Monday, April 04, 2016

527 De vluchtelingen-crisis.

Een beetje off topic op dit moment, maar ik vond dit wel een prima artikel van een Duitse schrijver.
Als Nederlander denk ik er hetzelfde over:

When I say that the German people have an obligation to help, I mean that the German people as a community of individuals have an obligation to help those in need, because all the individuals that constitute the German people have this obligation as a person. Just because they are a person, not because they are German.

Our European neighbours all have exactly the same obligation, as has everybody else. That does not mean that we have to take in refugees from all over the world no matter how many might come. But it means that we need to help within our means. And just giving shelter is not enough.

These people are not victims of natural disasters, but victims of political decisions. For over a decade now “the West” lead by the USA have unleashed a campaign of terror on the Middle Eastern world.

Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria have been torn to pieces. People robbed of their security, livelihoods and futures flee and naturally wealthy EU nations are a magnet for them.

I think that we should first and foremost help them win back their homes and stop further destruction. And while Germany has not played much of an active combat role in these wars, Germany has done very little to stop its allies. And actually done a lot to assist the war efforts.

Rammstein is one of the most important US military installations outside the USA. On German soil.

Article 26 GG:

(1) Acts tending to and undertaken with intent to disturb the peaceful relations between nations, especially to prepare for a war of aggression, shall be unconstitutional. They shall be made a criminal offence.

The military campaign in Iraq in 2003 without any doubt qualifies as a war of aggression and has deeply disturbed “the peaceful relations between nations”. So by the standards of German constitutional law even taking part in the preparations for such a campaign is a criminal offence.

One might think that allowing and subsidizing a huge military base in Germany that is used for such a war of aggression could be a problem for those responsible. But apparently it is not.

This is not even discussed.

If the Germans took their laws more seriously and demanded respect for them, there might be less chaos and suffering in the Middle East and fewer refugees to deal with.

My point is that the Germans have to work towards solving the problem at it’s root, in so far as that it concerns them, and in so far as they have influence. Most of the migrants are not on the move because they want to plunder EU social security systems and assault white women.They are running from the consequences of crimes our supposed “friends” committed. And we did not even try to stop them.

We have, in a way, become the wiedergänger (opniew tot leven gekomen persoon) of the character that we have been conditioned to loathe. The spineless object that is too afraid to stand up to the intimidating Nazi bully, too afraid even to acknowledge the existence of the Nazi bully.

Instead of just taking in the victims of the Empire we need to stand up to the Empire and stop being a part of it. The first step would be removing foreign military bases from our soil and leaving NATO. Followed by war crime tribunals. That would be my Alternative for Germany.


1 comment:

  1. Bellingcat is de cover up die bij geen enkele false flag mag ontbreken. We zouden dit dwaalspoor beter negeren want iedere vorm van aandacht voor deze werknemer van de Atlantic Counsel leidt alleen maar af in de zoektocht naar de waarheid achter de aanslag op MH17.

    Dit schrijft Sergey Mastepanov in de inleiding van het artikel waar ik al eerder naar linkte:

    "It is possible to not only fake certain photos, but to also fake certain videos with the help of software. Just because the source of the material is a social media site, it does not mean that the material is authentic by default nor that the uploader doesn’t serve someone’s interests. Social media can be used to anonymously spread disinformation, fake photos and videos. It also allows certain entities to upload their own fake material, to show it later at a press conference and claim that its source is social media.

    In order to determine the authenticity of a video uploaded to the internet, it is helpful to first check the account’s activity and creation date and to find out if it is possible to reach the author. If the account is new, anonymous, has no activity, doesn’t respond to messages, then the account was made for only one purpose — to anonymously spread the video and to not answer any questions. Of course, the video itself is more important."

    Hoe zoiets werkt zien we bijvoorbeeld terug bij de video over de BUK in Snizhne:

    Sergey Mastepanov:

    "The video was uploaded to YouTube by an anonymous account within a few hours after MH17 was shot down. The account was created on the same day and has no other activity. The video’s title said that this is the weapon that shot down MH17, as well as the place (Snizhne), and the date (July 17, 2014). The uploader removed the video within a few hours. The head of the Security Service of Ukraine showed the video the next day at a press conference."

    En over de clip van de BUK bij Zuhres:

    "The video was uploaded on July 17, 2014 on YouTube, had no description, and had “IMG 0647” as title. The uploader added the description between July 23 and July 27, 2014, which said, “coordinates of this and other videos: [link].” The account is anonymous and has no other videos. Between July 17 and July 22, 2014, a Twitter user named 3Andryu sent a message to a blogger named Ukraine@War that had the link to the Zuhres video and details, such as the coordinates, the date and time the video was recorded at. The tweet was retweeted by another user to Bellingcat on July 22."

    Van die dingen....