Response of a demo participant: "We only want to record the dialogue that has been refused to us"

After the big "hygiene demo" on August 1 in Berlin, NRWZ asked an author friend who lives in the capital to describe his view of the event. The result was a humorous text that received a lot of attention. But the other side remained unheard. So we looked around and found what we were looking for in Schramberg. One of our readers and active fellow discussants on Facebook was right in the middle of it on August 1st in Berlin. And he is active in the “lateral thinkers”. Here he takes the opposite position to the Berliner Peter S. Kaspar. We also publish his text in its entirety.

A guest post by Roman Lasota

First of all, I would like to thank the NRWZ for being the first medium in Germany that is willing to let the opponents of the measures and demonstrators for the reinstatement of the Basic Law have their say in full and unabridged. I was invited to report on the mass demo in Berlin, on the reasons for it, the number of participants and the influx of supporters of the movement, when there was always talk of the crude and insane theories, of right-wing "swashbucklers", conspiracy theorists, Covidiotes and Corona deniers will.

I would like to say in advance that the accusation of where I would get my expertise from, if you read my statements and how I come to them, would have to be leveled at every journalist, because this is about nothing other than exactly what journalists do: research and report the results.

I know that many will certainly feel an inner resistance when reading, which is called cognitive dissonance ("It can't be what shouldn't be"). In the end, however, in our history of mankind this was always exactly the reason why things could happen, and one later wondered how this could be allowed to happen. As Gandhi once said, "History teaches people that history teaches people nothing."

It is also important for me to make it clear right from the start that we are in no way trying to endanger anyone. On the contrary, our movement is equipped with many doctors and scientists who have nothing else in mind than protecting people, but in the proportionality that science and politics have always practiced and thus in accordance with the Basic Law and the disease protection law that has worked very well so far.

Since I myself was a civil servant in the Air Force for four years, it was drilled into me in every training, advanced training and further education course that one of the top priorities for civil servants is: compliance with the "proportionality of means". The same applies to lawyers. Politicians are also 100% committed to this.

For this reason, I was personally very suspicious when, right from the start, I looked at comparative figures for similar diseases with similar courses and found out in my research that the same protagonists had already tried to trigger a hype with swine flu and bird flu, which then the Scientists have prevented, who today belong to the counter-movement again, but who were immediately portrayed as insane conspiracy theorists.

You have to let this melt in your mouth: Those who uncovered the hoax with the swine flu and the bird flu are now the bad, stupid Covidiots. And those who tried to trigger an unfounded mass panic back then are the ones who are listened to today. I had never heard anything more paradoxical. If you would like to understand this, I recommend the ARTE documentation "Profiteure der Angst" which can be found on YouTube.

So far, there is no evidence that this new virus is supposed to represent a new dimension. All studies that I have received so far do not classify it as more dangerous than the flu. Yes, the flu can also be deadly, in precisely those patients for whom Covid-19 is also dangerous. This is supported by all the data available so far and nothing, absolutely nothing, at the moment suggests that other groups should be affected more than with the flu, and that there are worse consequences in greater numbers than the consequences of a strong course of this. The only problem is that the aftermath of the flu hasn't been as focused in the media as it is now. For example, I can mention heart failure as a result of heart muscle inflammation.

One can also see from the data from the Robert Koch Institute (RKI), i.e. official data and facts, that the flu did not claim any additional victims, which would have resulted in a higher number of deaths from respiratory infections, but that these were caused by Covid-19 has been ousted. One can also see from official statistics that this is the case every year. That sometimes one and sometimes the other respiratory tract infection is more pronounced, but in the balance they displace others. Here I recommend this recording of the Foundation Corona Inquiry Committee, which shows these and other statistics presented by scientists: https://youtu.be/pKllldIiMpI. You can also find the complete recordings of the committee on the same channel, which is intensively involved in clarifying the measures taken, including the legal ones.

But back to the RKI. The statement in the imprint of the RKI that it rejects any liability for the statements on its website is very exciting, but that should only be mentioned in passing.

The evidence and reliability of the PCR tests, which I will not go into in detail due to the length of this article, will also be very surprising. Just this much: Due to the immense increase in tests, the positive tests are currently within the error rate of the test. Even Jens Spahn confirms this in the following interview: https://youtu.be/nv4nQoNT244

At the moment there is talk of a second wave. However, the figures from the RKI can clearly demonstrate that this second wave is EXCLUSIVELY due to a massive increase in tests, which, as Spahn confirms, have an ever increasing error rate.

