homeschooling families. Stücher called upon all Christian parents in Germany to withdraw their children from the public schools which, he says, have fallen into the hands of “neomarxist activists propagating atheist humanism, hedonism, pluralism and materialism.” Manfred Müller, the Christian-Democrat Landrat of Paderborn county, has threatened to take Stücher to court on charges of “Hochverrat und Volksverhetzung (high treason and incitement of the people against the authorities) – a charge which the Nazis also used against their opponents. Müller considers homeschooling to be high treason because “die Schulpflicht sei eine staatsbürgerliche Pflicht, über die nicht verhandelt werden könne” (the obligation to attend school is a civil obligation, that cannot be tampered with).
The total number of homeschooled children in Germany is estimated to be only some 500 in a country of 80 million inhabitants. Unlike in its Western and Southern neighbours, however, homeschooling is illegal in Germany. Last year the police in Bavaria held several homeschooling fathers in coercive detention. They belonged to Christian groups who claim the right of parents to educate their own children, but they are not backed by the official (state funded) churches. Reinhard Hempelmann, a spokesman of the Evangelical Church in Berlin, maintains that the homeschoolers “isolate themselves from the world and the traditional churches.” Alfred Buss, the president of the Evangelical Church in Westphalia, has said that “freedom of religion does not justify opposition against the obligation to attend school.” Six decades after Hitler, German politicians and official church leaders still do not seem to understand what true freedom implies: that raising children is a prerogative of their fathers and mothers and not of the state, which is never a benevolent parent and often an enemy.
The targeted parents are all Christians, whose faith encourages them to act upon their principles, but the fierceness of the authorities’ reaction is telling. The dispute is not about religion (though that alone would be bad enough) but about the hearts and minds of the children. In Germany schools have become vehicles of indoctrination where children are brought up to unquestioningly accept the authority of the state in all areas of life. It is no coincidence that those who have escaped from indoctrination under the Soviets discern what the government is doing in the schools and are sufficiently concerned to want to protect their children from it. What is worrying is that “free-born” Western parents accept this assault on their freedom as normal and regard the Christian parents who want to opt out of the state system with suspicion.
What is one to make of modern-day Germany, a country which happily appoints a former marxist fanatic and condoner of terrorism to the post of minister of foreign affairs but accuses ordinary citizens of treason when they voice concern about what the schools are teaching their children? Clearly they have learned nothing from their experiences with state totalitarianism in the last century.
|February 29th, 2008||#11|
[eBay turns in Germans who buy pro-White material]
German police raid homes in far-right Internet probe
Feb 28, 2008
BERLIN, Feb 28 (Reuters) - Police in eight German states raided the homes of 23 suspects on Thursday as part of a lengthy probe into the illegal sale of right-wing extremist literature and audio material, the Federal Crime Office (BKA) said.
A further 70 suspects had been identified in the investigation, which began in August 2006 after the German unit of U.S. online auction company eBay Inc (EBAY.O: Quote, Profile, Research) reported the sale via the Internet of far-right material, the BKA said.
Twenty-four computers, around 50 memory devices and some 3,500 right-wing extremist CDs and LPs had been seized in Thursday's raids, it added.
"The measures are a continuation of ... the fight against right-wing extremism on the Internet," the BKA said. "They show that the Internet is not a law-free zone and that online auctions are also checked from incriminating content."
German laws ban Nazi emblems like the swastika but grant public funds to the far-right National Democratic Party (NPD), whose followers implicitly back racist and some Nazi ideas.
The German government follows a so-called "four-pillar" strategy against right-wing extremism that was agreed in 2002. It seeks to educate on human rights, strengthen civil society and promote civil courage, help integrate foreigners and target suspected far-right extremists. (Reporting by Iain Rogers, editing by Mary Gabriel)
|March 3rd, 2008||#12|
[Dr. Ludwig Watzal]
Mar 2, 2008
Outcry over 'anti-Semite' at German gov't agency
By BENJAMIN WEINTHAL, JERUSALEM POST CORRESPONDENT - BERLIN
A German politician is leading calls on Germany's Federal Agency for Civic Education (BpB), which provides educational material to combat anti-Semitism and anti-Israel hatred, to sack an employee for a series of alleged fiercely anti-Israel and anti-Jewish statements.
The controversy has raised an outcry in Germany because the employee, Dr. Ludwig Watzal, is more than a simple civil servant; he writes for the Das Parlament, a paper funded by the Federal government that covers domestic and international affairs, and serves as co-editor of Apuz, an academic supplement to the parliamentary paper. He has written widely on issues related to Israel and presents himself as an expert on Middle Eastern affairs.
