In the latest victory against right-wing extremism, police officers pull a 16 year-old girl out of chemistry class and advise her to stop posting Smurf-themed AfD-friendly content to TikTok
In the latest victory against right-wing extremism, police officers pull a 16 year-old girl out of chemistry class and advise her to stop posting Smurf-themed AfD-friendly content to TikTok
I wrote in February about the plans of Interior Minister Nancy Faeser (SPD) to combat “right-wing extremism,” by re-purposing the regulatory state to restrict the speech, travel and economic activity of people with inconvenient opinions. She wants to use state resources to intimidate “those who mock the state,” and she has proposed legal innovations to interfere with the bank accounts and finances not only of those who break the law, but also of those who represent “a potential threat” and who exercise undue “social influence.” At the same press conference, Thomas Haldenwang, head of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, announced his intention to police the “thought and speech patterns” of the German people, lest uncomfortable ideas and words “become part of our language.” Separately, Green Family Minister Lisa Paus addressed the problem of “
On the one hand, I feel very bad because that girl went through something which certainly was not pleasant. On the other hand, I smile because the powers that be just burned through another big, big chunk of political capital. My message to them: Keep going, you´re doing just fine...
Here in Canada the government is going for 25 years to life for hurting someone's feelings and house arrest if they think you might speak out of turn.
It seems the WEF and the globalists are serious in enforcing the narrative....er fighting the greatest threat of the century. in other words, the kulaks speaking up.
It's worth remembering that the State, in its purest essence, is the 'monopoly on violence'. It follows that its first purpose is to preserve its monopoly and shore up its own power.
ANY State, whether subject to democratic scrutiny or not, will not hesitate to use its monopoly on violence to preserve itself if it feels threatened.
Does the German State currently feel threatened? I think it does. I think it understands that it no longer governs (and is no longer capable of governing) with the full consent of the people. Thus threatened, it will resort to all and any means to protect itself from this threat. That includes ending democracy and imprisoning anyone whose speech contributes to an erosion of State control.
This is, by the way, the main reason why the State must always be kept in check, its resources limited and its reach curtailed. I cannot stress this enough: even in cases where a potential State intervention can yield unambiguously positive first order effects, we should think twice about letting it do so, because the second order effect of said intervention is always an increase in the State's own power and control and therefore an increase in its monopoly on violence.
They should ban thinking, because thinking is dangerous to our democracy. In addition, humor, voting, and (in the USA) white rural voters are also huge threats.
But I will say this: such actions have been stepped up all over the EU now, and I can't help think that it ihas to do with elections. Sweden's EXPO and SÄPO (the first, EXPO, is a suit-and-tie-bedecked Antifa-front that the Socialist Democrat party funds via taxes; the second is our Sicherheitsdienst, who uses EXPO as an "expert source") today announced that they are monitoring a "right-wing extremist group".
What it is, is a group of a dozen young teens who expresses dislike for Sweden's migration- and islamisation policies.
Meanwhile, at least 2 000 ISIS-soldiers live in Sweden, but are not deemed a threat.
I've posted this before - but it remains apposite. At an evening of sketches, long ago at my UK university, I recall an undergrad (to become a famous comedian) standing up at a stage podium to deliver, in cod-German accent, a speech about what "is now being done about people who'd served in the Nazi regime"; how the courts were working under new "focused legislation" to track down "these people" who are "everywhere"; how kindergartens, schools, colleges and universities were at last refining their recruitment and personnel policies to assist the state in recognising the "traits", often well-hidden, of "so-called" ex-Nazis; how businesses and local authorities and the media were winkling out "the guilty" at every level, working "fearlessly with discipline and efficient intelligence", to identify "the foulness in our midst...these people who infect our new Germany" with their "diseased sub-human thoughts". As the sketch continued the actor's initially sober voice grew heated. His words came faster, adjectives amplified and given deeper emphasis with rigid hand and then arm gestures. The sympathetic and virtuous figure who'd begun the speech had slowly transformed, growing grimmer, glistening, reddening, and in a grand finale, showing a face contorted into a mask of enthusiastic - almost joyful - rage; flecks of spittle reaching the front row of the audience; even a little foam at the mouth - near apoplexy, rage and hate personified "there will at last be a final solution to this problem!". The silence before the applause was deafening.
