Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Kein Generalverdacht bei Einzeltätern?

Januar 25, 2023

„Die Verbrechen Einzelner sind aber niemals auf Bevölkerungsgruppen, Religionen, Staatsangehörigkeiten zurückzuführen.“

Der CDU-Bürgermeister von Würzburg hat mit seiner Aussage zwar nicht völlig unrecht. So vernünftig und mäßigend sind deutsche Politiker und Medien jedoch immer nur bei islamischen Einzeltätern.

Bei Terroristen, die nicht bei einer Organisation angebunden sind, handelt es sich tatsächlich oft eher um Amokläufer, die ihre Taten lediglich politisch verbrämt haben. Dieser „falsche Terror“ kommt sowohl bei islamischen als auch bei rechten Tätern vor, auch wenn die psychischen Krankheiten fast immer nur bei islamischen Einzeltätern diagnostiziert werden.

Der rechte deutsche Einzeltäter von Hanau war wohl ähnlich irre wie der islamische somalische Einzeltäter von Würzburg oder der aus Gaza stammende Zug-Killer. Obwohl Hanau und Würzburg nicht mehr als 100 Kilometer Luftlinie von einander entfernt sind, lagen Welten zwischen der gemäßigten Reaktion nach Würzburg und der von oben verordneten Stimmungsmache nach Hanau.

Nach Einzelfällen von psychisch kranken Muslimen wie in Würzburg ein von „muslimischem Hass“ ausgehendes Bedrohungsszenario gegen alle Nichtmuslime zu beschwören, würde (zu Recht) als „rechte Hetze“ verurteilt werden.

Umgekehrt wird freilich nicht darauf verzichtet, Irrsinnstaten wie eine Amokfahrt in Kanada sofort für das Narrativ der muslimischen Opferrolle und den Aufruf zum weltweiten Kampf gegen „rechten Hass“ auszuschlachten.

Why had Covid started in Wuhan? Why had AIDS started in NY and California?

Januar 24, 2023

If a laboratory accident could be proven to be the reason for the corona pandemic, not only Chinese researchers but also the scientific establishment in the USA would be held accountable, especially since the „gain-of-function“ research in the Chinese „Wuhan Institute for Virology “ presumably hab been funded by Dr. Fauci-led US National Institutes of Health through the EcoHealth Alliance. Because of this, the laboratory theory has been condemned as „unscientific“ from the start, while efforts are still being made to make transmission by a natural zoonosis seem „scientifically probable“.

In the case of SARS-CoV-1, the intermediate host from which the transmission to humans had taken place was discovered after just a few months. Since this intermediate host could not be found this time, direct transmission without an intermediate host is probably the more likely option. There are up to 40,000 „wet markets“ in China selling animals, but only one WIV that collected bats for research into corona viruses.

Like SARS-CoV-2, HIV originates from an animal virus. As with Corona, it is unclear how the chimpanzee virus really got to New York and California, where it was first noticed in 1981.

With AIDS the wilderness theory has prevailed, according to which AIDS would have jumped to humans through Central African bush hunters and would then have been spread to the USA via Haiti.

The Haiti-Zaire-hypothesis, which has become the official theory, doesn’t convince me for many reasons. AIDS until the middle of the 1980s was only slightly widespread in Africa. For the period from 1959 to the late 1970s, only 3 samples were found (2 of them by Michael Worobey) that were proven to contain HIV. And even in the early 1980s, only very few HIV-positive blood samples were subsequently discovered in Africa.

When a mysterious disease of the immune system among homosexuals was noticed in New York, San Francisco and Los Angeles in 1981, the first suspicion, for very understandable reasons, fell on an experimental hepatitis B vaccination campaign that was carried out from 1978 to 1980 with 1,038 homosexuals as a voluntary test group.

That (first and only) plasma vaccine in history was made from the plasma of homosexuals suffering from hepatitis, precisely from the blood of the first AIDS risk group (which was of course still unknown at the time). Research with chimpanzees played a central role in the development of the vaccine.

