The World and Germany
Towards an Equal and Respectful Dialogue
George Reiff (revised 2011)
In a modern interconnected world, safety and peace depend more and more on social justice and understanding between people. Enemies of yesterday are friends today. Long standing atomic war threats dissolved overnight; capitalism has forgiven Communism; former colonies have forgiven former colonialists; and Black has forgiven White. A better window for open friendship between the nations has never been so possible as now. However, in all this positive development, one country has been morally left out from being a Republic even though it goes by the name of the Federal “Republic” of Germany. This paper asks whether something should be done to ensure Germany gets a better deal.
The facts with regard to Germany’s sovereignty, or lack of it, are as follows: Germany still does not have a peace treaty with the former allies of World War II. Instead, since 1990, there exists a memorandum of understanding, (the 2+4 agreement) which serves as a fig leaf. It is not a peace treaty according to international public law.
Discriminatory articles 57 and 103 of the UN Charter are still fully in force against Germany and Japan an the memorandum of understanding states that the articles should not be “considered” anymore. But only a complete abolition of both articles would put UNO “Paymasters No 2 and No 3” (Japan and Germany) in an equal position with the other 189 countries.
Within the FRG prerogative, legislation emanating from SHAEF (Supreme Headquarter of the Allied Expeditionary Forces) has been incorporated into
German law; the so called Military Laws. The best example (among many others) for this is Military Law No. 67 under which the fiscal policies of the FRG are governed 64 years after WW II!
In order to understand the FRG one must first understand the legal nature of the Deutsches Reich (a best translation would be: German Realm). When we speak about the Deutsches Reich here, one must understand that we speak about the Weimar Republic, not about the 3rd Reich which is underlined with strong negative current in the FRG due to the occurrences under National Socialist rule, despite the fact that the state with the name Deutsches Reich was founded in 1871. Most people would certainly believe that the Deutsches Reich perished after WW II. This is, however, not true as it had been artificially kept alive legally by the allies of WW II who only had the Regular German Army (Wehrmacht) unconditionally surrender on the 8th of May 1945. It is noteworthy that the English, officially kept alive the Government of the German Realm (Deutsches Reich) in the city of Flensburg, Northern Germany till 23rd of May 1945.
Afterwards, they imprisoned this government. On the same day four years later (they probably surmised that using the same day four years later would make the people forget four years without self-rule that said it all), the allies created the Western Separate Vassal Protectorate “Federal Republic of Germany”, decreeing that the Germans had to convene in a “parliamentary council” under SHAEF Control and to “deliberate” a constitution which had to be endorsed by the SHAEF. The founding fathers of the Federal Republic of Germany were, however, no traitors but pragmatic people and superficially bowed to the wishes of the allies in not presenting a constitution but a provisional “basic law” which was supposed to be supplanted by a real constitution after Germany could decide her own fate in freedom again according to Article 146 Basic Law of the FRG.
Because of the long legal existence of the FRG not many people would believe that the Deutsches Reich/German Realm legally still exists. But the Federal Constitutional Court of the Federal “Republic” of Germany has another view, which it expressed in its rulings 2BvL6/56, 2Bvf1/73 and 2BvR373/83. There the court states that the Deutsches Reich is still in existence within its borders as defined on the 12th December 1937.
Excerpt from sentence 2Bvf1/73: ” … it is held on to it (see BVerfG, 1956-08-17, 1 BvB 2/51, BVerfGE 5, 85 ) that the Deutsches Reich endured the break down in 1945 and neither perished with the capitulation nor with execution of foreign state rule through the Allies in Germany; it is still endowed with a judicial body but not able to act as a state due to the lack of organization. The FRG is not legal successor of however, in relation to its spatial expansion only partly identical…” Excerpt from sentence 2Bvf1/73: “…She (FRG) limits under public law her sovereign powers to the area of application of the Basic Law (see BVerfGE 3, 288 (319 f.); 6, 309 (338, 363)) and feels responsible for the whole of Germany. With implementations of the FRG there was no founding of a new West German state but only a re-organization of a part of Germany.”
The FRG does not have a Constitution (Verfassung) but a so-called Basic Law (Grundgesetz). The reason for this is that the founding fathers of the FRG had to organize a part of Germany anew under the occupation of the SHAEF. As they recognized the severity of a situation where foreign powers dictate the creation of German separate states, they did their utmost to ensure that this did not serve as a fig leaf.