The Bill would create a new process for Canadians to report instances of online speech directed at them is discriminatory, with a quasi-judicial tribunal ordering fines up to $50,000, and up to $20,000 paid to complainants, who in some cases would remain anonymous. Findings would be based on a mere “balance of probabilities” standard rather than the criminal standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt;
The Bill would increase the maximum sentence for “advocating genocide” from five years in prison to life in prison. That means words alone could lead to life imprisonment;
The Bill would allow judges to put prior restraints on people who they believe on reasonable grounds may commit speech crimes in the future;
The Bill would require social media companies to “minimize the risk that users of the service will be exposed to harmful content” with the threat of massive fines if they don’t properly mitigate the risk; &
The mere threat of human rights complaints and fines for Canadians and social media companies will chill large amounts of otherwise protected speech.
This Monday we launched a new campaign that allows visitors to our site to use a form to tell their MP to stop this bill.
Please note that if you're in a riding with a vacancy you might not be able to contact your Member of Parliament. I'd encourage you to reach out to party leaders (including the PM) if you live in one of these ridings.
From the ridiculous inflatable snowman episode to this insane smurf cartoon incident… How much longer until the frog jumps out of the water? How much longer before boiling point is reached?
wow! minority report in action "... to prevent the girl in question from committing a crime." absolutely amazing to see that in action and, more shockingly, for it to be defended. and that they are "... so radicalised and deranged, as to inspire nervousness even among allies" is astounding, given what trudeau is doing in canada. on the other hand, these actions are in fact so out there that the fence sitters will soon not be anymore. it is likely a sign of the beginning of their end. thank you for sharing.
On the one hand, I feel very bad because that girl went through something which certainly was not pleasant. On the other hand, I smile because the powers that be just burned through another big, big chunk of political capital. My message to them: Keep going, you´re doing just fine...
"As Zimmermann denounced his student, his school was hosting an exhibit on 'Strengthening Democracy'..." of course it was.
Here in Canada the government is going for 25 years to life for hurting someone's feelings and house arrest if they think you might speak out of turn.
It seems the WEF and the globalists are serious in enforcing the narrative....er fighting the greatest threat of the century. in other words, the kulaks speaking up.
It's worth remembering that the State, in its purest essence, is the 'monopoly on violence'. It follows that its first purpose is to preserve its monopoly and shore up its own power.
ANY State, whether subject to democratic scrutiny or not, will not hesitate to use its monopoly on violence to preserve itself if it feels threatened.
Does the German State currently feel threatened? I think it does. I think it understands that it no longer governs (and is no longer capable of governing) with the full consent of the people. Thus threatened, it will resort to all and any means to protect itself from this threat. That includes ending democracy and imprisoning anyone whose speech contributes to an erosion of State control.
This is, by the way, the main reason why the State must always be kept in check, its resources limited and its reach curtailed. I cannot stress this enough: even in cases where a potential State intervention can yield unambiguously positive first order effects, we should think twice about letting it do so, because the second order effect of said intervention is always an increase in the State's own power and control and therefore an increase in its monopoly on violence.
They should ban thinking, because thinking is dangerous to our democracy. In addition, humor, voting, and (in the USA) white rural voters are also huge threats.
Under stress, like the present German government, people show you who they really are deep down- your politicians are fascists.
"A preventative educational talk".
I'm lost for words.