Despite the outbreak of AIDS among American homosexuals in the US metropolises of Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York, as a head of the NIH, Fauci immediately pointed the finger at Haiti to divert suspicion of a vaccination experiment that had been funded by his own agency.

Fauci claimed at minute 31 that Zaire (now Congo) had the same AIDS rate as then San Francisco. True, this statement is not literally wrong. In fact, in 1984 a figure of 5,000 infected people in the Congo was assumed. But just as much for the entire Congo as for San Francisco alone. Fauci’s testimony, however, created the impression (presumably deliberately) that all of Congo was like the AIDS hotspot of San Francisco.

According to a Michael Worobey study, the Haiti thesis was allegedly confirmed by the molecular structure of 5 HIV samples from 1982 Haitian immigrants. However, there are no older samples from Haiti to actually show that the Haitian HIV strain should be older than the American one. In fact, molecules cannot tell what country they came from unless older samples can be found to refer to. The oldest American samples do not come from Haitians, but from US participants in the 1978 hepatitis study. But with his calculations the young scientific Michael Worobey played exactly the music the scientific establishment wanted to hear at the time.

It is true that older HIV infections were actually detected later in the Congo (2 of the 3 detected by Michael Worobey). However, it is by no means certain whether these HIV infections were natural precursors to the American epidemic. Until the emergence of AIDS in the United States, there were only unnoticed sporadic cases in Africa.

AIDS only became a pandemic in Africa in the late 1980s. And not in the Congo, but in southern Africa, where the plasma vaccine (after sales in the USA had stopped in 1985) was distributed to Africano children as a “gift of Merck“ until the mid-1990s.

There is another very strong argument against early unnoticed contagion in Haiti. A plasma center for the American market was operated in Haiti in the 1970s. Plasma donors were members of the typical AIDS risk groups. If Haiti had been infected in the 1970s, American hemophiliacs (rather than homosexuals) would have been the first at-risk group as recipients of Haitian plasma donations.

Even well-known (at that time still objective) media such as the Washington Post assumed that Haitians were infected by American sex tourists and not vice versa, since AIDS in Haiti initially affected people with homosexual contacts and only over the years has an African pattern with mainly heterosexual infections.

It wasn’t just the Haitians, who were believed to have been infecting American sex tourists in the late 1970s, who were hit hard, but the homosexuals themselves, who had served as guinea pigs in a scientific experiment and subsequently contracted an extremely stigmatizing „own fault“ disease.

Why weren’t homosexual associations vehemently demanding information about the vaccination campaign, which was suspected at the beginning as cause for the new disease?

The homosexual associations, which were very young at the time, were heavily involved in the series of experimental HBV-vaccinations and viewed and supported the campaign as a noble and good project for the benefit of the young community, which was still heavily discriminated against. They had been made into accomplices who didn’t dare question the good cause they were committed to along with the nice doctors.

Here we are back in the present. Anyone who has campaigned for the vaccination or even enforced it with coercive measures can hardly turn back, even if they themselves should become a victim. Like the homosexual organizations in the HBV vaccine experiment, our establishment has been made an accomplice. Should our corona vaccination experiment go wrong like the HBV vaccination experiment, our establishment would probably react in a similar way to how the homosexual associations reacted to HIV.

Wie würde ORF über Hunter Trump berichten?

Januar 18, 2023

Im ORF wird das neueste Kapitel im Biden-Skandal als „Hunter-Hasser nehmen neuen Anlauf“ geframed. Man stelle sich die Berichterstattung im ORF vor, wenn Hunter Trumps Sohn wäre.

