Skip to content

Naomi Seibt Faces Prison For Incorrect Climate Views

May 26, 2020

By Paul Homewood






Naomi Seibt

While our attentions have been focussed on the coronavirus, something alarming and rather shocking has been going on in Germany.


You will probably be aware of Naomi Seibt, the 19 year old from Germany who has been making a name as the anti-Greta lately. Her common sense messages about global warming have not gone down well with the climate establishment, who prefer the hysterical outpourings of Greta.

But the campaign against her took a disturbing turn last month. Lord Monckton takes up the story:


To all the kind and generous readers who have donated to the appeal for Naomi Seibt, I should like to say how very grateful she for your support. Thanks to your contributions to her Patreon account, she now has $1600 a month in income, and skeptics everywhere are spreading the word. Stefan Molyneux, who has interviewed Naomi in the past, has just retweeted it. Latest news is that Naomi has been threatened with imprisonment.

Naomi, who will be writing a personal thank-you as soon as she has time, will be devoting your donations to continuing her gallant fight not only for freedom of speech about the climate question but also for freedom from jail.

It is not just about the money, life-saving though it is. She felt very much alone when she realized that the power, the might and the wealth of the State were – for purely political reasons – being aimed directly at her. The warmth of your support has been a very great comfort to her at this difficult time.

She was not happy to receive a letter from the State Media Authority in North Rhine Westphalia, where she lives, telling her that three of her YouTube videos on the climate question were against the law because she had expressed views that were not, in the Authority’s opinion, “climate-friendly”, and because she had mentioned the Heartland Institute in those videos.

Such non-“climate-friendly” mentions of Heartland, the letter said, constituted unlawful product placement.

At the time when that first letter arrived, Naomi was not well. A letter went to the Authority on her behalf, asking for more time so that she could respond properly in due course. The Authority did not give her more time. It went right ahead and issued an “administrative act”, a quasi-judicial decision against her. The act gave her just three choices:

  1. Take down two of the three videos the Authority had originally complained of; or

  2. Pay the Authority 1000 euros plus 200 euros costs for each of the two videos (total $2640 at today’s exchange rate); or

  3. Go to prison for up to 14 days in respect of each video: total up to 28 days.

Naomi made the first of the three videos five months before she even knew the Heartland Institute existed. Unsurprisingly, therefore, that video – video 1 – did not mention Heartland at all. The Authority has now backed off and accepted that video 1 could not by any stretch of the most insanely malevolent bureaucratic imagination constitute product placement for the Heartland Institute. That leaves videos 2 and 3.

In video 2, just a couple of minutes long, Naomi announced to her 88,000 YouTube followers that she was now a member of the Heartland Institute, and said that she would be working with it to take a rational and non-alarmist approach to the climate question. All she was doing was telling the truth. But in her homeland it seems it is now again unlawful to tell the truth if the State does not like the truth. That should worry all of us.

In law, that mention of Heartland does not constitute unlawful product placement because Naomi stated her connection with Heartland explicitly, right at the beginning of video 2. For that was the whole point of the video: to tell her followers, openly and honestly, that she was now with the Institute. In civilized jurisdictions, for good reason, it is only undeclared product placement that is unlawful.

In any event, the Authority says such mentions are only illegal if in the same video one advocates policy prescriptions. But the 280 words of video 2 contain no policy recommendations at all.

Video 3 did not mention Heartland even once. It was a video of a speech Naomi had given to a German audience. The event had been arranged long before I had introduced her to the Heartland Institute. Heartland had absolutely nothing to do with it, and it had absolutely nothing to do with Heartland. It beats me how anyone could imagine for a single instant that video 3 could possibly constitute product placement.

Yet the Authority – inferentially anxious to find fault with more than just one short and harmless video – persists in pursuing Naomi for video 3 as well as for video 2, even though I have written to it twice directly and once via the German Ambassador in London to warn it to cease and desist’

On the facts, no reasonable, independent and impartial public authority exercising a quasi-judicial function could possibly regard any of videos 1-3 as constituting unlawful product placement.