They called the new law not a constitution but a “basic law”. With this they laid the foundation for later generations of Germans to constitute a National Assembly according to Article 146 Basic Law (stating that the Basic Law renders itself invalid after the Germans give themselves in Freedom a Constitution) in order to determine a constitution according to the Free Will of the German People.
However, sycophantic later governments, from 1990 on, did not follow the will of the founding fathers but held on to the provisional basic law, created under foreign occupation and laced with legal inconsistencies against Germany!
Other facts regarding the suzerain status of the FRG in regard to her former occupiers can be seen in various other inconsistencies. For instance, the German people are not permitted to hold a referendum about becoming a province within the European Union as their mainstream parties are all controlled by supranational American based organizations like e.g. Bilderberg, Council for Foreign Relations (in Germany Atlantik Brücke e.V.). Further, it is still not permitted in Germany to introduce new scientific findings in the fields of history and archeology which are connected to WW II and especially if those findings reduce the number of victims of the Nazi regime. Scientists who do not comply may be punished up to 5 years in prison according to Criminal Code, law §130.
The German people are forced to endure continuous moral economic and military black mailing; how else could one explain that German soldiers are now for years under US command in Afghanistan in order to guard US interests there, despite the fact that the broad majority of citizens wish their soldiers were not there.
A German cannot be citizen of the FRG! In documents proving citizenship, FRG officials write “German” as citizenship, not citizen of FRG. Whereas there are other countries that are Monarchies and refer to the subjects as “Thai” or “Spaniards”, it is definitely out of line to call the citizenship of a Republic “Deutsch/German”. This is all due to the aforementioned artificial legal existence of the German Realm, though without organization because the German Citizenship law/Staatsangehörigkeitsgesetz has been renamed just in 2000. Before, this the law, as introduced in 1913 by William II, then Emperor of Germany, was called Reichs und Staatsangehörigkeitsgesetz (German Citizenship and Membership of the Realm law). Through this legal construction, Germany is held in eternal unspeakable legal limbo. Such legal status may have applied the last time in history to Carthage after the 3rd Punic War. Movie productions which explicitly picture Germans as monsters, are financed by the Federal Government of Germany. Most recent of these was Quentin Tarantino’s “Inglorious Basterds” which has been supported financially by the State Secretary for Culture (€6.8 million Euros) and the province of Brandenburg (€ 900.000). The basic message of the movie is that everybody who wore a “Nazi uniform”, meaning also uniforms of youth and women’s organizations and of the regular army, should either be killed and scalped or at least maimed by knifing a swastika into the fore head. It is beyond belief how a peace and people loving government could possibly support such crude brutality with a total of €7.7 million ($US 13 million).
For the sake of legal equality not only of the peoples, religions and genders but also of the nations, it seems that there is a case for giving Germany back full sovereignty over her affairs. A beginning would be a real peace treaty, which actually deserves the name. Another token of respect and friendship of the international community would certainly be to remove Articles 53 and 107 from the UN Charter.
The solution in Germany itself must come from the German people. They must no longer vote for established parties (CDU/CSU/SPD/GRUENE) that deliberately deprive their own people of their right to be equal among the nations and to have not only a nationality (German) but also a citizenship (Federal
Republic of Germany) of their country. There are enough democratic new parties existing who pledge to give Germany a National Assembly and a real Constitution, e.g. the Deutsche Demokratische Partei, Partei der Vernunft, Freie Union, Die Freiheit, and also Bürger in Wut.
A new German government would be required to proceed at once to negotiate bilateral peace treaties with all major players involved in WW II. With this, all hidden and open reparations must end as FRG is 35% smaller than the German Realm (Deutsches Reich) as payment for the lost war. Therefore peace has already been paid, at a more than steep price. Finally, the German Realm (Deutsches Reich) must be laid legally to rest and the reformed FRG must gather a National Assembly according to Article 146 of the Basic Law of Germany and give herself a decent, free constitution according to the will of the German people. This will end 64 years long charade and give the world a new perspective in mutual respect and friendship.
Finally, it is certainly advisable for all government bodies not to financially support any movies that incite to hatred, inferiority complexes or which are directed against good faith, for while artists deserve freedom to express themselves it is clear that government support should be reserved for the betterment of the human condition. Safety and peace are only obtained in a world where people can hold their nationality and their nation in loving regard. What the nations experience within themselves determines what they render to other nations. Forgiveness and redemption are the way to a better modern world. Such a world makes a place for everybody without regard to their former sins. Modesty and openness provides the key. It is time we introduced Glasnost or Perestroika in international politics and in the functioning of the United Nations Organization.