Example: If you send ten people to count the red-haired people in a city, you get 200 within a time limit. If you send out 100 people, you will find 2000 in the same time, if I send out 1000, they will find 20,000 in the same time. Nothing else is happening at the moment and there is talk of an increase in the number of infected people.

However, a positive test is not evidence of an infection. And it certainly doesn't mean that the person is sick. Only an RNA fragment of a virus is found, which could also (see Tönnies) come from a cross-assessment with another corona virus. But this can also lead to cross-immunity. According to a report by "Focus", 85% are already cross-immune. This means that countless of the people tested can no longer get sick from it. But they are locked up every 14 days as if they could kill people.

It is also always claimed that people without symptoms could infect others. Nothing has proven that at the moment. Even the WHO says that this is only possible in absolutely exceptional cases. Many immunologists rule this out entirely, saying that transmission involves replication of the virus. Reproduction causes inflammation and inflammation makes a symptom.

In the media, however, all positive tests are presented as if the people were sick. You speak of “increasing numbers of cases”. Every normal citizen thinks: Are more people getting sick? Wrong or right?

The leading media still present the cumulative number of all those who have ever been infected in their reports and act as if these people were currently infected. However, it is deliberately forgotten that the recovered and deceased would have to be deducted, which means that there are currently around 8,000 people who have tested positive. As I said: TESTED POSITIVE, NOT INFECTED RIGHT AWAY.

So if you take the number 8000, but they are locked away, and take it as a base with an R-value of 1, then the same number of "infected" will walk in "the wild" again. If you apply it to the 83 million inhabitants of Germany, then I would have to meet 10,375 people to find a PCR-positive person. But he's not definitely infected yet and can't just infect me through a succinct encounter. How many people do we get close enough to really get infected every day? Let's assume 20. Then it would take an average of 519 days to be able to meet a PCR-positive person who could potentially infect me - which they probably don't do if they were symptomatic, because then they wouldn't be on the street.

According to a new study from Switzerland, it is actually the case that most infections only take place at home. So what's the point of all this masked ball?

Where are the sick at the moment? Hospitals register short-time work because they have to keep beds free, for which they are paid handsomely. Funeral directors go bankrupt and with increasing cases of illness? Sounds exciting.

In fact, the RKI Sentinels (representative number of practices that are regularly queried) have had NO more reports since week 16 (can be checked on the RKI website) that people with respiratory problems have tested positive for SARS-CoV -2 have been tested. It's very funny, isn't it?

There is always the argument that the numbers in other countries are much worse. Yes, in the sum of the people it is. But if you put it in relation to the number of people, the health system, the horrendous air pollution, etc., i.e. always put it in relation, then these always look comparable in percentage terms. But if you take away any sense of proportionality from people by shifting the focus away from it, you don't see that.

People are always talking about Sweden's special path and trying to discredit it wherever possible. By the way: They currently have declining "fall rates" because they don't go along with the test mania. But I don't want to talk about that at all. I'm talking about Belarus, who didn't do anything, nothing. Look at the numbers from there. Yes, you can't trust a dictatorship with the numbers. Aha, and why is there no travel warning to this highly infectious country?

If you look at the verifiable facts mentioned above, which everyone and much more can find in research, but which do not find their way into the leading media (if I am wrong in my research and results, I am not flawless, in one case or another or overall , may you correct me), and then see the current actions and statements like: "The pandemic will only end when we say so, and if so, then only with a vaccine!". If you increase the mask requirement. If you force our children to go to school with masks, where there are reliable studies (currently from Saxony) that this is not necessary, and other studies that it traumatizes children. With a virus which, according to all available knowledge, is not dangerous for children. I don't even want to talk about the effectiveness compared to the overall harm potential of the masks to the general public and the above facts. There are now many publications about this as well.

Our politicians have been caught often enough without social distancing and masks. Just a few days ago, our Federal President in SOUTH TYROL, in the middle of several people, arm in arm, without distance, without a mask. Would a politician who only has one kidney and therefore belongs to the risk group do that if he believed in a dangerous virus? But probably because of parliamentary “immunity”?