Remarkably, the Authority manifests its prejudice in this affair by using the words “climate-friendly” to describe its own viewpoint on the climate question, not only in its initial letter but also, far more seriously and far more culpably, in its quasi-judicial administrative act…….


Monckton goes on to demolish the legal aspects of the State’s case, before concluding:

The Authority is wrong in fact, for it is manifest that neither of the two videos it complains of constitutes unlawful product placement. And it is wrong in law, for it has acted contrary to natural justice by judging itself, by expressing open prejudice in the judgment and by failing to allow Naomi time to respond substantively before it judged her.

Its crude attempt at silencing the freedom of thought, of conscience, of expression and of association of a 19-year-old YouTuber against whom it has chosen to discriminate on the stated ground that she is not, in its words, “climate-friendly” is now justifiably attracting worldwide condemnation.

As a result of the appeal, Naomi not only has enough money to keep body and soul together, but individual donors have come forward so that she can engage a senior administrative lawyer to fight her corner in the Verwaltungsgericht (the State administrative court).

Even the Left-leaning media hacks who had previously given Naomi a hard time for daring to question the climate-Communist Party Line are now increasingly on her side. They are shocked at the Authority’s heavy-handedness.

The Authority, now visibly desperate, has issued an imprudent and mendacious press statement falsely stating that it had given Naomi a fair chance to put her side of the case. The courts will not like that.

An appeal against the Authority’s kangaroo-court misconduct has been lodged. In due course a proper judge will hear not only the Authority’s side of the case but Naomi’s as well – the case that the Authority scandalously refused to hear before it issued its quasi-judicial administrative act.

One question the judge will be asked to rule upon is whether the Authority must answer Naomi’s request to be told which of its “climate-friendly” fellow-believers told it about her videos.

On her behalf, a copy of an email from a third party to the Authority about Naomi’s videos was requested and provided, but the Authority redacted the name of the sender without having declared the redaction. That failure to declare that a document furnished in court proceedings had been altered from its original state is a serious breach of process. The Authority has thus put itself in contempt of court. The offense is imprisonable.

The question arises whether the Authority and its “climate-friendly” clerks, in demanding money from Naomi with menaces even though it knows perfectly well – for it has been plainly, fairly and repeatedly told – that it has no legitimate grounds whatsoever to make those demands, has committed the serious, imprisonable criminal offences of blackmail, fraud and misfeasance in a public office.

I shall be referring the case papers to the German Ambassador with a formal complaint to be forwarded to the police and investigating authorities in Münster, where Naomi lives, and in Berlin.

The international news media are already planning to be present in the Verwaltungsgericht. This will be a battle royal for freedom of speech against the over-mighty State. Thanks to your generosity, the State will crash and burn, and freedom of speech will win. It will not be Naomi that goes to jail. Thank you all again. Let freedom ring!


Monckton sent a copy of this draft article to the State Media Authority, with the following cover letter:

I refer to previous correspondence in this matter, to which I have had no reply. I now attach a draft of an article that is to be published globally via multiple outlets. If by close of business on 26 May 2020 I shall not have received any corrections on questions of fact from or on behalf of the State media “authority”, I shall take it that the “authority” is content that the facts are as I have represented them in the article, which will thereupon be published.

A copy of this letter and its enclosure goes to His Excellency the German Ambassador in London.

Yours faithfully,

Viscount Monckton of Brenchley


As he notes, no such undertaking has been received.


It is frankly quite astonishing that a young girl can be locked up for politically incorrect views. After all, this is not China we are talking about.

Forget about the nonsense of “unlawful product placement”, which Monckton destroys anyway. Why would a State media authority even be aware of such a minor video, never mind go to the lengths of legal proceedings over such an inconsequential technicality? The very words “climate friendly” tell us all we need to know.

But it is even more concerning that, apparently, laws exist in Germany to allow this to happen.

Clearly darker forces are at work here, determined to shut down any criticism of the climate establishment.

