Christian Oestmann and German Senator Senator Iris Spranger enemies of Free Speech

[DavidM]

Statement by the Coordination Team for MERA25 and DiEM25 in Germany

The Berlin Senate is attempting to deport four international residents, three of whom are European citizens — Cooper Longbottom, Kasia Wlaszczyk, Shane O’Brien, and Roberta Murray — for their participation in pro-Palestine protests. None of them have been convicted of a crime. The accusations against them are flimsy, vague, and largely unsubstantiated — yet they are being targeted by the German state in a blatant act of political repression.

We name this for what it is: a fascist, authoritarian attack on fundamental democratic rights — orchestrated by Berlin’s Senator for the Interior, Iris Spranger (SPD), and enforced through the Senate Department for the Interior and Sport, with the complicity of the State Office for Immigration under Engelhard Mazanke.

Internal documents now made public reveal that these deportation orders are politically motivated and were pushed through despite legal objections from within Berlin’s own immigration office. Even the head of the State Office for Immigration, Engelhard Mazanke, and his colleague Silke Buhlmann raised alarm: there were no criminal convictions, no real threat to public order, and no legal grounds to revoke EU citizens’ freedom of movement. But their concerns were overruled by Christian Oestmann of the Senate Department for the Interior, under the leadership of Senator Iris Spranger (SPD), citing so-called public order and Staatsräson — Germany’s state doctrine of support for Israel.
https://diem25.org/political-cleansing- ... aatsrason/

The political climate in Germany continues to be sick...suppression of discussion of the so-called Holocaust is now coupled with banning discussion of the extermination of Palestinians. The irony is painful

[Archie]

This has been happening in the US as well. Jews have traditionally been one of the main forces behind liberal immigration policies, but if you are anti-Israel they suddenly turn into jackbooted border hawks.

Germany apparently does have some speech protections in their constitution, but it is more limited than in the US. There is something about right to opinion, but it is more narrow than in the US. And in practice things seem much worse. There were some clips going around recently of German police raiding people's homes for making racist posts online.



Here's a video that discusses some of the laws around speech in Germany.

[slob]

What was it all for then?
We really would of been better off under Germans then, it could not be any worse than this horrid zionist run world?

[Hektor]

This has been happening in the US as well. Jews have traditionally been one of the main forces behind liberal immigration policies, but if you are anti-Israel they suddenly turn into jackbooted border hawks.

Germany apparently does have some speech protections in their constitution, but it is more limited than in the US. There is something about right to opinion, but it is more narrow than in the US. And in practice things seem much worse. There were some clips going around recently of German police raiding people's homes for making racist posts online.



Here's a video that discusses some of the laws around speech in Germany.

The text of the (provisorical) constitution for Germany is a bit ambiguous on the free speech issue. Indeed they say that you got free speech unless there is a law against what you are saying... Actually rendering it rather useless. And there is legislation against "Holocaust Denial". So no free speech there, but the dimwit German will believe that there is....


As for the youtube video, the woman making it is a staunch Holocaust Believer having even made videos on this....

[TlsMS93]

The text of the (provisorical) constitution for Germany is a bit ambiguous on the free speech issue. Indeed they say that you got free speech unless there is a law against what you are saying... Actually rendering it rather useless. And there is legislation against "Holocaust Denial". So no free speech there, but the dimwit German will believe that there is....


As for the youtube video, the woman making it is a staunch Holocaust Believer having even made videos on this....

Freedom of expression is not freedom of aggression, or that it is not an absolute right. This is what many argue to justify this contradiction. In the case of Germany, they appeal to “public peace”, that is, you can only speak or defend something that does not disturb the interests of others. This is bizarre because there is no ideology or policy that wants to please everyone, politics in itself is hate and freedom of expression is politics.

[Hektor]

The text of the (provisorical) constitution for Germany is a bit ambiguous on the free speech issue. Indeed they say that you got free speech unless there is a law against what you are saying... Actually rendering it rather useless. And there is legislation against "Holocaust Denial". So no free speech there, but the dimwit German will believe that there is....


As for the youtube video, the woman making it is a staunch Holocaust Believer having even made videos on this....

Freedom of expression is not freedom of aggression, or that it is not an absolute right. This is what many argue to justify this contradiction. In the case of Germany, they appeal to “public peace”, that is, you can only speak or defend something that does not disturb the interests of others. This is bizarre because there is no ideology or policy that wants to please everyone, politics in itself is hate and freedom of expression is politics.