Other countries do not have to wear a mask if the course of infection is similar, but is the virus more aggressive in Germany?

Other countries had already abolished this obligation and reintroduced it despite low infection rates. Strangely enough, the particularly extreme ones that are dependent on EU funds and thus the top donor Germany?

The mask requirement was introduced when the infection curve at the RKI was already at the bottom and has not changed noticeably since then?

We have a crisis of national importance and without installing a crisis management team, is our federal government going on a summer vacation?

Politicians and "state scientists" stand in front of the cameras several times and say openly that questioning and discussing the measures should be avoided in a democracy?

If you think openly about mandatory vaccination, a novel RNA-based vaccine that has the potential to interfere with our genomes, but which can be created in a very short space of time where development would normally take years but the safety criteria are simple times down because it was necessary in view of the lethality of the virus? May everyone draw their own conclusions from this aspect. I find it devoid of all proportionality and reason. Everyone can and SHOULD be allowed to decide for themselves.

Questions upon questions that perhaps only a few ask themselves, but they want answers and don't get them. All that remains is resistance in the form of demonstrations.

Unfortunately, many of the things mentioned above cannot be found in the mainstream media, or they are presented differently. These only take place through research or publication in the free and alternative media of which the vast majority are not aware as they cannot be viewed from the sofa or found in the mailbox.

This long list of motives was important in order to understand the motivation for the lateral thinking 711 movement and the distorted image presented in the media. It is also important if you want to understand why masses are now gathering behind it, all of whom have objectively compared information from the leading media with their own research results. They are not "crude conspiracy theorists" or fascists or Nazis. There are people across from all ways of thinking and layers of society who have recognized that no division, but only community will find a solution.

Everyone can look at the pictures of the demo in Berlin in many videos on the Internet. No, not in the mainstream media, there pictures are shown from 1 p.m. (verifiable by the shadow fall), aerial pictures when the demo train was still on the way and hadn't even arrived at the venue. There is talk of 17,000 to 20,000 participants. If you look at the real pictures and the videos, you will see that there were a high six to seven-digit number of participants.

The police gave the spokesman for “lateral thinking” 1.3 million. Even if you want to doubt that, there is clear evidence that it was at least a high six-digit number of people. But why do the leading media have to calculate the number so extremely? Because it would be proof that it's not just a few stupid weirdos, and you can extrapolate that for every one who was there, there were many more who think like that but couldn't be there. And that this would make the majority aware that so many people cannot all be stupid covid idiots. That you would then have to admit your own omissions and exaggerations of the last few months.

Having been there myself, I can absolutely attest that it was a Woodstock like happening with no drugs, and not a demo by violent lunatics. It was an absolutely highly energetic and emotional festival of living community. It was what the organizers said, a peace and freedom demonstration. Anyone can see for themselves at one of the next demonstrations. Everyone is welcome. But here, too, an attempt was made to mix up the demonstration with another one that took place in Neukölln in the evening, which had nothing to do with us, but rather on the part of the counter-demonstrators, who also injured police officers. Why is the mainstream media doing this?

Check the many videos on the web to see if you can see anything else. It was a message to the world that our movement doesn't want anything else than my personal life motto could not put it better: "For a life in love, peace, freedom, awareness, gratitude and in harmony with nature."

But what does the state do? He has the demonstration broken off because of non-compliance with the hygiene regulation, but this only meant that the speakers could no longer speak. The demonstrators stayed and the police did not escalate either. As well, with this number of people, who faced maybe a maximum of 100 police officers.

Cancellation due to hygiene regulations. We let this melt in our mouths once again. Because it was over 30 degrees in the hot sun. On the one hand, what would have happened if people had been forced to wear masks here? The organizers would have made themselves guilty of bodily harm, because the people would have fallen over in rows. You only had to look at the police officers standing in front of us, dripping sweat, on the verge of collapsing, armed with masks and even helmets.

Thus, our state made itself guilty of attempted assault by making it a requirement. Oh no, there is the evil virus, which jumps at people outdoors like a flea, but unfortunately cannot survive temperatures above 25 degrees and also dies under high UV light. No, I had completely forgotten that the laws of proportionality are currently suspended, sorry, I had forgotten that.