Watzal has openly identified himself as a BpB employee in his widely disseminated writings on the Middle East. He did so, for instance, for a November 2007 article in Lebanon Wire, an on-line news site based in Beirut, to blast the prominent Israeli historian Benny Morris, saying Morris "encapsulates all Zionism's major elements, its inherent implausibility as a practical enterprise, its arrogance, racism and self-righteousness."
Elsewhere, Watzal has written, "Now that the US has been Israelized, is the Israelization of the world imminent?"
In an e-mail to The Jerusalem Post, the head of the BpB, Thomas Krüger, wrote that the agency "has always made it clear that it does not identify with Watzal's statements as a private person, and has in fact clearly distanced itself from them."
However, Gert Weisskirchen, a leading Social Democratic Party deputy, has called Watzal's positions anti-Semitic and demanded his dismissal. German politicians tend to be extremely reluctant to accuse other public officials of anti-Semitism, a charge that carries particular weight in Germany because of its history.
Critics charge Krüger with tolerating Watzal's anti-Israeli outlook by hiding behind employee rights arguments. Belinda Cooper, a lawyer and specialist on Germany at the World Policy Institute in New York, said, "By falling back on legal arguments, the BpB is making things too easy for itself; surely, it would find a way to fire a neo-Nazi employee, if the situation came up."
When questioned about Watzal's alleged anti-Jewish views, the University of Bonn, which Watzal cites as his current academic teaching post on his CV, said that he was no longer employed by the university's institute for political science and sociology. No reason was given.
Watzal's hostile sentiments date back to the 1990s. In a widely heard German radio broadcast in 2005, Watzal said the Israeli media businessman Haim Saban's purchase of the German television pro7 outlet was "evidence of how symbiotic the relationship between power and money is. Saban's political desire is to obtain as much control as possible over the media."
Dr. Juliane Wetzel, a historian at the center for the research on anti-Semitism at the Technical University of Berlin, said Watzal "activates the typical clichés of Jewish capital and Jewish power."
Cooper said that "instead of engaging in thoughtful examination, the BpB is responding with defensiveness - as though the critics were the problem."
At a parliamentary hearing devoted to combating anti-Semitism on January 25, several specialists in the field criticized the BpB for what they said was its failure to realize that Watzal's continued employment undermined their credibility. Asked why the Interior Ministry, which oversees the BpB, had extended Watzal's contract in 2006-2007, Gabriele Hermani, the spokeswoman for the agency, declined to comment on "personnel" matters.
Following the parliamentary hearing, Watzal initiated legal action against a critic at the session and the journalist Samuel Laster in Vienna, who is the editor of the on-line Jewish magazine Die Jüdische.
"If Watzal can accuse Benny Morris of racism, why can Watzal's critics not accuse him of anti-Semitism?" said the journalist John Rosenthal, who writes for the World Politics Review and has reported on the Watzal affair.
"If Benny Morris is worried that anyone might take Watzal's opinion seriously, then it is up to him to be a big boy and defend himself with words, not by running to the courts. In a mature democracy, Ludwig Watzal would be expected to do the same. In Germany, evidently he is not," said Rosenthal.
Watzal did not respond to e-mail requests for comment for this article. Reached on his mobile phone, he said that "Mr. Weisskirchen can say what he wants," in response to Weisskirchen's assertion that his positions constitute anti-Semitism. Weisskirchen, the Social Democratic Party deputy, serves as the personal representative of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe for combating anti-Semitism.
The controversy surrounding Watzal and the BpB comes ahead of a March 16-17 visit to Israel by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and her cabinet. Merkel told the German parliament on January 25 that "mainstream forms of anti-Semitism" must be combated in Germany.
|March 3rd, 2008||#13|
Neo-Nazi Goods Seized in Germany
Berlin, Feb 28 (Prensa Latina) An undetermined number of neo-Nazi Germans were stripped of their goods and properties for spreading songs and texts with racist messages, Germany's Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) reported Thursday.
Since the beginning of the investigation in August 2006, the BKA has carried out more than 20 home searches of suspects, together with 40 provincial prosecutors' offices and local authorities of eight federated states.
Computers, thousands of CDs and other equipment for saving and reproducing music, as well as neo-Nazi insignias and symbols were confiscated.
|March 3rd, 2008||#14|
Germany's constitutional court on Wednesday restricted online police searches, ruling against a law which allows authorities in the western state of North Rhine- Westphalia to snoop on computer users.
The constitutional court argued in its decision that "the basic right on ensuring confidentiality and integrity of information technology systems" had to be made possible.
The court added that online police searches are only permitted when there are concrete dangers to the lives of people or the existence of the state.