Der ORF kommt zwar nicht ganz drumherum, die Fakten anzustreifen und räumt ein, dass der arme Hunter 5 Jahre lang monatlich über 50.000 $ im Monat von einem ukrainischen Energie-Konzern kassieren durfte. Dass Hunter Biden außer seinen Namen keinerlei Qualifikationen für den Job hatte und für einen „Big Guy“ 10% Provision vorgesehen waren, lässt der ORF allerdings weg. Wäre Trump der mutmaßliche „Big Guy“ hätte der ORF wohl kaum darauf verzichtet, darüber ausführlich zu spekulieren.

Die Unterdrückung der Laptop-Berichterstattung durch das FBI (welches den Laptop bereits ein Jahr hatte und daher ganz genau wußte, dass der Laptop echt und keine „Russian Disinformation“ war) wird vom ORF als „gefundenes Fressen für die Republikaner“ serviert. Die Unterdrückung der NY-Post-Story wird damit gerechtfertigt, dass die NY Post eine „Boulevardzeitung“ wäre und seriösen Journalisten keine seriösen Quellen präsentiert worden wären. Dass das FBI den Laptop bereits seit einem Jahr hatte und daher ganz genau wissen musste, dass es sich nicht um „Russian Disinformation“ handelte, wird dem ORF-Leser nicht erklärt.

Die vom FBI angeordnete und vom politmedialen Establishment gedeckte Twitter-Zensur vor der US-Wahl wird in keinem Zusammenhang zum Ausgang der Wahl gestellt und als kleiner, aufgrund drohender „Hackingversuche der Russen“ nachvollziehbarer Ausrutscher dargestellt, für den sich das alte Twitter-Management ohnehin längst entschuldigt hätte.

Am Ende wird noch tüchtig Mitleid für den armen, drogensüchtigen Präsidenten-Sohn geheischt, der von herzlosen, rechtsextremen Republikanern selbst in seiner neuen Karriere als Künstler gehasst werde, was beim amerikanischen Volk, das drogensüchtige, aber dafür hochbegabte, geschäftstüchtige Präsidentensöhne liebe, jedoch nach hinten losgehen könne.

Why did a pandemic caused by a chimpanzee virus start in NYC and California?

Januar 16, 2023

Although the AIDS pandemic undeniably began in June 1981 in the United States and the oldest samples from people confirmed to have AIDS came from participants in a 1978 hepatitis B study, the former Belgian Congo is now considered the cradle of AIDS.

According to the theory accepted by science today, HIV would have been brought to the United States by a Haitian around 1969. After Haiti, HIV would have come from Congo in the mid-1960s, where after the end of the colonial period, „well-educated“ Haitians would have been hired as „experts“ to replace the Belgian colonizers.

In Africa, HIV would have jumped from chimpanzees to humans as early as around 1920 through a cut wound by a bush hunter (although humans in Africa had probably been hunting chimpanzees millions of years before that). After that, HIV gradually spread unnoticed in Africa.

The problem, however, is that these data cannot be substantiated by blood or tissue samples, but only on the basis of back calculations of the mutations. In fact, the oldest evidence of HIV in America is no older than 1978 (which can also be seen in the picture of the hypothetical distribution) and does not come from Haitians but from American homosexuals, all of whom had participated in an experimental HBV vaccination course.

It is true that older HIV infections were actually detected later in the Congo. However, it is by no means certain whether these HIV infections were natural precursors to the American epidemic. Until the emergence of AIDS in the United States, there were only unnoticed sporadic cases in Africa. AIDS only became a pandemic in Africa in the late 1980s. And not in the Congo, where the rate has always remained relatively low, but in Kenya, which is visited by western sex tourists, and in southern Africa, where the plasma vaccine (after sales in the USA had stopped in 1985) was distributed to Africano children as a “gift of Merck“ until the mid-1990s.

Why has the Haiti-Africa-thesis been accepted so uncritically by the scientific world?

In Africa, the first documented HIV blood samples from 1959 and 1960 from Kinshasa, Congo, had been linked to an experimental polio vaccination that had just been carried out in Congo in 1957-1960. A chimpanzee camp with up to 400 test animals was set up especially for the experimental vaccination campaign.

