Making an Example of a Pegida Protester

My Recent Posts

When a camera team of state TV channel ZDF showed up to film people as they were joining a pegida march, one man walked up to them and told them that they had no right to film his face. Because they did not stop filming, he went straight to some nearby police officers and complained that his right to his image and personal data was not respected. The policemen stopped the TV team and wrote down their personal information. The protester also filed a formal charge against them.


WELT reported that a man who was with him slapped some gear out of the hand of the reporters. Unfortunately, they left a link to the full video that shows their lie. Fair enough, they let some comments through from readers who had noticed it.


The fact that the camera team had to wait three-quarters of an hour was played up as a big scandal.  “On what side is the police on, pegida or the press?”, was the question ZEIT and others asked. In a democracy nobody would even ask such a question. The police officers are supposed to enforce the law.


The law in question is the German ratification of the EU personal data protection directive which is so extreme that even mainstream American newspapers like the LA Times have stopped their online service in the EU because comment sections require some IP address storage to prevent DDoS attacks. My blog is certainly breaking the law as is any free WordPress site. It is impossible to follow German laws at this point because they are too many and too draconian. We have entered a lawless state.


But what decides what gets punished in a society where everybody is lawless? People who disagree with the mob of the majority get punished. For instance, conservative author Akif Pirincci is constantly punished for the most harmless comments while left-wing antisemite Jakob Augstein is free to call a kippa a provocation. This is the territory where only G-d can stabilize me. When all is forbidden, I can only hope not to break too many laws and I must follow a different set of rules. It is my psychological self-defence. I must be able to respect myself although the world has turned against me.


The data protection directive was, of course, thought to prevent the rise of a German version of Project Veritas or Rebel Media. If there were a rule of law in Germany, mainstream journalists would also be unable to work under these conditions.


And this is where the protester becomes dangerous. He obviously knew that the law applies to everybody equally. This is what makes him a threat. His insistence not to be filmed could have become common on right-wing gatherings all over the country.


The media therefore attacked the policemen who just did their job.  Since that is not good enough to stop the wildfire, the Interior Ministry of the state of Saxony tweeted out on their official twitter account that the protester worked at the Office of Criminal Investigation LKA. If Germany were a democracy and respected the rule of law, that would surely be illegal. But, well, as I said, everything is legal and illegal. “Quod licet iovi non licet bovi,” as the Romans said.


Parliamentarians Ralf Stegner of the Social Democrats and Wolfgang Kubicki of the pseudo-libertarian party FDP demanded that the protester should face disciplinary consequences for protesting. Justice Minister Katharina Barley gave a press conference saying that she is worried. She is not worried about the man, but about the inconvenience of the reporter team that had to wait three-quarters of an hour.


Angela Merkel in one of her rare speaking roles let us know that "If one goes to a protest, you must expect to be recorded by the media." There were an investigation [I assume against the police officers for bothering the reporters for some minutes]. Merkel says, "But I want to emphasize that I support the freedom of the press." And THEN she drops at at 0:30 here "If you partakes in a protest march, you must know that you become subject to the freedom of the press."


Mao taught, "punish one and teach hundreds." Freedom of the press is presented as a weapon of the government that oppositional protesters can fall subject to. This is not exactly how the US founding fathers understood the concept. It's a pity that George Orwell cannot rework his 1984 novel and call the all-seeing screens "freedom of the press."


At this point ZDF show “Frontal21” and a variety of news outlets have already shown the face of the man who didn’t want to be filmed many times. He will be a target of the larger mob. The common argument from the pro-government side is that protesters want to show their faces anyway to make a point. I daresay that this is not very plausible. Protesters want to present their support for an idea, (sometimes) display the numbers behind an idea, make unattentive people aware of a cause, and a lot of things, but they certainly have no narcissist ambition to get their faces recorded.


I don’t know if they will go the length and directly punish him on his job, but enough damage is already done to him to intimidate the wider public anyway. His employer, the LKA, has started an investigation into the man. There are no formal charges and in a democracy it would surely be illegal for a government department to use ressources to "investigate" their own staff without charges - for participating in a protest march. At first the man was unavailable for the investigation, but his holiday has now been nixed.


To clarify, I do support the right of the media to record faces. However, I want a level playing field. Lauren Southern is making a documentary on Europe. We will see if the freedom of the press is still so precious for democracy when she shows up. I want the press to show faces and everybody feeling comfortable with it because that means we would have reached a state of civilisation when people can speak their minds without fear of retaliation.


