by Peter Löcke //
Do you want success in your life? Then lie so that the beams bend. Bend like the beams themselves! The path of life becomes rockier if you walk it in a principled, truthful and honest manner. But there is one thing you should never do. Deny! Nothing is worse than a denier. I find that strange, because many deniers are, strictly speaking, honest, respectable people. You can't say that about all the pathological liars. It is worth taking a closer look at the two phonetically similar terms.
"Do you deny the crime?"
"Yes, I do."
If a person is falsely accused, he speaks the truth when he denies. After all, he is innocent. Two weeks ago, Michael Z. stood trial [1]. His offense was that he collected terrible quotes from politicians, celebrities and doctors during the Corona period. The public prosecutor's office saw no problem with the sometimes inhumane statements. They saw a problem in documenting this contempt for humanity in a collection of quotes. This was an enemy list. Michael Z. denied this bizarre accusation and was acquitted. However, it cannot be ruled out that he will lose at second instance. The public prosecutor's office has announced an appeal. The honorable denier Michael Z. still has to worry. This is in stark contrast to the pathological liars whose words and deeds regularly go unpunished. Here, too, is a current case study: Olaf Scholz's summer interview on ARD on June 23, 2024 [2].
"There have been a few decisions that were over the top."
Such a trivializing assessment of the German pandemic policy by the Chancellor is so low that a comment is superfluous. So let's quickly move on to Olaf Scholz's demonstrable lies. He never understood the curfews. Oh yes, he did! Scholz understood it very well. Scholz had even vehemently advocated it in spring 2021 [3]. On "Maybrit Illner" on April 15, 2021, he described curfews as "helpful, good and right" and a "great relief" for many citizens. A chancellor's historical fabrications and lies in the hope that the population suffers from the same memory lapses as he does. Made by a person who was initially always against compulsory vaccination, then always in favor of compulsory vaccination and who, in his memory, is happy that the debate about compulsory vaccination "evaporated relatively quickly". Oh yes! The chancellor still believes in the external protection of vaccination in 2024. It could be considered a coincidence that three days after Scholzen's rewriting of history, the Thuringian Constitutional Court ruled that the curfews imposed were unconstitutional. Anyone who believes this is also under the illusion that the summer conversation between ARD presenter Markus Preiß and Chancellor Scholz was a critical interview. It was, of course, an agreed double pass, a lie. Before every coronavirus question, Markus Preiß wrapped himself and the chancellor in absorbent cotton by emphasizing "from today's perspective, not from back then". Message? People didn't know any better back then. Oh yes, they did! They knew. And yet the narrative of backsliding is to be maintained. But this narrative has been exposed as a lie since the publication of the RKI files at the latest.
Now it would be unfair to pillory Scholz alone. The lie runs through the entire political-media complex and has become a second self for many actors. Karl Lauterbach has become a true master of lying. This is not limited to his statement about "vaccination without side effects". It extends to his background, his questionable CV, his alleged academic qualifications and his fraudulent professorships. The lie is the reliable constant in Lauterbach's life. For interested readers who want to delve deeper into the subject, we recommend the Münster-based publisher and journalist Thomas Kubo [4]. What is astonishing about the German health minister is that he lies even when justifying his lies - and gets away with it. When Karl Lauterbach admitted on ZDF television on March 12, 2023 [5] that the vaccination could lead to serious side effects, he excused himself by saying that the probability of such a serious side effect was less than 1 in 10,000. This statement was a lie. It just so happened that this stochastic estimate corresponded to the definition of "very rare" on every package insert. Would you like another example?
"The truth, i.e. the truth, leads to political death in very many cases. Please." [6]
Ironically, I consider this statement to be one of the few honest moments in Karl Lauterbach's life. Of course, the sentence blew up in his face and he had to justify it. How? By telling a lie. It was just a joke on the ZDF heute-show. It wasn't. The statement was made in 2019 on the WDR program "Könnes kämpft".
They are lying. We know they are lying. They know that we know they are lying and they continue to lie. The only thing that has changed is the shamelessness with which they lie. What has changed is that even the biggest lies remain without political consequences. And evening after evening, the liars sit on the talk shows to ask themselves together why there has been such a huge loss of trust among the population? The answer to this question is frighteningly obvious. People are tired of being lied to. People long for integrity, honesty and truthfulness. Not to be confused with truth, because the liars have leased that.
And yet I don't flinch at the word liar, only at the word denier. Why is that? After all, deniers can certainly be respectable people. It's probably because for most of my life, when I heard the word denier, I instinctively thought of Holocaust deniers. I did not and do not want to have anything to do with such people. How can you trivialize or even completely deny the greatest crime committed in the name of Germans? They are brutes. You can now deny a lot of things. The climate, corona or even science as a whole. All it takes is a differentiated opinion on a topic and the label of denier is stuck on your forehead. You become a monster, almost as bad as a Holocaust denier.
It is interesting that the defamatory term "denier" is used almost exclusively in German-speaking countries. You could almost be forgiven for thinking that this is done on purpose to silence unpopular opinions on the topics of corona, climate and war. After all, every German is brought up to associate the Holocaust as soon as they read or hear the term denier. It's just an assumption put forward for discussion. A hypothesis.
Articles identified by name do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the publisher.
English 
German 
Spanish
2 Responses
They are not credible, they don't deserve to be believed, the polls don't look like that for nothing. Where are the alternatives? Is the old saying "If elections changed anything, they would have been banned long ago" true? A party state can degenerate and become increasingly undemocratic as a result. The coronavirus era has revealed that there was great unity among the parties in the Bundestag. Functionally, we had an "epidemic unity party of Germany", as it was perceived by many, and only one party, the AfD, which was suspected of fascism, opposed the ruling policy, which many central Germans recognized as Bolshevism of the purest water. A major problem is the lack of democracy within the party, an essentially unconstitutional state of affairs that has not been ended for sixty years or more due to the incomplete functioning of the separation of powers. The problem is now boiling over because more and more people have the impression that the ruling political system is turning against them. This was not so obvious in the past, the bureaucracy was content to inflate itself like amoebas and drive the state quota to ludicrous heights, but now for many people it is about much more. Do we want to live like this? How do we want to live? "Liberty, equality, fraternity!" does not mean a revolution in our state, but a return to our Basic Law and the post-war awakening. It needs protest from the sovereign, the citizen, on the street, in media consumption - nobody has to watch these outpourings in the talk shows, simply turn them off and ignore them. Stop buying Di Lorenzo's brilliant achievements. Take a look at which companies still have a bit of a common good orientation and which ones have beaten up dissenters in the coronavirus era. We decide for ourselves where we become or remain a customer. GLS Bank, for example, has just revealed itself to be an opponent of freedom of the press by believing it had to cancel the account of a respected alternative medium. Rudolf Steiner on his cloud will be amazed!
It is also interesting in this context that there is only one "liar" in the vocabulary of the MSM, Trump, who is called that for every slipped number in a debate, while the same people generously overlook all the constant lies of most politicians. "Whose bread I eat the song I sing,,," was the saying back in the Thirty Years' War. The problem is that the vast majority of people feel comfortable and safe in the pack. Thinking for yourself, expressing your own opinion? Who does that? And so everyone always follows the drummers and whistlers, only to claim afterwards that they couldn't have known. Well, for those to the left of the apex of the intelligence distribution, that's true. That's another problem. So nothing new for ages: "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark." Hamlet