The young evolutionary biologist Worobey made a significant contribution to ending the discussion about the origin of AIDS and finally moving it back to Africa in the 1920s. So he managed to acquit „the science“ of the late 20th century of any suspicion of a possible blame for creating the biggest pandemic of the 20th century. With his calculations the young scientific played exactly the music the scientific establishment wanted to hear at the time. Worobey’s calculations placed the emergence of HIV in both Africa (1920) and America (1969) in time periods that were very convenient for the scientific world.

Worobey was probably not the first to step into the breach for Fauci or „science“. Even before Worobey there was an accidental discovery of a frozen blood sample allegedly taken in Kinshasa in 1959, which had been stored in the USA. However, this find was on very shaky ground due to its isolation. With two additional finds from 1960 and 1966, which are said to also come from Kinshasa, Worobey increased the effort for the Congo and a much older origin enormously.

Worobey also helped to cement the Haiti-Thesis by presenting the molecular structure of 5 HIV samples from Haitian immigrants from 1982 as the oldest American ones. However, there are no older samples trom Haiti to actually show that the Haitian HIV strain should be older than the American one. In fact, molecules cannot tell what country they came from unless older samples can be found to refer to. The oldest American samples do not come from Haitians, but from US participants in the 1978 hepatitis study.

That (first and only) plasma vaccine in history was made from the plasma of homosexuals suffering from hepatitis, i.e. precisely from the blood of the first AIDS risk group (which was of course still unknown at the time). Research with chimpanzees played a central role in the development of the vaccine.

1.083 gay men were used as guinea pigs to test the new vaccine in a controlled clinical trial from 1978 to 1980.

The Haiti hypothesis, which has become the official theory, doesn’t convince me for many reasons. AIDS was initially only slightly widespread in Africa. For the period from 1959 to the late 1970s, only 3 samples were found that were proven to contain HIV. And even in the early 1980s, only very few HIV-positive blood samples were subsequently discovered in Africa.

The number of „experts“ from Haiti (most Haitians were probably no better educated than Congolese) was probably very manageable. Had AIDS actually been widespread in the Congo since 1920, AIDS would not have been noticed in Haiti/USA, but long before that among Belgians who had returned home after the end of the colonial period.

AIDS was not reported in Haiti until the outbreak in the US, and no subsequent blood samples were found that would confirm older infections. Only after the discovery of the affected homosexuals in 1982 was a cluster discovered in Haitians living in the USA. In the USA they belonged to the supposed risk groups of the „4Hs“ (homosexuals, heroin addicts, hemophiliacs, Haitians). While Haitians were indeed more likely to be affected by AIDS than the US average, they were not more than the black US average.

The Haiti thesis is based on the assumption that Haitian UN employees, who would have come to the country as experts after the Belgian colonial power had left, would have contracted the disease there and then brought the disease back to Haiti on their return.

That thesis is allegedly confirmed by the molecular structure of 5 HIV samples from Haitian immigrants in 1982. However, there are no older samples from Haiti to actually show that the Haitian HIV strain should be older than the American one. In fact, molecules cannot tell what country they came from unless older samples can be found to refer to. The oldest American samples do not come from Haitians, but from US participants in the 1978 hepatitis study.

There is another very strong argument against early unnoticed contagion in Haiti. A plasma center for the American market was operated in Haiti in the 1970s. Plasma donors were members of the typical AIDS risk groups. If Haiti had been infected in the 1970s, American hemophiliacs (rather than homosexuals) would have been the first at-risk group as recipients of Haitian plasma donations.

In Africa, the leap from chimpanzees to humans probably happened several times as well. Why not in the New World, where chimpanzees had been used for vaccine development?

I believe that the developers of the vaccines acted in the best of intentions. In the case of polio, a horrific killer virus was indeed defeated. In the case of HBV, however, this can only be said with difficulty.