“Constitutional” Goodies of the Federal Republic of Germany
Quoted from the “Basic Law FOR the Federal Republic of Germany”
(FOR instead of OF already makes it grammatically pretty clear that this “Basic Law” was give to them (the West Germans) by the occupiers (mainly USA and England) rather than given by the German people to themselves. No “We the People” for Germans to date….)
Conscious of their responsibility before God and man,
Inspired by the determination to promote world peace as an equal partner in a united Europe, the German people, in the exercise of their constituent power, have adopted this Basic Law.
Germans in the Länder of Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Berlin, Brandenburg, Bremen, Hamburg, Hesse, Lower Saxony, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, North Rhine-Westphalia, Rhineland-Palatinate, Saarland, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, Schleswig-Holstein, and Thuringia have achieved the unity and freedom of Germany in free self-determination. This Basic Law thus applies to the entire German people.
Now the reader must understand one thing: the preambe is already LAW. What do we read there? Inspired by the determination to promote world peace as an equal partner in a united Europe, the German people, in the exercise of their constituent power, have adopted this Basic Law.
Sounds got, doesn’t it? Serving world peace, being an equal partner in a united Europe etc. However, when it is considered as law, it gets a far more compromising meaning. Promoting world peace corrupts into membership of the NATO who exists in name as an intergovernmental organization in order to promote world peace despite it does mostly the opposite. And adopting as basic law a determination to be a partner ( in German there is written “Glied” which could also clearly resemble a tool within a bigger system) in a UNITED Europe shows from the beginning on that there is no chance and no political will from inside and outside Germany to ever allow for full sovereignty again. And that already from 1949 on!
That this is the clear and correct interpretation of the Preamble of the FRG has been just supported by Minister Dr. Wolfgang Schaeuble, who is second in command of the FRG as follows:
At minute 6:50 onwards, Dr. Schäuble states nonchallantly that after the two World Wars in the first half of the 20th century, the concept of sovereignty has led itself ad absurdum and that, therefore, Germany has not obtained full sovereignty ever again since 8th of May 1945. This is not a mistranslation or tendentitious translation. This is what former interior minister and current Finance Minister Schaeuble who was member of various German governments within the last 30 years, has actually clearly proclaimed before the banking elite of the European Union at a recent conference in November 2011. He also points out that exactly this is the meaning of what is written in the preamble of the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany. My case rests.
[Definition of “German” – Restoration of citizenship]
(1) Unless otherwise provided by a law, a German within the
meaning of this Basic Law is a person who possesses German
citizenship or who has been admitted to the territory
of the German Reich within the boundaries of 31 December
1937 as a refugee or expellee of German ethnic origin or as
the spouse or descendant of such person.
Yes, there it is. The “German Citizenship” is indeed still that of the German Reich (German Empire) despite we have a Federal Republic of Germany now.
Side effect: so far more than 4.5 Million so called “late re-settlers” have entered the FRG and are not counted as foreigners despite they usually have nothing to do with Germany or German culture and have either Russian or Polish as their respective languages. As it is stated “who has been admitted to the territory of the German Reich within the boundaries of 31 December 1937″. That applies to a great many people in Russia and Poland. Instead of implementing a reasonable immigration policy with equal chances for qualified foreigners world-wide, those FRG guys in the government really think they are collecting Germans… party haggle, right? The re-settlers are supposed to vote Black (CDU Party) and the usually unqualified immigrants from Turkey are supposed to vote Green (self-explanatory) or Red (SPD Party). Business as usual…. By the way: parties are paid by head count of their votes. Ruling Parties appoint the highest constitutional judges, ruling parties even interfere with the appointment of school principals in Germany….
[Occupation costs – Burdens resulting from the war]
(1) The Federation shall fi nance the expenditures for occupation
costs and other internal and external burdens resulting
from the war, as regulated in detail by federal laws. To the
extent that these war burdens were regulated by federal laws
on or before 1 October 1969, the Federation and the Länder
shall fi nance such expenditures in the proportion established
by such federal laws. Insofar as expenditures for such
of these war burdens as neither have been nor will be regulated
by federal laws were met on or before 1 October 1965
by Länder, municipalities (associations of municipalities),
or other entities performing functions of the Länder or municipalities,
the Federation shall not be obliged to fi nance
them even after that date. The Federation shall be responsible
for subsidies toward meeting the costs of social security,
including unemployment insurance and public assistance to
XI. Transitional and Concluding Provisions 116
the unemployed. The distribution of war burdens between
the Federation and the Länder prescribed by this paragraph
shall not be construed to affect any law regarding claims for
compensation for consequences of the war.
