“One should take distance from the general public opinion”

When EU and NATO say “fake” they mean the elimination of our fundamental rights

by Willy Wimmer, former State Secretary of the Federal Minister of Defense.

It’s happening again: It is dangerous to have your own opinion. If your opinion deviates from the government guidelines, the EU regulations or the World Declaration Guidelines from Washington regarding NATO, then your opinion is attacked. Subsequently you lose the right to speak in the German Bundestag.1 Due to this “deviationism” you are urged to leave the German Bundestag. No wonder that the plenum of the German Bundestag is adopting more and more manifestations from the Kroll Opera2 or the People’s Parliament of unblessed memory. In Berlin, the Senate prohibits public events that uphold the diversity of opinions.3
The fundamental right of the citizen to freely form opinions as according to our Basic Law no longer occurs. The so-called leading media does not reflect the differing views of the German population. Subsequently the government does not have to deal with the various views in the country. The government in the style of a NATO Popular Front can do whatever it wants. In this way it can sanction deviant opinion in a totalitarian way. In this way, the Ministry of Justice has developed a “device for outsourcing censorship and immunity of NATO fakes”.4
According to the Basic Law, the sole political justification for the existence of political parties lies in popular opinion building and decision making of the German people. How this is degenerated, you can see every day. Within the parties the diversity of opinions no longer exist and are tailored to the leadership in Berlin. Undesirable opinions that threaten the Berlin person-power-cartel can be reported immediately. The party does not want to align with the public view, because that counteracts the given line. The immediate end of the political career is guaranteed. Opportunism is party line and now includes – with exceptions – the old parties represented in the Bundestag. If you don’t join in the general NATO war strategy you are blocked to be part of the government.
One may show off in attacking the current American President Trump, who has forbidden direct communication with his Russian counterpart Putin. Why? Because communication in matters threatens. These matters jeopardize the very existence of all mankind, at least of Central Europe, if they should be martially decided.
Actually, where were the Chancellor and the Federal President and those who by consensus today, show the new American President Trump the cold shoulder, when the predecessor presidents exclusively and alone had plunged the world into today’s misery? Including the coup in the Ukraine, which one probably has to answer for in order to justify the military deployment against the Russian Federation somehow. Since 1992 violation of promise and treaty has been Western policy, and in 1999 Belgrade was the first victim.
What is at stake this week, the British Prime Minister tried to make clear during a security speech in the style of an “island fury”. If you annually finance the BBC with hundreds of millions of pounds as an instrument of British foreign policy to have an instrument of global opinion dominance, then competition is unwanted. People are supposed to fall for the BBC and CNN hype, because the journalistically excellent program like the Russian RT is of greatest evil. Especially because RT in Europe and in the US allows opinions which do not follow the EU and NATO warpaths. Mrs Theresa May made it clear in her speech. It is about the superiority of the “Anglo-Saxon race” in the sense of Cecil Rhodes, which embodies itself today in the “new world order”. If a politician or a country goes against this line it must be eliminated, even if it is only in the form of RT or Sputnik. Ms May and others say “fake” and mean the removal of our fundamental rights.     •

    Editor’s comments:
1     In all parliamentary groups, the party leadership decides who gets the right to speak in the parliamentary debates. Members of the Bundestag who do not join the majority opinion in their group are not given the right to speak. This is what happened to Willy Wimmer among others after his criticism of German participation in the NATO war – being against international law – against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999. Although he was a proven defense and foreign politician, he was no longer allocated time to speak by the CDU/CSU parliamentary group. Then the only way to get to speak in the Bundestag, are so-called personal explanations.
2     The Berlin Kroll Opera was the venue of the Reichstag after the fire of the Reichstag building in February 1933. The place is synonymous with a parliament that is disempowered, forced into line and subordinated to a dictatorial executive.
3     The Berlin Senator for Culture Klaus Lederer (Die Linke) intervened and prevented an award ceremony for the publicist Ken Jebsen. Ken Jebsen was to be presented on 14 December 2017 the “Charlemagne Prize for Committed Literature and Journalism”. The prize is awarded by the Neue Rheinische Zeitung Online. On short notice, the organizers of the award ceremony terminated the room and the award ceremony was cancelled.
4     At the initiative of the German Minister of Justice Heiko Maas (SPD), shortly before the end of the last parliamentary term at the end of June 2017, the German Parliament and the Federal Council passed a law threatening social networks with high penalties if they publish so-called “hate speeches”. This is just one of the planned government measures against so-called “fake news”, “Russian propaganda” etc. Critics assume that the networks for fear of possible punishment delete or no longer allow not only actual violations of law, but also political criticism, for example, to the EU and NATO.

(Translation Current Concerns)