Discovered by Baruch Blumberg in 1966, the virus had been with us for at least 4,500 years, according to Bronze Age finds, without causing much drama for humankind. Viral jaundice was a fringe phenomenon in the USA in the 1970s (like hepatitis C is today) and was very rarely fatal for those affected. However, the relatively harmless disease was stylized as a killer virus to justify the risky development of the vaccine. If the vaccine victory over HBV did in fact lead to the HIV pandemic, it definitely wouldn’t have been a good trade.

Would China be more honest than Fauci?

Januar 12, 2023

I got vaccinated at the first opportunity because I basically trust the prescriptions of conventional medicine. Normally, scientific medicine delivers results that represent a clear advantage over other healing methods, even when medical interventions sometimes do not work themselves or have undesirable side effects. If the benefits outweigh the odds by 51%, you’ve won in the long run.

Although I don’t like it as a supporter of scientific medicine, not only may Covid have been created by scientific medicine itself, but the virus has often hit countries that otherwise have a clear advantage because of their modern healthcare system harder than normally disadvantaged poor countries.

It is part of science to accept facts, instead of insisting more ruthlessly on methods that, for once, don’t work so well and defaming opponents as „deniers“ and „endangerers“, the less successful one’s own methods are. The success of the vaccination is not so evident that it would justify compulsory vaccination or discrimination against vaccination opponents.

However, trust in science is lost precisely when scientists allow themselves to be incited by politics to play miracle healers who have an answer to every question. The most extreme example is Dr. Fauci, who presented himself as a major corona guru but brazenly denied before Congress his funding of the Gain of Function research in the Wuhan lab that may have led to the virus jumping to humans.

That Fauci had played a sorcerer’s apprentice in the research of corona viruses and had possibly contributed to transmission to humans through his research would not necessarily be condemnable for me, especially since he had probably acted with good intentions. Scientific research is always associated with risks. One cannot simply enjoy the benefits of science without ever expecting any disadvantages.

What is unacceptable, however, is the denial of facts in the name of scientific immaculateness. Anyone who thinks he has the legitimation to lie because he is on the right „scientific“ side is not behaving like a scientist, but like a cult guru. The black-and-white picture of good scientists and bad deniers, which has already been demonstrated in the case of climate change, is deeply unscientific. Skepticism has always been an important part of science.

If you consider how consistently the top American health official had denied the „Gain of Function“ funding, you can imagine how honestly the Chinese dictatorship would have dealt with a laboratory accident in October or November 2019.

Wo es rechte Radikale leichter haben?

Januar 12, 2023

Klimajünger sind so im Einklang mit dem Mainstream, dass eine normale Demonstration niemanden interessieren würde. Daher sind sie dazu verurteilt, sich immer nervigere Dinge auszudenken, um trotzdem als subversive Protestbewegung wahrgenommen zu werden.

Linksradikalismus zur Schau zu stellen, regt in Deutschland niemanden auf, wenn dabei nicht mindestens ein paar Steine oder Molotowcocktails auf die Polizei fliegen.

In dieser Hinsicht haben es „Coronaleugner“ und rechte Aktivisten viel leichter. Da werden stinknormale Demos oder ein Plakat mit „No Way“ als schlimme subversive Aktionen wahrgenommen.

Um als echter linker Genosse und respektabler Staatsfeind wahrgenommen zu werden, musste der RAF-Anwalt Hort Mahler selbst zum Terroristen werden.

Später wurde der linke Anwalt rechtsradikal. Da wurde das, was er als linker RAF-Anwalt über den rechten Staat behauptet hatte zur Realität. Horst Mahler wurde wegen falschen Meinungen verurteilt, ohne selbst zur Gewalt greifen zu müssen.