We live in strange and worrying times.

If you would like to contribute to the cost of Naomi’s court case, just click on the link below:

  1. stephen kent permalink
    May 26, 2020 7:31 pm

    Whatever ones beliefs… what happened to freedom of speech ? Is this the Third Reich ?? Naomi should move to the UK !

    • Bertie permalink
      May 26, 2020 7:45 pm

      Maybe the 4th!

    • J William Scott permalink
      May 26, 2020 7:53 pm

      It is the Fourth Reich, but, not named as such – it is otherwise known as the EU. Just wait till it hits the ECJ.

    • Roger Cole permalink
      May 26, 2020 9:06 pm

      You really think the U.K. has freedom of speech, Stephen?

      • bobn permalink
        May 26, 2020 11:07 pm

        Correct Roger, the fascists are in control in the UK as well. Ask julian assange about freedom of speech. Or Tommy Robinson, jailed in a quickie kangeroo court for 11 months for practicing journalism.

  2. tim leeney permalink
    May 26, 2020 7:37 pm

    This should really raise her media profile, and get her message more widely heard. She needs to be reassured that this is one of the likely outcomes. Meanwhile, please donate, everyone. This repression must be fought.

    • May 26, 2020 7:49 pm

      Hopefully it is a fine example of the Streisand Effect (The Streisand effect is a social phenomenon that occurs when an attempt to hide, remove, or censor information has the unintended consequence of further publicizing that information, often via the Internet).

    • Kelland Hutchence permalink
      May 28, 2020 1:14 pm

      I would gladly donate but unfortunately Paypal doesn’t allow me to log in and they have a long expired and unknown phone number registered for me. So I go around in circles. Is there any other way I can contribute?

  3. Jonathan Scott permalink
    May 26, 2020 7:44 pm

    The supposed “perfect” people, the claimed planet lovers are actually people haters. Just read the Gulag Archipelago and you will find familiar voices echoing down from history in NKVD or Smersh jackboots. Their claims are tenuous in the extreme and there is a lot of money which can stop flowing if they do not keep the climate fraud hysteria from flowing. People do not get angry with you when you want to make a fool of yourself. They get angry because they worry you will show what fools they are!

  4. Bertie permalink
    May 26, 2020 7:51 pm

    Duly supported. Go girl. Damn sight more credible than the sainted one!

    • May 26, 2020 8:17 pm

      I’ve supported her. Well done girl, you are an inspiration, and complete opposite to poor ‘used’ little Greta

  5. dogdaisy2 permalink
    May 26, 2020 8:06 pm

    I am absolutely appalled.

  6. Jackington permalink
    May 26, 2020 8:18 pm

    So sad to have to give a German girl a “leg up” what is happening to the world??

  7. Ian Travers permalink
    May 26, 2020 8:18 pm

    Well done Lord Monckton! What chance of hearing about this on BBC news?

    • Jonathan Scott permalink
      May 26, 2020 8:42 pm

      hahahaha have you READ the BBC news web page today…this evening ? Go and read it and just drink in what the BBC considers now is “news” There is nothing but identity politics and intersectionality. Race, sexuality, gender name it and b..all news! There is one particularly tastelessly reported piece about an incident in the US. Just when you think the BBC cannot get any worse they do! They have taken to blanking any climate issue their political commissars do not agree with. They did not report at all on Michael Moores latest blockbuster also shamefully neither did they report on the sad death of Freeman Dyson a British born American physicist, one of the geniuses of our time I suspect because of his views on their sacred climate nonsense.

  8. Harry Passfield permalink
    May 26, 2020 8:37 pm

    This, seriously, is a warning: The Covid-19 lock-down in the UK has emboldened authorities, including the police, to follow-up and act on the way a large section of the public have quietly acquiesced to the non-legal ‘rules’ of lock-down. In this TPTB see a way to expand their controls such that contra-beliefs to state-defined dogma will be ‘unlawful’ – and who among us is to stand against such a law?
    The sooner the CV ‘laws’ are taken down (I wonder if the ever will), the better.