It isn't 'aggression' in any reasonable legal sense, if I express disbelief of something that was the object of atrocity propaganda during a major war in history. Now they will insist that 'this was proven in court'.... Well, it wasn't. And the content of the trials is part of the reasons for disputing it.


Public peace... Well, if people learn that they have been taken for a ride, humiliated and fleeced based on this, they naturally will be upset about this....

[TlsMS93]

It isn't 'aggression' in any reasonable legal sense, if I express disbelief of something that was the object of atrocity propaganda during a major war in history. Now they will insist that 'this was proven in court'.... Well, it wasn't. And the content of the trials is part of the reasons for disputing it.

Public peace... Well, if people learn that they have been taken for a ride, humiliated and fleeced based on this, they naturally will be upset about this....

There is some claim that Holocaust revisionism is hate speech or anti-Semitism because it is based on the assumption that it is a Jewish hoax and therefore evokes the so-called Jewish conspiracy to dominate the world, just like the Protocols, and therefore, when all is said and done, it is hate speech.

Of course, this is a contortionism; it is not necessary to evoke that it was a Jewish hoax, just as refuting the luminiferous ether was not an attack on science; only sick minds make that connection.

[Hektor]

It isn't 'aggression' in any reasonable legal sense, if I express disbelief of something that was the object of atrocity propaganda during a major war in history. Now they will insist that 'this was proven in court'.... Well, it wasn't. And the content of the trials is part of the reasons for disputing it.

Public peace... Well, if people learn that they have been taken for a ride, humiliated and fleeced based on this, they naturally will be upset about this....

There is some claim that Holocaust revisionism is hate speech or anti-Semitism because it is based on the assumption that it is a Jewish hoax and therefore evokes the so-called Jewish conspiracy to dominate the world, just like the Protocols, and therefore, when all is said and done, it is hate speech.

Of course, this is a contortionism; it is not necessary to evoke that it was a Jewish hoax, just as refuting the luminiferous ether was not an attack on science; only sick minds make that connection.

Yes, I recall that reasoning as well. Essentially, when you dispute an otherwise asserted narrative, you are suggesting that someone is lying. In this case you are suggesting that Jews and other groups that push the narrative are lying (or simply in error). And that apparently is "Anti-Semitism".... You could of course play this with any narrative. And then use the cop out that that disputing it is 'hate' towards the group that is asserting it (or is benefitting from it). In conclusion that would however be a full shut down of free speech altogether. And as far as the Holocaust Narrative goes, you could also claim that this is hateful towards Germans - Indeed it turns out it actually is.... Yet, it can still be asserted. I think this is sufficient to demonstrate that something is fundamentally wrong here...

[TlsMS93]

Yes, I recall that reasoning as well. Essentially, when you dispute an otherwise asserted narrative, you are suggesting that someone is lying. In this case you are suggesting that Jews and other groups that push the narrative are lying (or simply in error). And that apparently is "Anti-Semitism".... You could of course play this with any narrative. And then use the cop out that that disputing it is 'hate' towards the group that is asserting it (or is benefitting from it). In conclusion that would however be a full shut down of free speech altogether. And as far as the Holocaust Narrative goes, you could also claim that this is hateful towards Germans - Indeed it turns out it actually is.... Yet, it can still be asserted. I think this is sufficient to demonstrate that something is fundamentally wrong here...

Apparently only Jews have the right to be offended by those who challenge their claims. In the case of climate change, scientists who argue that man is the cause of these changes are not asking for arrest or cancellation in the media, but rather for a better scientific approach to present to the public, something that Jews and their organizations do not want because, after decades of freedom with impunity in their media, they have not been able to win the hearts and minds of everyone, and this remnant keeps them awake at night, because they are the most hard-core, organized and systematic group. So they resort to their characteristic victimization and use of the political system to distort a right that is essentially universal, which is freedom of expression and of the press. Preventing investigations or asking inconvenient questions is an aggression, that is hate. They believe that if the Holocaust is refuted, new Treblinkas will happen in the future.

[Eye of Zyclone]

We name this for what it is: a fascist, authoritarian attack on fundamental democratic rights — orchestrated by Berlin’s Senator for the Interior, Iris Spranger (SPD), and enforced through the Senate Department for the Interior and Sport, with the complicity of the State Office for Immigration under Engelhard Mazanke.

Calling it "fascist" is a clear sign of being brainwashed by the propaganda which justifies the democratic dictates about prohibiting anything that Jews don't like. Just saying. No offense intended...