\n\t\t\tPosted by Monika<\/a> in Free Speech<\/a>, Germany<\/a>, Truth and Justice for Germans<\/a>, Uncategorized<\/a>, Ursula Haverbeck<\/a>, WW II Revisionism<\/a>\t\t<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ursula Haverbeck<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n What does the state have to hide when\n they relentlessly persecute a 92-year-old peaceful woman who has never \ndone anything that we normally associate with \u201ccriminal\u201d, never did \nanything violent, never stolen, never vandalized, never defrauded \nanyone, BUT has asked an inconvenient question over and over again. This\n woman has just been released from jail, having spent 2&1\/2 years \nbehind bars, and less than 2 weeks later was in court in Berlin for more\n charges. Her name is Ursula Haverbeck<\/strong>. The Law is the infamous Par. 130.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This 16-minute video (in German) by the Volkslehrer<\/em><\/strong> (Folk Teacher) was sent my way recently by an English-only speaker, who wondered what was said. What follows is by no means a word-for-word translation, but a description giving the gist of it. I highly recommend viewing at least the first 8 minutes of the video even if you do not speak German, because it is beautifully put together especially the music and scenes at the beginning, followed by the interesting scene of reporters chumming outside the courtroom\u2026 excluding the independent journalist-reporter Nikolai Nerling the Volkslehrer<\/em> <\/strong>\u2013 producer of this video.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~https:\/\/volkslehrer.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/2020-11-17_Haverbeck.mp4<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n The Volkslehrer asked Ursula Haverbeck \nfor an interview before court began, but she explained that she was not \nallowed to speak to anyone at this time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Then you see the throng of reporters \noutside the courtroom awaiting entry, all friendly with each other, \nlaughing and joking, until one masked woman asks \u201cwho are you?!\u201d to \nNikolai. He introduces himself, shows his press pass, explains that he \nhas been a journalist for the last 3&1\/2 years. Condescendingly, she\n scoffs at him, accuses him of having made up his press pass himself \n(effectively calling him a liar), says this is nothing, it is not from \nuh.. uh.. a proper organ of the press, and then natters about putting \nthe mask on properly. He answered that it had just slipped down.<\/p>\n\n\n\n After she disappears with his press pass, she returns, again delegitimizing him by saying his press pass has not been issued by a recognized institution. She cackles about not coming too near and that his mask is slipping yet again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n He read her the Grundgesetz \u2013 the \nfoundational law which stipulates freedom of the press, to no \navail. Nikolai Nerling was NOT allowed in, and was forcibly<\/em><\/strong> taken out of the building.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Next, Ursula Haverbeck was in fine \nspirits when she came out of the building. The remainder of the video is\n the interview with Haverbeck\u2019s Attorney, Wolfram Nahrath.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nahrath tells\n how Ursula spoke so clearly, so honestly, with dignity, with grace, \nbrilliantly really, and made her case in court that day. She spoke about\n how she came to her present understanding of what really happened in \nWW2. It began in the 1960\u2019s, as she was investigating the nuclear \nindustry on account of her concern for the environment. She read much, \nresearched much, which led her to question the official narrative of \nWW2.<\/p>\n\n\n\n She \nemphasized that she never denies anything, but that she has repeatedly \nasked the question over the years, to which nobody could ever give her \nan answer. Nahrath referred to that famous question which she still \nasks, but did not describe it in this interview. [The question is \u201cwhere did the crime <\/em><\/strong>(the 6 million\u2026) take place?\u201d<\/em><\/strong>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ursula went \non to say that actually there is nobody in the courtroom who would be \ncapable of denying anything, because nobody was there to witness what \nhappened. So if they don\u2019t know what it is that happened (because they \ndid not see it themselves), then none of them are in the position to \n\u201cdeny\u201d it either.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [It is an\n interesting logic, because in German the word for deny is \u201cleugnen\u201d, \nand by the German definition, you cannot \u201cleugne\u201d something that did not\n happen. It is impossible. ~ MS]<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Then Nahrath \nwent on to say that Ursula had said all these things with a clear mind \nand spirit, and that she demonstrated that she has no guilt-awareness or\n better said, no guilt feeling. In all the 10 different trials she has \nbeen through, that not a single prosecutor nor judge nor anybody could \nanswer her question. Nor did anybody attempt to answer her question. \nThey simply declared her guilty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [When they declared her guilty in the past, they proclaimed that Frau Haverbeck knows<\/strong>\n the holocaust took place, and yet she denies it (leugner). So she is \nguilty. ~ Evidently the judges and prosecutors engage in mind-reading. ~\n MS]<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n We will see \nwhat the verdict is on December 4th, he says. He fears it might be as \nprevious verdicts. Then it is far from over. There is another count that\n she is charged with in Berlin for which the prosecutor appealed because\n the 6-month sentence was not deemed stiff enough. Then there are the \ncourt proceedings in Hamburg still underway in which the prosecutor \nasked for 10 months.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lastly, \nNahrath goes on to say that Frau Haverbeck is in no way-shape-or-form \nagitating to incite. She operates on an intellectual level, searching \nfor answers. He laments the fact that they are dragging a 92 year-old \nthrough the court. He of course makes the point that this Par. 130 \nshould not exist at all, but really emphasizes how terrible it is that \nthey drag an elderly woman through this. He talks about how at this age \nher health could take a turn at any time, and also that if she goes back\n to jail after these legal battles, there is naturally the possibility \nthat she could be brought back out under a sheet directly to her grave. \nThe fact that she is willing to seek answers at the age of 92, in full \nknowledge of the personal consequences \u2014 it rings forth \u2013 yeah \u2013 \nrespect!<\/p>\n\n\n\n ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nahrath\u2019s emotions could be felt coming \nclose to the surface when he said those things. The whole affair is such\n a travesty. But if they do put Ursula Haverbeck back in jail, do they \nnot just show their desperation to protect their lies? Evidence is \nforbidden. Independent reportage is forbidden. They read the accused\u2019s \nmind to say she KNOWS something only to deny it with the intention to \nincite hatred. How absurd.<\/p>\n\n\n\n How is it not blatantly obvious to every thinking man and woman? German Political Prisoners Ursula Haverbeck faces the Inquisition\u2026 again! 03 Thursday Dec 2020 Posted by Monika in Free Speech, Germany, Truth and Justice for Germans, Uncategorized, Ursula Haverbeck, WW II Revisionism Ursula Haverbeck What does the state have to hide … Continue reading ![\"OIP\"](\"https:\/\/freespeechmonika.files.wordpress.com\/2020\/10\/oip.jpg?w=529\")
<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n
\nThe house of cards is tumbling down!<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"