ÖR: Umverteilung von unten nach oben

Januar 6, 2023

Nach der Einspar-Forderung von Medienministerin Susanne Raab (ÖVP) gibt es Debatten um die künftige Finanzierung des ORF. Etwa zwei Drittel des 1-Milliarden-„Umsatzes“ sind Zwangsgebühren, die GIS. Henrike Brandstötter von den Neos fordert eine Haushaltsabgabe. Die gibt es etwa in Deutschland.

Dass gerade das deutsche Modell wohl das einzige System ist, das sogar noch teurer und missbrauchsanfälliger als das österreichische Modell ist, hat der Fall Schlesinger eindrucksvoll gezeigt:

Der Kleinverdiener muss einen beträchtlichen Teil seines Einkommens abgeben, um sich von den elitären Öffentlich-Rechtlichen verachten zu lassen. Die kleine Billa-Kassierin zahlt dabei ganz genau die gleiche Zwangsgebühr für den ORF wie ein ORF-Generaldirektor oder Starmoderator.

So leiderschaftlich sich die ORF-Genoss*innen für linke Themen wie Genderismus und Massenzuwanderung von „Geflüchteten“ einsetzten, so wenig stört sie jene extrem unsoziale Umverteilung von unten nach oben durch die an sie zu leistenden Zwangsgebühren.

Wenn man bei einem Einkommen von 1.000 € die 19 € für den ORF ablegen muss, bleibt wohl wenig über, um sich Medien zu leisten, die einen selbst interessieren. Ich würde gern sehen, wie linke Schnösel reagieren würden, wenn sie monatlich 2% ihres Einkommens zwangsweise für Servus TV ablegen müssten, und ein Wegscheider statt einem Wolf alle Zwangsgebührenzahler täglich auf ihre Kosten belehren würde.

Haiti as a scapegoat for HBV vaccination experiment?

Januar 2, 2023

When a mysterious disease of the immune system among homosexuals was noticed in New York, San Francisco and Los Angeles in 1981, the first suspicion, for very understandable reasons, fell on an experimental hepatitis B vaccination campaign that was carried out from 1978 to 1980 with 1,038 homosexuals as a voluntary test group.

That (first and only) plasma vaccine in history was made from the plasma of homosexuals suffering from hepatitis, i.e. precisely from the blood of the first AIDS risk group (which was of course still unknown at the time). Research with chimpanzees played a central role in the development of the vaccine.

In 1984 in the US, 70% of AIDS victims were homosexuals, 17% heroin addicts, 2% hemophiliacs, 5% Haitians. However, despite the strong suspicion regarding the plasma vaccine experiment in what was by far the largest risk group (70%), Fauci, who was already the top health bureaucrat at the time, pointed the finger at the much smaller risk group of Haitians (5%) and an “African Connection”.

Fauci claimed at minute 31 that Zaire (now Congo) had the same AIDS rate as then San Francisco. True, this statement is not literally wrong. In fact, in 1984 a figure of 5,000 infected people in the Congo was assumed. But just as much for the entire Congo as for San Francisco alone. Fauci’s testimony, however, created the impression (presumably deliberately) that all of Congo was like the AIDS hotspot of San Francisco. It is true that older HIV infections were actually detected later in the Congo. However, it is by no means certain whether these HIV infections were natural precursors to the American pandemic.

Until the emergence of AIDS in the US, there were only sporadic cases in Africa. AIDS only became a pandemic in Africa in the late 1980s. And not in the Congo, but mainly in southern Africa, where the plasma vaccine (after sales in the USA had stopped in 1985) was delivered as a „Gift of Merck“ to „protect“ children until the mid-1990s.

The Haiti thesis is based on the assumption that Haitian UN employees, who would have come to the country as experts after the Belgian colonial power had left, would have contracted the disease there and then brought the disease back to Haiti on their return.

That thesis is allegedly confirmed by the molecular structure of 5 HIV samples from Haitian immigrants in 1982. However, there are no older samples from Haiti to actually show that the Haitian HIV strain should be older than the American one. In fact, molecules cannot tell what country they came from unless older samples can be found to refer to. The oldest American samples do not come from Haitians, but from US participants in the 1978 hepatitis study.