The German government has repeatedly called for online searches in its war against terrorism, organized crimes, child pornography, neo-Nazi propaganda and other types of crimes.
German lawyer and journalists group have continuously rejected online police snooping.
Last year, the German Federal Supreme Court (BGH) ruled that based on the German Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO), online police spying was illegal.
The court argued that the StPO had no provisions to allow the authorities to perform secret online snooping.
|March 20th, 2008||#15|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
Courageous German challenges Shoah Orthodoxy
|March 29th, 2008||#16|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: JUDEAware, originally MassaJEWsetts
|July 1st, 2008||#17|
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: FUCK YOU!
ZigZog Zionist Jews Run Scared Of Mike James
ZigZog Zionist Jews Run Scared Of Mike James
German State Attorney Cites Insanity
Learning to live among the sane and comfortably numb
in the European Soviet Union of Zionist States
By Michael James in Germany
"No policeman would ever ask someone born in 1959 to stand in the dock before a judge and swear on the Bible that he had witnessed a crime that allegedly took place twenty years before he was born. Such a policemen would soon find himself charged with corruption and the witness would be incarcerated for perjury." -- 'Mike James Sues "German" Jews for Incitement to Bear False Witness'.
"It remains the case that the German Reich survived the collapse of 1945 and did not cease to exist, neither through capitulation nor the exercise of foreign power in Germany on the part of the allies; it possesses today, as it always has, legal and judicial sovereignty. The BRD is not the legal successor of the German Reich." -- Bundesverfassungsgericht (Federal Constitutional Court), 31 July 1973 (Urteile 2 Bvl.6/56; 2 BvF 1/73; 2 BvR 373/83; BVGE 2,266 (277); 3, 288 (319ff; 5.85) 126; 6, 309, 336 und 363)
It's not every day an educated and highly-informed former journalist is accused of insanity. It's the sort of thing that happened quite frequently however in the former USSR. It was a classic defence of those exposed by the STASI for anti-Marxist thinking in the former communist East Germany.
I don't have access to a scanner at the moment and can't upload this frighteningly Orwellian letter sent to me by the State Attorney of Frankfurt, so please see my faithfully typed reproduction below.
In essence, the State Attorney, having conferred with the Central Council of Jews in Germany, has decided not to bring a prosecution for Volksverhetzung (racial incitement [against the Jewvandals]) against me for the following reasons (adapted translation):
"The guilt of the accused, following some consideration was estimated as very minor. It would not be in the public interest to seek a prosecution. Contingent upon this assessment were the following factors: the accused has no previous criminal record and is not under investigation; on account of his psychiatric health there remains some doubt as to his awareness of the crime."
Paradoxically, the letter ends with a warning: "If the [mentally insane] accused continues [to ask troublesome questions] he will lose the benefit of the above-mentioned ruling." (Additions in brackets are mine.)
One strike and you're crazy; two strikes and you're sane. Don't "crazy" people repeatedly make the same "mistakes" or is the State Attorney afraid to prosecute a man who will counter-sue for incitement to bear false witness?
What did I do? Let me refresh your memory. I simply sent letter to the Central Council of Jews asking them if there was something mysteriously Kabbalistic about the very rounded and sacredly indisputable six million number. Why would positing 5,999,999 or even 6,000,001 be considered "holocaust" denial and put an inquisitive man behind bars? Why can't mature, grown-up human beings answer such a question without hauling me before the police and then involving the State Attorney into the bargain? Did I hit a nerve?
And why the snide the comment that, should I continue in my "craziness", I shall suddenly be deemed sane enough to go before the bench (without a jury, which is always the case in Soviet Germany)? Is that not a threat? Is not making threats with menaces a crime in Germany as it is elsewhere?
There is something else which irks me profoundly by the way I have been slandered in this letter, and here I have an honest confession to make. I do indeed suffer from depression and I have a long history of alcoholism. In the latter case, I've kept my old pals, Johnny Walker and Jack Daniels, well out of reach for ten years, despite two spectacular relapses. In the former case, I tried everything the Jewish medical establishment threw at me before deciding to live with depression and chronic fatigue rather than endure the horrific side effects delivered by pharmaceuticals.
So how did the Central Council of Jewvandals and the Frankfurt State Attorney get hold of my medical records? There are very strict laws in place in Germany that prohibit the betrayal of trust and confidence in terms of doctor-patient relationships. Who snitched? Who pried? Who stole information that does not belong in the public domain?