  9. Geoff B permalink
    May 26, 2020 8:39 pm

    Reuters have an article on her case published today, its here.

    I am not taking any sides on this and Lord Monckton is well respected, but i have always believed in doing my own research, before taking up a cause.

    • sarastro92 permalink
      May 26, 2020 8:54 pm

      The article you posted said that Seibt violated German laws and she was requested to delete the videos. Now there will be appeals and a court fight. How is this different from Monckton’s post?

      • Geoff B permalink
        May 26, 2020 9:09 pm

        according to the reuters article, she was not fined and the articles are still available on youtube (she has 5 articles on youtube when I just checked). As I stated I am not taking sides, but where money is requested I like to check first.

    • MrGrimNasty permalink
      May 26, 2020 9:28 pm

      It’s difficult to do your own research when ‘fact checkers’ are just propaganda enforcers, and the main internet platforms police any dissent.

      At first glance there seems be some ‘moving the goal posts/straw man’ type issues with that Reuters link.

      The link for one of the claims they debunk is a nothing face book page – which they could have posted themselves for the debunk. Other links are the WaPo/Guardian/HuffPost – FFS! and looks like a coordinated smear campaign. And why does this ‘impartial’ factcheck contain so much largely irrelevant negative stuff?

      As we know internet platforms are far cleverer than outright banning, they make people invisible without them knowing and shutdown revenue streams.

      As for the official denial about being allowed a defence and no fine – who knows, if Lordy has got it wrong no doubt he will correct and so will Seibt in due course.

      Claiming to have asked for a comment? Makes the accused sound shifty – probably contacted in the middle of the night 2 seconds before publishing.

      But the verdict screeches of what it is not saying:-

      “False. Naomi Seibt was not banned from social media platforms. Regional German telecommunication regulators did not fine Seibt, but requested she delete two YouTube videos for violating German law.”

      Then shadow banned perhaps, and if not fined by ‘regulators’ then perhaps technically some other office title etc. Who knows these days. It’s all a sick game.

    • Roger Cole permalink
      May 26, 2020 9:43 pm

      We know she wasn’t fined or imprisoned, she was given three choices, according to your link, all of which were an imposition on her freedom of speech, as this article correctly says, she was only THREATENED with these outcomes, the matter being not yet finished, so that’s alright then! Perhaps you might have opened your own link and read it carefully before putting forward a straw man as evidence.

      • Chaswarnertoo permalink
        May 27, 2020 6:33 am

        Shows how nasty the cornered warmists are.

    • Phoenix44 permalink
      May 27, 2020 7:58 am

      That’s an appalling “fact check”. She was asked to remove videos because they broke the law. So what happens if she refuses? She gets fined or goes to jail. That’s how it works. Sure, maybe she hasn’t been fined – yet. Minckton doesn’t say she has been fined – but she has been threatened with a fine or jail.

    • Derek Reynolds permalink
      May 27, 2020 8:35 am

      The Reuters ‘article’ is less a fact check, more a deliberation and sentence. They appear to be standing as kangaroo court complete with verdict

      Sit on the fence for long and you will get splinters.

  10. sarastro92 permalink
    May 26, 2020 8:46 pm

    Germany sorely needs another round of de-Nazification.

  11. Thomas Carr permalink
    May 26, 2020 9:23 pm

    It will be interesting to discover what Reuters’ Fact Check Team did to check the facts and the relationship between the State Media Authority and Reuters.
    Perhaps the State Media Authority is using Reuters as the conduit for their version of the facts.
    Paul, please keep us informed as the Court action progresses. At least some more of the credibility awarded to Greta will be in peril.

    • bobn permalink
      May 27, 2020 1:59 am

      A reuters hit piece. Remember reuters is not impartial nor independant anymore. It works under the influence of the Atlantic Council and has CIA and MI5 editors in its midst. Because reuters and AP are the 2 big feeds to the Main media the State infiltrated and took editing control of them decades ago. Media management was taught to me in the military in the 1990’s. British Army has a whole brigade established for media management. They’re working overtime to push the Govt lockdown was necessay message at the moment, through the docile main media outlets. Shame if the truth that ‘lockdown’ made no difference to final death rates ever gets out.