There is another very strong argument against early unnoticed contagion in Haiti. A plasma center for the American market was operated in Haiti in the 1970s. Plasma donors were members of the typical AIDS risk groups. If Haiti had been infected in the 1970s, American hemophiliacs (rather than homosexuals) would have been the first at-risk group as recipients of Haitian plasma donations.

The science bureaucrat became a hero of science for his diversion from the vaccine experiment, even though cover-ups and speculative finger-pointing at Haiti and Africa are the antithesis of science.

Not only the Haitians, who had probably been infected by American sex tourists in the late 1970s, were badly played with, but also the homosexuals themselves, who had served as guinea pigs and then ended up with an extremely stigmatizing „self-blame“ disease.

Why weren’t homosexual associations demanding much more vehemently that the vaccination campaign, which was suspected at the beginning, be clarified?

The homosexual associations, which were very young at the time, were heavily involved in the vaccination series and viewed and supported the campaign as a noble and good project for the benefit of the young community, which was still heavily discriminated against. They had been made into accomplices who didn’t dare question the good cause they were committed to along with the nice doctors.

Here we are back in the present. Anyone who has campaigned for the vaccination or even enforced it with coercive measures can hardly turn back, even if they themselves should become a victim. Like the homosexual organizations in the HBV vaccine experiment, our establishment has been made an accomplice. Should our corona vaccination experiment go wrong like the HBV vaccination experiment, our establishment would probably react in a similar way to how the homosexual associations reacted to HIV.

Qatargate in Regenbogen-EU

Dezember 20, 2022

Warum förderte ausgerechnet Regenbogen-Schreck Katar die Regenbogen-Sozis im EU-Parlament?

Weil Katar mit den Regenbogen-Sozis seine wahre Islamisierungs-Agenda am besten durchsetzen kann.

Verglichen mit Chinas und Ukraines Investments in den BIG GUY waren die Katar-Schmiergeldzahlungen für die EU-Parlamentarier allerdings nur Peanuts.

Haben Journalisten mehr Meinungsfreiheit?

Dezember 17, 2022

Artikel 10 EMRK

(1) Jedermann hat Anspruch auf freie Meinungsäußerung. Dieses Recht schließt die Freiheit der Meinung und die Freiheit zum Empfang und zur Mitteilung von Nachrichten oder Ideen ohne Eingriffe öffentlicher Behörden und ohne Rücksicht auf Landesgrenzen ein.

Das Grundrecht auf Meinungsfreiheit, das alle politischen Meinungen und ihre Verfasser schützen sollte, unterscheidet nicht zwischen Journalisten und anderen Menschen, sondern steht allen gleichermaßen zu.

Das Gebot der Meinungsfreiheit gilt zwar grundsätzlich nur für den Staat, während Medien immer selbst bestimmen durften, welche Inhalte sie veröffentlichen wollten. Google, Facebook und Twitter (der kleinste Fisch im Big-Tech-Teich) sind jedoch nicht mit Medien, sondern eher mit Druckerpressen im Zeitungszeitalter zu vergleichen. Ohne freien Zugang zu den Druckerpressen hätte es keine Meinungsfreiheit gegeben.

Insofern ist die Zensur von Internetplattformen, die eine Monopolstellung haben, ein Problem. Aber sicher nicht erst seit Musk den einen oder anderen Establishment-Journalisten wegen Gefährdung durch Doxing (das auch in Deutschland strafbar ist) von Twitter verbannte.

Die Big Tech-Betreiber hatten sich nicht den Grundsätzen des westlich-demokratischen Verfassungen, sondern den Wünschen des tiefen Staates verpflichtet gefühlt, der dank Big Tech Zensur betreiben konnte, ohne sich selbst die Hände schmutzig machen zu müssen.