If they really want to know just how crazy I am, I must also fess- up to a midlife crisis. I'm a divorced 48-year-old desperately in love with the daughter I never had. Her name is "Billie". I met a young lady recently who told me she wouldn't mind cooperating with me in an intimate manner to bring forth "Billie", but now I have cold feet. I would really love to meet "Billie" one day and teach her everything I know, and learn much more from her besides. I yearn for this unborn daughter of mine but I have serious doubts about her prospective mother, and I wouldn't want her to grow up in the European Union of Soviet [ZigZog] Zionist States.
On April 4, I shared a series of e-mails with a close friend in Germany. I spoke of my depression and how pessimistic I was in terms of a free Europe. I spoke at length about ways in which the European Union could be abolished. I expressed my wish to leave the European Soviet and live a life of freedom in South America. I may even have said it would be better to commit suicide than live in the emerging Soviet Zionist European Union.
I awoke the next morning in the company of two policemen. They were polite, embarrassed almost, but asked me to dress myself as quickly as possible and pack my necessities. What ensued was the scariest 24 hours of my life. Now, I've been there, folks. I was once surrounded by 36 paratroopers at Nairobi airport, all under orders to shoot me dead. I was also the target of an MI6 hit-man in the Taunustrasse in Frankfurt in May 1997. I can still remember having a [Vandal Nigger] Kenyan General Service Unit assassin put a gun in my mouth on the outskirts of Nairobi, and instead of blinking, I laughed, and he ran off.
This was different. They took me to a high-security psychiatric clinic in Koppern and they locked me in a room with lights that never dimmed, even during sleeping hours. A fat, balding man would peer in on me every twenty minutes or so, and he wondered why I had not undressed; why it was that I lay on my bed in the cold, tie undone, shoes in place. I didn't plan to stay.
They sent in a battery of "doctors" and psychiatrists to probe, prod and test me. They could find nothing wrong with me, and I still have the report to prove it. Psychiatric health: A-plus. Extremely high IQ. As sharp as a whistle.
Isn't that fucking amazing? You're feeling depressed and you end up in the most nightmarish, hellish scenario you can ever imagine just because you told a friend about your fears for the future of Europeans and how you're hurting deep down inside for yourself and your own People [Whites].
Do you know what they did? They said, "Okay, here's your 'get out of jail free card', but (and there's always a fucking 'but' in your face when that's the last thing you want to see), "You take these, and you take them without question."
So I did.
Do you know what they were? Paxil (Paroxetine). Never heard of this garbage ever before in my life. I was online for 24-hours-straight trying to figure out what was going on inside of my head. I did not know who the hell the I was. I did not even know I had started to drink again. They put me on this pharmaceutical trip, and I went wheeling from one bar to another and my guess is I drank the whole of Bad Homburg dry.
I have no real, quality spectacles anymore. I smashed them by falling over simply because some girl said, "Hi, Mikey." I just span around and my face hit the concrete. I had been off the booze for three days and eventually flushed those tablets down the toilet after four weeks. I can't even remember whether this "Hi, Mikey" happened to me here in Burgholzhausen, Bad Homburg, Switzerland, Berlin or even in Shanghai City. Could have been anywhere. Really. Name that planet.
I purchased two pairs of replacement spectacles at Woolworths, and I have to keep swapping them out because I get a headache after each shift. I can neither read nor write for more than ten minutes without losing vision. I've always had migraines, but now they're worse than ever before. I now have a tremor in my right hand and it shows no sign of abating. That Paxil was designed to destroy my brain cells. Thanks ZigZog Zionist Jewvandal Swine!!!
As my readers will know, my Internet connection was recently shut down for six days. When they can't win, they [The Jewvandali] kick the game board.
The "German" government and their ZigZog Zionist and Jewpiggish puppet masters have a new weapon in their armory to be used against those who tell the Truth about suppressed history and the illegal European Soviet Union: denial of internet access, without warning and without any apparent remedy.
It is a cruel cut. In all of my discussions with my ISP and the infrastructure 'providers', T-Com, the message came through loud and clear: We reconnect at our leisure. You're not welcome here. You're making waves. Stop writing the things you're writing and everything will be just fine.
What would Billie say?
Mike James, an Englishman, is a former freelance journalist resident in Germany since 1992 with additional long-haul stays in East Africa, Poland and Switzerland. 88!
|July 4th, 2008||#18|
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston, MA
Xuxa Rihhia, a PM or e-mail would be nice. 88 Bob
"Is Tusa Mo Thus Chatha Agus Mo Chaisce Cogaidh"
|August 12th, 2008||#20|
Join Date: Sep 2005
“Need' now means wanting someone else's money. 'Greed' means wanting to keep your own. 'Compassion' is when a politician arranges the transfer.”
― Joseph Sobran