  12. Adam Gallon permalink
    May 26, 2020 9:27 pm

    I see that YouTube’s pulled Planet of the Humans. Sounds like a little editing, to remove the few seconds of footage & it should be back up.

    • Jonathan Scott permalink
      May 26, 2020 10:05 pm

      Yes and the “impartial Guaniad hasd the temerity to quote Mann of all people claiming the moral high ground!

    • Wellers permalink
      May 29, 2020 11:54 am

      If you have watched the Planet of the Humans make sure that you give it a review rating on Totten Tomatoes.

  13. Broadlands permalink
    May 26, 2020 9:45 pm

    This is sadly reminiscent of a letter written to President Obama, his Attorney General and Dr. Holdren asking for climate skeptics to be prosecuted…

    Letter to President Obama, Attorney General Lynch, and OSTP Director Holdren

    Dear President Obama, Attorney General Lynch, and OSTP Director Holdren,
    As you know, an overwhelming majority of climate scientists are convinced about the potentially serious adverse effects of human-induced climate change on human health, agriculture, and biodiversity. We applaud your efforts to regulate emissions and the other steps you are taking. Nonetheless, as climate scientists we are exceedingly concerned that America’s response to climate change – indeed, the world’s response to climate change – is insufficient. The risks posed by climate change, including increasing extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and increasing ocean acidity – and potential strategies for addressing them – are detailed in the Third National Climate Assessment (2014), Climate Change Impacts in the United States. The stability of the Earth’s climate over the past ten thousand years contributed to the growth of agriculture and therefore, a thriving human civilization. We are now at high risk of seriously destabilizing the Earth’s climate and irreparably harming people around the world, especially the world’s poorest people.

    We appreciate that you are making aggressive and imaginative use of the limited tools available to you in the face of a recalcitrant Congress. One additional tool – recently proposed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse – is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change. The actions of these organizations have been extensively documented in peer- reviewed academic research (Brulle, 2013) and in recent books including: Doubt is their Product (Michaels, 2008), Climate Cover-Up (Hoggan & Littlemore, 2009), Merchants of Doubt (Oreskes & Conway, 2010), The Climate War (Pooley, 2010), and in The Climate Deception Dossiers (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2015). We strongly endorse Senator Whitehouse’s call for a RICO investigation.

    The methods of these organizations are quite similar to those used earlier by the tobacco industry. A RICO investigation (1999 to 2006) played an important role in stopping the tobacco industry from continuing to deceive the American people about the dangers of smoking. If corporations in the fossil fuel industry and their supporters are guilty of the misdeeds that have been documented in books and journal articles, it is imperative that these misdeeds be stopped as soon as possible so that America and the world can get on with the critically important business of finding effective ways to restabilize the Earth’s climate, before even more lasting damage is done.

    Jagadish Shukla, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
    Edward Maibach, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
    Paul Dirmeyer, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
    Barry Klinger, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
    Paul Schopf, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
    David Straus, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
    Edward Sarachik, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
    Michael Wallace, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
    Alan Robock, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ
    Eugenia Kalnay, University of Maryland, College Park, MD
    William Lau, University of Maryland, College Park, MD
    Kevin Trenberth, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO
    T.N. Krishnamurti, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL
    Vasu Misra, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL
    Ben Kirtman, University of Miami, Miami, FL
    Robert Dickinson, University of Texas, Austin, TX
    Michela Biasutti, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY
    Mark Cane, Columbia University, New York, NY
    Lisa Goddard, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY
    Alan Betts, Atmospheric Research, Pittsford, VT