But I will say this: such actions have been stepped up all over the EU now, and I can't help think that it ihas to do with elections. Sweden's EXPO and SÄPO (the first, EXPO, is a suit-and-tie-bedecked Antifa-front that the Socialist Democrat party funds via taxes; the second is our Sicherheitsdienst, who uses EXPO as an "expert source") today announced that they are monitoring a "right-wing extremist group".
What it is, is a group of a dozen young teens who expresses dislike for Sweden's migration- and islamisation policies.
Meanwhile, at least 2 000 ISIS-soldiers live in Sweden, but are not deemed a threat.
I've posted this before - but it remains apposite. At an evening of sketches, long ago at my UK university, I recall an undergrad (to become a famous comedian) standing up at a stage podium to deliver, in cod-German accent, a speech about what "is now being done about people who'd served in the Nazi regime"; how the courts were working under new "focused legislation" to track down "these people" who are "everywhere"; how kindergartens, schools, colleges and universities were at last refining their recruitment and personnel policies to assist the state in recognising the "traits", often well-hidden, of "so-called" ex-Nazis; how businesses and local authorities and the media were winkling out "the guilty" at every level, working "fearlessly with discipline and efficient intelligence", to identify "the foulness in our midst...these people who infect our new Germany" with their "diseased sub-human thoughts". As the sketch continued the actor's initially sober voice grew heated. His words came faster, adjectives amplified and given deeper emphasis with rigid hand and then arm gestures. The sympathetic and virtuous figure who'd begun the speech had slowly transformed, growing grimmer, glistening, reddening, and in a grand finale, showing a face contorted into a mask of enthusiastic - almost joyful - rage; flecks of spittle reaching the front row of the audience; even a little foam at the mouth - near apoplexy, rage and hate personified "there will at last be a final solution to this problem!". The silence before the applause was deafening.
Tell your MP to stop Bill C-63!
The Bill would create a new process for Canadians to report instances of online speech directed at them is discriminatory, with a quasi-judicial tribunal ordering fines up to $50,000, and up to $20,000 paid to complainants, who in some cases would remain anonymous. Findings would be based on a mere “balance of probabilities” standard rather than the criminal standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt;
The Bill would increase the maximum sentence for “advocating genocide” from five years in prison to life in prison. That means words alone could lead to life imprisonment;
The Bill would allow judges to put prior restraints on people who they believe on reasonable grounds may commit speech crimes in the future;
The Bill would require social media companies to “minimize the risk that users of the service will be exposed to harmful content” with the threat of massive fines if they don’t properly mitigate the risk; &
The mere threat of human rights complaints and fines for Canadians and social media companies will chill large amounts of otherwise protected speech.
This Monday we launched a new campaign that allows visitors to our site to use a form to tell their MP to stop this bill.
You can do so here: https://theccf.ca/fix-c-63/
Please note that if you're in a riding with a vacancy you might not be able to contact your Member of Parliament. I'd encourage you to reach out to party leaders (including the PM) if you live in one of these ridings.
Evil always comes for two things first:
1. Children
2. History
They're just being efficient by killing two birds with one stone.
He pleaded that the police had only acted “to protect both the pupils and … the school,” and to prevent the girl in question from committing a crime.
--------
From who?
From the ridiculous inflatable snowman episode to this insane smurf cartoon incident… How much longer until the frog jumps out of the water? How much longer before boiling point is reached?
wow! minority report in action "... to prevent the girl in question from committing a crime." absolutely amazing to see that in action and, more shockingly, for it to be defended. and that they are "... so radicalised and deranged, as to inspire nervousness even among allies" is astounding, given what trudeau is doing in canada. on the other hand, these actions are in fact so out there that the fence sitters will soon not be anymore. it is likely a sign of the beginning of their end. thank you for sharing.
I am a chemist and am doubly upset she got pulled out of chemistry class!
Uuuccchhh. . . .Disgusting fascist behavior.
Holy moly. The monsters are back in power. Monsters don't ever relent. The only solution is their forced removal.