But if you took a look at the Spree a few meters further, then there were countless pleasure boats with people packed close together and without masks across the river, in the best of moods. And on the banks, people lay close together on the sandbanks and had fun, of course without masks. Oh yes, the virus only chooses the “bad” demonstrators as super spreaders, I had completely forgotten. That was also the case with the demos serving the interests of the state. I completely forgot again, sorry.

Yes, there were also people among the demonstrators who the media would describe as right-wing. But they were just as small a part as a large whole was made up of many other small parts. How can I use exclusion to move people towards a community? This is only possible by accepting the opinion and reaching a consensus FOR the good of a society. Doing something else would be exactly the same as saying to people who are new to our country: "I don't have to deal with them, they can't be integrated, their culture is too different". Anyone who says something like that is rightly classified as discriminatory. But when it comes to excluding people with opinions and not looking for a consensus because they are socially ostracized, how can there ever be a community?

So no matter how many times it is repeated, it is absolute nonsense that is being spread by the so-called mainstream media as far as the demonstrators are concerned. And since more and more people are now realizing this, the constitutional basic rights of those whose opinion is not acceptable are being questioned again and again.

No matter how the intellect defends itself against it, it is impossible that the same thing as before could be repeated: So far, these thoughts have always been the beginning of totalitarian systems, even if the reasons of the majority could be presented as "noble".

It is precisely for this reason that the founding fathers of the Federal Republic of Germany have written certain rights into the Basic Law as indispensable fundamental rights, and that if these are restricted or abolished, resistance is required.

Several articles currently state that the Office for the Protection of the Constitution has now registered concerns. But it is a mockery to want to put people under surveillance who take to the streets so that the Basic Law can be fully implemented again. And the people who want to repeal essential paragraphs, for which it is even firmly written that they may not be changed, and thus must be monitored by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, are not attacked either by the press or by the opposition. On the contrary, she still joins in the chorus. Because the AfD is the only one not to agree, the demonstrators are then automatically party supporters.

So there is nothing more paradoxical: wanting to blame the advocates of the Basic Law for disloyalty to the constitution, and presenting those questioning the Basic Law as legitimate because the demonstrators do not support the current state line.

At the moment, some politicians are standing out again, they are demanding higher penalties for violations of the applicable compulsory regulations. Why didn't that happen during the "Black Lives Matter" (BLM) demonstrations, where crowds of people were also on the move in several places at the same time, without distance, without a mask*? The virus only seeks out certain protesters who become super spreaders? This double standard doesn't give anyone anything to think about?

Anyone who is somewhat familiar with the law, whether they are in favor of measures or opposed to them, must know that you can only punish something if there is evidence that you have caused damage or are doing something with the intention of causing damage. Otherwise you could say: "You are not allowed to enter the bank anymore because you could commit a bank robbery!" Wrong, or right?

So far, despite countless demos in Germany, FOR MONTHS (including the mass demos of the BLM), there is NOT A SINGLE piece of evidence that these have generated any infection, let alone disease clusters. NOT A SINGLE RECEIPT! Therefore, if this is demanded here, it is a clear violation of the law and of civil rights and human rights and is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

Anyone who continues to claim that this has no traits of a totalitarian regime is not only asleep, but is in permanent deep hypnosis! Getting power is like a drug and once you have it, you are very likely to become addicted to it.

It would be easy to end the demonstrations overnight. Namely, to finally allow the scientific dialogue again, which is currently being refused by the state and its scientists.

But what about the state? "You don't discuss with crackpots!" And the majority nods - if the government says they're crackpots, then that's the way it is. It doesn't matter who it is, what reputation it has and what their role in solving earlier false alarms was. And it doesn't matter what role those who are now considered "political scientists" by the state played.

So anyone who discredits instead of discussing and thus avoids the normal, political and scientific approach, instead having to silence it with laws and censorship (countless posts on social media and on YouTube have been deleted), obviously has no arguments to support a discussion would withstand. Because otherwise there would be no reason whatsoever to want to change or abolish paragraphs of the Basic Law in order to avoid the dialogue that is offered again and again.

The demonstrations will therefore definitely continue until this willingness to engage in dialogue is restored, no more and no less is required. Even if the Basic Law is bent and demonstrations are banned, it will not stand up to the Constitutional Court and they will continue. But the mere attempt to pervert the Basic Law obliges, according to the Basic Law, to resist it. The founding fathers of the FRG had something in mind.