  14. Jonathan Scott permalink
    May 26, 2020 10:03 pm

    Well my claim to fame is being first suspended then removed from Linkedin I assume for being a thorn in the side of some of their more “important” corporate patrons who post total lies as part of their green posturing, in particular one Scandinavian pusher of in support of worthless over priced under performing windmills,. First I knew was that I could not get in to Linkedin then I received a mail which pointed to their terms and conditions which they said I had violated which lists a very woolly number of things you cannot do to others ( which boiled down to not being allowed to say things their preferred listers did not agree with! ). I tried to have a conversation..I may only ever have been writing to a robot because I repeatedly was asked ( very cleverly I thought) if I would agree to abide by their rules and conditions “in the future”. I kept writing saying to do that was an admission of past guilt and kept asking them to provide as evidence any wrongful post made by myself so I could perhaps understand my “lapse”.
    After asking this half a dozen times this question was not answered directly but indirectly by saying that it was not Linkedin policy to divulge its’ security systems!!! I had not heard from them for a week so replied again asking for clarification of any wrongdoing by myself including evidence in the form of a post which supposedly contravened their rules of engagement. A mail came back quickly with blurb saying this mail address could only be used for current or recently closed cases… my case was either current or recently closed(by them)! I tried it several times and all it did was point you to take contact with them via a link……..which it turned out was only accessible inside an active account because it prompted me to log on but I could not so as far as I can see they have just pulled the plug and like the rest of these murky organizations getting in touch with a live person is well nigh impossible….certainly if you are locked out!
    If ANYONE out there knows a way externally to contact their “customer” service or whatever they call themselves please let me know because I feel I have been knobbled because I dared to challenging lies with empirical data based facts and Linkedins handling of this was akin to the behaviour of the NKVD or Smersh…. guilty and no need to provide evidence to support the accusation or verdict!

    • Broadlands permalink
      May 27, 2020 1:09 am

      I was also “removed” from the AAAS ‘blog’ for making too many comments that their team of moderators decided didn’t fit their climate change narrative…one that is also funded by the Grantham Foundation.

    • Harry Davidson permalink
      May 27, 2020 3:21 pm

      LinkedIn is owned by Microsoft. It is Microsoft corporate policy to utterly ruin any and every company they buy. As part of that they apply strict censorship and a totalitarian view of the world.

  15. May 26, 2020 10:42 pm

    This State Media Authority has surely overreached its powers and/or is bluffing.

  16. adamsmith1922 permalink
    May 27, 2020 12:06 am

    Reblogged this on The Inquiring Mind and commented:
    Could it happen here?

  17. May 27, 2020 1:46 am

    I haven’t yet found either a factual account, explaining the charges, with links to the legislation and the court papers, or a purported debunking of this campaigning, appealing-for-legal-defence-funding polemic. We need more detailed facts, that we can check.

  18. Richard Bell permalink
    May 27, 2020 5:21 am

    Germany should be above reproach when it comes to this type of opinion silencing … it has form !!

  19. Is it just me? permalink
    May 27, 2020 7:13 am

    For years, I have stated I think the internet is the eight wonder of the world, but right now – I’m beginning to waver on this opinion. Anybody’s whole existence can seemingly be ruined by a prevailing ‘click-shoal’ of carefully targetted ill-feeling & signpost semantics – all ‘policed’ by assorted bods, always with about 25% of the actual life experience needed in any situation for brevity and clairty. Once we get AI in the mix, Christ only knows what the next generation will face? For me, it’s increasingly about back to basics. No-one can halt progress, but Jesus – is this what we call progress? Spending hours of our days trying to find one shard of non-cyber hard, touchable reality we can use as a yardstick to ‘sanity check’ anything? Trying to frantically separate out the light from the dark? Every day is a battle to separate out the soup of ‘agenda’ from ‘O.M.G shock horror’ from proper process and due dligence (“Who owns what? Who’s driving what? Where is what?”). Meantime – here we all are – ‘at it’ with each other. Humanity seems to have always come up with new ways to destroy and devalue itself. 1950’s – annihilation by Oppenheimer’s bomb. 2020’s – annihilation by fake news and emotional overload/exhaustion. God, it really is depressing….