Uuuups, occupation costs? Didn’t the cold war end in 1990? Did the FRG not get full sovereignty over her affairs? Haven’t a great many articles of the Basic Law been repealed or changed (like Article 23)? And then THIS? 70,000 US American soldiers and 20,000 British Soldiers are still within the border of the FRG and are happily equipped with a “constitutional” right to be paid in full by the Federal Republic of Germany and that to date! WOW. That’s a lot of salaries and damages per year.
[Succession to the Administration of the Combined Economic Area]
The Federation shall succeed to the rights and duties of the
Administration of the Combined Economic Area.
Rights and duties of the administration of the COMBINED ECONOMIC AREA? So, the whole FRG thing is closer to being an economic administration then to statehood? Outch, outch, outch… being German is truly no fun – I am telling you!
[Law of religious denominations]
The provisions of Articles 136, 137, 138, 139 and 141 of the
German Constitution of 11 August 1919 shall be an integral
part of this Basic Law.
What the f….? Isn’t it official FRG propaganda line to dismiss every hint on the legal existence of the German Reich beneath the structures of the FRG as conspiracy theory? And then THIS? So, the Weimar Constitution is still valid and the Basic Law has been put atop. Weimar Constitution = DOS, Basic Law = Windows. Hurra, the empire still lives as a little black box within the FRG framework. Is more embarrassment even possible?
[Duration of the Basic Law]
This Basic Law, which since the achievement of the unity
and freedom of Germany applies to the entire German people,
shall cease to apply on the day on which a constitution
freely adopted by the German people takes effect.
And finally, outch, outch, outch: the German penny pinchers / bean counters know exactly the difference between a Basic Law and a Constitution. A Basic law is given to a defeated people by the victor in order to establish law and order according to Article 43 of the Hague Treaty. A constitution is implemented by a constituting act of the people. Appointed State Prime Ministers of the Länder (those guys were not elected in 1948 but appointed by the occupying forces of the UK and USA) could not vote a Basic Law into a Constitution and, lo and behold, therefore Article 146 here. Germany has no active constitution since 1945 and nobody sees it, especially not the Germans.
Well, well, well – those guys who wrote the Basic Law while American bayonettes pointed at them, were not bad guys. They did what they had to do and they made the best possible out of it. My guess is that 75% of the law principles within the FRG Basic law are well considered and good for the people. The 25% garbage which stems from occupation and foreign military government should be replaced with something useful and uplifting. Defining a true citizenship of a true German Republic would be a first step. Constitutions come through national assembly. Overdue since 1990 at least. Also, a full change of system towards a German Republic would lay to rest the legal balast that is involved with the Deutsche Reich and the administrative construction of a FRG like for example the sublime threat through the enemy state clauses of the UNO.
Here the UNO articles that are to date exclusively directed against Germany and Japan and they basically mean that a blood bath as initiated against, well, let’s say Lybia could be initiated by the USA or its allies without much ado even without asking the Russian and Chinese for permission within the Security Council:
- The Security Council shall, where appropriate, utilize such regional arrangements or agencies for enforcement action under its authority. But no enforcement action shall be taken under regional arrangements or by regional agencies without the authorization of the Security Council, with the exception of measures against any enemy state, as defined in paragraph 2 of this Article, provided for pursuant to Article 107 or in regional arrangements directed against renewal of aggressive policy on the part of any such state, until such time as the Organization may, on request of the Governments concerned, be charged with the responsibility for preventing further aggression by such a state.
- The term enemy state as used in paragraph 1 of this Article applies to any state which during the Second World War has been an enemy of any signatory of the present Charter.
- The trusteeship system shall apply to such territories in the following categories as may be placed thereunder by means of trusteeship agreements:
a. territories now held under mandate;
b. territories which may be detached from enemy states as a result of the Second World War; and
c. territories voluntarily placed under the system by states responsible for their administration.
- It will be a matter for subsequent agreement as to which territories in the foregoing categories will be brought under the trusteeship system and upon what terms.
Nothing in the present Charter shall invalidate or preclude action, in relation to any state which during the Second World War has been an enemy of any signatory to the present Charter, taken or authorized as a result of that war by the Governments having responsibility for such action.