So we absolutely have to return to a dialogue based on the premise: "The cure (measures) must not (must) be worse than the illness!" Otherwise there is a risk that we will end up in a health absolutism, in which the state offers an absolute "life insurance." “ is demanded. To put it a little provocatively, "Life is a sex-borne disease that is 100% fatal."

We ALWAYS have to deal with risks in life and with numerous greater risks of dying from accidents or diseases than from Corona. If we lose focus on that, we will end up in permanent lockdown danger for the next few decades, every year, again and again. Because new viruses will always appear.

Humans have been living on this planet for ages and have had to face new diseases again and again. If we didn't have such an ingenious immune system, we would have died out long ago. But instead of strengthening this, at the moment we are doing everything that could weaken it. We are increasingly staying at home, constantly tying a mask in front of our face, which increases the number of germs in our body by rebreathing the exhaled germs and also the consumed CO2.

I could write many more lines and hours of information here that speak for the rapid elimination of the coercive measures, because we have not even talked about the damage to people and their physical, mental and financial existence caused by the lockdown, the so-called collateral damage . How many people have been or will be victims of thousands upon thousands of canceled and postponed surgeries? That, according to the available autopsies, people have so far not demonstrably died directly from Corona, but always "only" WITH Corona and the causes were mostly due to existing previous illnesses.

How many people will face total ruin from lockdown? How many will have taken their own lives because of this or from anxiety disorders fueled by the media's constant high panic levels? The argument that health comes before economy is true, but if I try to extinguish a house and blow up the dam and flood the whole village, the house is extinguished, but the entire livelihood is destroyed. We keep coming back to proportionality.

Even if one has to give the federal government credit for not being able to tell at first how things would develop, it would have been clear very quickly how one could have acted differently and how the measures could have been scaled back. But instead, the level of panic is kept high and any dialogue with scientists who think differently is persistently refused. There can only be a reason for this, that one wants to cover up one's own failure and can then say with the saving vaccine that everything is fine again now. That the vaccine was the savior, even if objectively anyone willing to go the scientific route of thesis, antithesis and synthesis has long since seen that there is no need to wait that long. But we know that sitting out has always been one of our Chancellor's great strengths. Only this time she didn't expect so much resistance.

Even within the Federal Ministry of the Interior, Mr. Stephan Kohn soon took on his task as a risk assessor and drew up a detailed paper that attempts were made to exorcise the devil with the Beelzebub. Well-founded and underpinned by many expert opinions from scientists. The thanks for this was his dismissal, since he had not been officially commissioned to do so. They forgot that his position per se included this task. But he was immediately exposed to media slaughter. They did so happily, rather than OBJECTIVELY dealing with the results themselves, based only on government statements. If these results were wrong, they can be refuted. If they are correct, I must discredit them and the author.

And precisely because many know what happened to Mr. Kohn, many know what could happen to them if they did disclose what they know, or if they would stand by as scientists if they thought otherwise, as directed by the authorities. Professor Homburg, for example, is currently on the verge of losing his job simply by having his position re-advertised.

In a country where democracy and freedom of expression should apply? For real?

That's why the association https://mutmacher.org/ was founded, which catches everyone who will secure your existence.

I could fill many more pages.

It is very, very important that we find our way back to an OPEN and HATE-FREE dialogue with one another. In politics, science, research and on a very personal level. There is a tear through our society, a deep wound. It can only heal if you contract the wound again and not if you keep sprinkling salt on it.

Sometimes it seems to me that the hatred for those opposed to the measures is so great that one would rather see them die of Corona than be happy if they were right and everyone got their normal life back.

In addition to the RKI, I recommend https://swprs.org/ , www.cidm.online , https://www.mwgfd.de/ , https://www.xn--rzte-fr-aufklrung for your own research -pqbn68b.de/ And finally the motto of the enlighteners: "Don't believe me, do your own research!" And again my personal mission statement: "For a life in love, peace, freedom, awareness, gratitude and in harmony with nature.

*Here the NRWZ editorial team has to contradict a little bit: The pictures of the Black Lives Matter demos show people with mouth and nose protection everywhere.