Dino Manalis Added Aug 24, 2018 - 1:30pm
 Peaceful protests must be respected and protected, while riots have to be avoided in society.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Aug 24, 2018 - 2:51pm
Now, the idiotic police chief even apologized for filing the charges.
Bill Caciene Added Aug 24, 2018 - 4:36pm
I’m not sure if you’re aware, but I believe this is an American site, whose readers are mostly interested in American issues.  If you do wish to opine on issues outside America, it would behoove you to not assume so much.  For example, I have no idea what a Pegida protestor is?  I have no idea what law would forbid a camera man from filming a protest?  I have no idea what the FDP, LKA or ZDF is? 
In America we have a free press but under certain instances faces must be blurred and others they don’t.  I’m not sure what the German law states and would be interested in understanding how it differs from ours. 
Flying Junior Added Aug 24, 2018 - 4:42pm
Thanks for the heads up of what is happening in Germany.
I think it has something to do with the EU privacy laws that were recently enacted in Germany.  My understanding is that it is still legal to film a protest in Germany and that this man who caused the trouble was mistaken.
FacePalm Added Aug 24, 2018 - 5:02pm
i relate to Bill's points.  i'm ignorant not only of German law, but of all the acronyms and what "Pegida" means, too.  My first impression was that this article was going to be about Spain, Portugal, or Italy.
As a result, i don't know what your complaint is other than in the most general terms.  i know that in America, freedom of speech is a right protected by the Oath-keepers in American government employee circles, but i understand that German law has many exceptions, not least to speak or write about the National Socialist German Workers Party in anything other than negative terms, and if you dare demand to see records of the alleged 20million deaths attributed to Hitler and his minions, much less dare to WRITE about the discrepancies in any way, fines and jailtime are more likely than not to be the result of your exercise of "not-free" speech.
i'm sincerely hoping that those who favor getting Muslims right out of your country are in the ascendancy; do that, and the raping will slow down considerably, as well as end the "no-go" zones.  This may entail, however, not only getting rid of Merkel but also exiting the EU completely.
A "joke" i heard about the situation may illustrate things relatively well:
"A Greek, an Italian, and a Spaniard go out drinking all night, putting everything on a credit card; at closing time, who pays the bill?  The German."
Why ANY European nation would turn over the essential governance of their country to any group of unelected bureaucrats - who, therefore, are not accountable to ANYone - is beyond my ken and imagination.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Aug 24, 2018 - 5:13pm
Bill: This isn't an American site at all. If  you have not watched Tucker Carlson, not read Breitbart, Drudge or anything and don't know what pegida protests for, don't worry, it's irrelevant for the text. You ask what ZDF is. Let me help you. If it says "TV channel ZDF" it means that ZDF is a channel on the television. You know, you take a remote control, flick through the channels and there you have it. A TV is that noisy thing old people have on their wall. I trust that your IQ is high enough to decipher the rest.
FJ: Thanks for reading. I'm not sure if the man is mistaken. This is the EU data protection directive. It bans everything.
The reason why the LA Times is no longer available in the EU is because IP addresses are already collecting to much information. Recording faces is much more so. The police has apologized for filing the charge so you can bet that the thing will be shelved before any court could check if the action is legal. Of course, I want the press to operate freely, but society must ensure that people who are recorded are not bullied like this man. I'm also curious if they will make a fuss about press freedom when Lauren Southern returns. The last time she was in Germany, this happened.
Strange how Merkel did not come out then to support the freedom of the press.
FacePalm Added Aug 24, 2018 - 8:51pm
Wow.  i took a look at your first link - 99 Articles, 10 chapters, written in typically obfuscatory legal language.  i honestly don't have the patience to go through it all.
i checked out the second link, and curiously, i'm also looking at another vid by Lauren Southern called "Farmland." 
But it sounds like you're hip to the fascist/nazi/commie tactics of antifa in Germany, as well, and like 'em about as much as most sane Americans do here...which is to say "not much."
Also, i websearched Pegida, and it apparently stands for "Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West, so it appears that by sheer blind luck, i hit on what is a major problem for Germany-loving Germans in Germany in my first reply to you.  If you're in favor of their goals, more power to you!
I believe i'd have a workable plan to get 'em deported here; any Muslim coming from a foreign land who wishes to become a US citizen must swear an oath of fealty to the US Constitution as a condition of citizenship, therefore any subsequent teaching, promotion, or worse, attempted implementation of Shar'ia here would constitute a violation of that Oath, aka "felony perjury," so let the arrests, prosecutions, convictions and deportations ensue!  Maybe something similar would work in your country, as well.  There's GOT to be a nice, legal, procedural basis to get them OUT, otherwise there's likely to be a war; i believe that this eventually is EXACTLY what the globalists are planning for by their forced resettlements of an alien culture to that of your native European lands.