In 1995 there was Resolution A/RES/50/52 issued by UN’s General Assembly
“Taking note of the recommendation of the Special Committee on the most appropriate legal action to be taken on the question of the deletion of the “enemy State” clauses from Articles 53, 77 and 107 of the Charter of the United Nations,
Recognizing that, having regard to the substantial changes that have
taken place in the world, the “enemy State” clauses in Articles 53, 77 and 107 of the Charter of the United Nations have become obsolete”
Definition of OBSOLETE as per Definition of Merriam-Webster
a: no longer in use or no longer useful
So this is not a legal agreement at all that would invalidate the enemy state clauses but merely a fig leave declaration that it should once (UPON A TIME, EH?) be invalidated, and this we can see as follows:
3. Expresses its intention to initiate the procedure set out in
Article 108 of the Charter of the United Nations to amend the Charter, with prospective effect, by the deletion of the “enemy State” clauses from Articles 53, 77 and 107 at its earliest appropriate future session;
Well, now we are already 20 years later and NOTHING happened. Can people see now why the legal construction “Deutsches Reich” is still kept legally alive below the administrative construction of a “Federal Republic” of Germany/”Bundesrepublik” Deutschland?
One last thing where we can see that something must be very wrong with the Federal Republic of Germany in itself from the beginning on:
Criminal Code § 81, dealing with High Treason – § 81 StGB
He who undertakes with violence or threat(ens) with violence
1. To impair the continuance of the Federal Republic of Germany or
2. To change the constitutional order which is based on the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany
Will be punished with life imprisonment or with imprisonment not under 10 years.
As we can see, there is only a provision for High Treason IF violence comes into play. Introducing a constitution-like super law like the Maastricht or Lisbon Treaties or previously introducing without popular vote a flailing currency like the Euro is not punishable despite historical precedence like for example the foundation of the Northern Union, later on resulting in the German Empire of 1871. This first German unification process back then clearly shows that a unification of customs and money is a definite step to abolishing a country and dissolving it into a bigger one. An attempt to dissolve a country without the express will of the sovereign has been in the book of history high treason at all times – no matter whether violently approached or by other means. The voluntary dissolution of the separate sovereignty of the Colonies that rebelled against the English with final success in 1776, acquired respectively their own sovereignty and dissolved this after much discussion and public consideration deliberately into a union which is called USA is an example of a dissolution into a bigger country with the express will of the sovereign . Nonetheless, the Civil War of 1861 had to take place because even in this voluntary dissolution of countries into a bigger one, there were flaws in the process. These flaws let the Southern States assess the legal situation back then as still having sovereignty as free single countries. And that unviolent acts like e.g. giving secret information to another country or even the public, is considered high treason everywhere as the cases of Mordechai Vanunu (uncovered the Israeli Atomic Bomb) or Bradley Manning ( gave ( probably unwittingly partially Secret Service “white-washed”) information to Wikileaks). We can see that the FRG has from the beginning on the necessary provisions that it can be dissolved into another country without any legal hindrance – in that case into the European Union – without popular vote. The dream of Henry Morgenthau (the guy in Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s staff who wanted to completely partition and dissolve Germany) comes true.
People need not to think that I am against a unification of Europe. By far not. I am even for the unification of earth. But the question is for whom and how. The unification must take place strictly democratically and always based on popular vote and prior public discussion and the aim must always be an advancement of humanity. With such mechanism in place the high finance and bankster elite will not profit from it because people will demand provisions during such unifications which are good for the people and not good for the banksters and their attached tin pot imperialists.
Also, a unification can only take place by respecting local cultures and customs. People are not all the same though they are endowed with the same human rights. They are hugely different due to culture and those do-gooders who would not believe it just need to visit another continent (for all “white” people I can warmly recommend Asia as an eye-opener) for a longer time span. These differences must be possible to prevail in their respective regions. In all the current unifications processes, be it UNO, be it EU or the like the problem is that they are all instigated by secret societies and the high finance. Therefore, it is all about Corporatism and the resulting cheap labor, low or absent taxation for the super rich and their global corporations and foundations, free flow of masses of money for those guys and so forth only. Money slavery… Therefore, unified laws on all levels are given to all like the EU pretty well shows us. National uniqueness and different customs are not taken into account at all. That under such circumstances like the current looming crisis, finally resentment and failure will follow, is clear. The American Civil War of 1861 may well be a harbinger of what could come. As sad as it is.