After all, one should never forget that one of the 8 forms of jihad is by simply going into another country, refusing to assimilate, have lots of children, have select candidates run for office, and agitate constantly to have "religiously tolerant" people adapt to MUSLIM culture and traditions, rather than them assimilate HERE or get out, with frequent use of "Islamophobia" and "hate speech" designations to punish anyone alert enough to be sounding the alarm loudly.
That's their plan, and it's how they've taken over many countries in the past; squeel about "religious tolerance" and "freedom of religion" until they hold the reins of power, then there's NO MORE freedom of religion, there's Shar'ia, Jizyat(a "tax" non-muslims must pay to subsidize muslims), and oppression of any religion OTHER than Islam.  Their "Holy Qu'ran" teaches that anyone NOT Muslim must convert, pay the Jizyat, or die.  Those are the "choices" in Muslim majority countries.
Sounds exactly like tyranny to me.
Ken Added Aug 24, 2018 - 9:06pm
I believe i'd have a workable plan to get 'em deported here; any Muslim coming from a foreign land who wishes to become a US citizen must swear an oath of fealty to the US Constitution as a condition of citizenship,
The problem with that is Taqiyya.  Lying to infidels to further Islam is perfectly acceptable.  Once one becomes a citizen, there is no constitutional provision to strip citizenship.
FacePalm Added Aug 24, 2018 - 9:16pm
Lying under your oath is perjury.
i think that it should be a relatively easy matter to push such a lawful penalty for that sort of perjury through Congress, and i bet Trump would sign it in a heartbeat.
My preference would be that any such convict pay for their OWN deportation, to boot.  After all, why should US taxpayers foot the bill to get convicted criminals out of the country?  IMO, all such convicts should be imprisoned at hard labor until they can EARN their ticket out, but i wouldn't be opposed to their friends or families chipping in to buy them their tickets, either, so as to reduce the burden of feeding and housing the convicts, either.
Let 'em squeel "Islamophobia" and "religious intolerance" all they like - just from several thousand miles away.
After all, their religion teaches that Shar'ia is God's perfect law, so they should be extremely happy to live anywhere it's already holding full sway, right?  You know, like Pakistan, for example; everyone's happy THERE, ain't they?
Flying Junior Added Aug 25, 2018 - 2:46am
Lying under your oath is perjury.
i think that it should be a relatively easy matter to push such a lawful penalty for that sort of perjury through Congress, and i bet Trump would sign it in a heartbeat.
I wouldn't be so sure that Trump will sign any bill which makes it easier to prove perjury.  He already fears a, "perjury trap," at the hands of Mueller.
Stone-Eater Added Aug 25, 2018 - 4:29am
Hm. Naja LOL
I mean nobody equipped with a clear mind watches ZDF ARD and their "Ableger' NDR HR etc.
Germany is ruled by PC leftist fake dogooders and Pegida has the same right to exist as has the CDU or the (lately) warmongering Greens.
Stone-Eater Added Aug 25, 2018 - 4:30am
....but....Weidel, as being an old Goldman-Sachs pal, isn't really representing the battered underclass, is she LOL
Stone-Eater Added Aug 25, 2018 - 4:32am
BTW: Even when this site is US mainly there is no law against Americans showing interest in EXTERNAL subjects. Horizons have no sharp ends.
FacePalm Added Aug 25, 2018 - 2:18pm
Horizons have no sharp ends.  
But...but...the earth is FLAT!  (just kidding)
Forgot to mention this earlier; taqiyya would be the VERY REASON to prosecute perjuries; if it is a tenet of your religious practice to LIE, those people have a built-in reason why there's "probable cause " to investigate and prosecute them.
AFAIK, perjury laws have been on the books since before the country was founded.  It's just the PENALTY that needs some updating, specifically and only for immigrants.  So for ALL immigrants, legal or illegal, part of the penalty for perjury OR illegally being in America should involve imprisonment at hard labor until they earn the price of their ticket out.  It seems self-evident to me that once the word gets out about this change in policy, there'll be a damn-sight fewer more of them!
US Citizenship for immigrants is a PRIVILEGE, not a right, and a CONDITIONAL one, to boot.
FacePalm Added Aug 25, 2018 - 2:27pm
Oh, and as to the Constitutional question, you're right; however, the Constitution delegates immigration law to Congress, and Congress has voted on multiple immigration and naturalization laws over the years; i don't doubt that stripping an immigrant of citizenship has been covered before, though i haven't researched the issue.
The point still stands; if one swears on oath their loyalty to the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land, then works to subvert or overthrow it, that makes them ENEMIES of the Constitution, ergo the enemies of everyone who ALSO swore the oath - like military, police, firefighters... - in short, everyone who works for every kind of governmental entity in America, even public librarians.

Recent Articles by Writers Benjamin Goldstein follows.