    • Derek Reynolds permalink
      May 27, 2020 8:55 am

      No, it’s not ‘just you’!

      To conquer psychologically is to set common factions against one another. Create dissemination throughout, weakening any one direct action or thought and allowing one great scam to prevail, driven by those 1% who are always behind the curtain. Which, by the way, is becoming more transparent as time – and the clear oppression of the masses – becomes ever more obvious.

      Yes, it’s time consuming researching all that is available, and personally I find myself at the screen and keyboard until midday. But without exposure of the evils that surround us we can only end up blind and ignorant. Just what the oligarchy desire.

      • Is it just me? permalink
        May 27, 2020 10:38 am

        I understand what you are saying Derek Reynolds – but occasionally – for the sake of your own sanity – you have to cease. And, after having spent all morning slaving over your keyboard – what makes you so 100% cock-sure you’ve the right answers? Have you the right answers? Or, have you convinced yourself in your own mind they are the right answers? That’s the problem of the internet – we can find our own level of capability / conscious and stay there. Yes, the 1% have always been there. But, when people were ‘getting on’ – e.g – each generation did better than the previous one – few gave a stuff about the 1%. Now everything’s gone to hell in a hand-cart – the “terrible actions of the 1%”, “exposing the 1%” is what a huge chunk of the 99% bang on about morning, noon and night. Do most of you not realise this started with the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913? Or the Kallergi plan in the 1920’s? Do you honestly think that being a keyboard warrior in 2020 is going to turn you into some kind of cyber ‘William Wallace’? Get real. This has been planned for well over a century – and if you think it’s all going to be vanquished by the collective tappings of millions on keyboards – then I think youve grossly under-estimated your enemy!

      • saparonia permalink
        May 29, 2020 8:51 pm

        “Is it just me” The fact that you too have added to this thread means that you too are stuck in the web, we all are. We can disentangle.
        The basics for this web began a very long time ago.
        The IChing’s ‘Map of the Yellow River’, a system of 1’s and 0’s, mirrors exactly the Binary Code. We have been here before. The Map was found by the Yellow River so long ago it’s lost in time.
        I play on my computer and use it for personal stuff, I do not ever use my phone for Internet. I always turn off the Internet unless I specifically need it for something. I do not use Windows. I threw away my TV, I use Google for email, the worst possible, because all email is insecure no matter what you use and google reminds me of this.

  20. Gerry, England permalink
    May 27, 2020 9:04 am

    And in the same vein Dr Peter Ridd is in court today as the appeal by James Cook University against it losing the case against Dr Ridd on ALL 17 counts for sacking him when he told the truth about the Great Barrier Reef not dying and of the poor quality of research at JCU. The JCU has shown no shame in spending millions of public money to pursue Dr Ridd as opposed to take note of his points particularly about shoddy research given that a recent study about changes to the oceans ph was shown not to be repeatable. I have helped fund Dr Ridd’s case as of course he doesn’t have the public’s taxes to fund him just the ordinary public. Jo Nova will be a good source for updates. Interesting that the case sees what could be considered the top two QCs in Australia going head to head.

  21. Charles Bradshaw permalink
    May 27, 2020 11:11 am

    She is a citizen of Muenster. It must not be forgotten that this is a city that has had its troubles in the past. It was the focus of the Anabaptist movement during the reign of Henry VIII. In the last century Cardinal Von Galen stood out against the Nazi party. During WWII it was ringed by Army barracks because of suspected disaffection with the regime. No surprise that yet another citizen finds herself in the focus of the authorities for questioning doctrine.
    Having questions that cannot be answered is part of our existence. What is repulsive is saying that there are answers that cannot be questioned.

  22. sva990 permalink
    May 27, 2020 11:32 am

    The (grave) accusations that are made in this post are mainly based on opinions expressed by one of the most well-known climate threat sceptics in the world right now, Lord Monckton. As far as I know Monckton has no professional knowledge of German law and he also has invested heavily in promoting the image of Seibt as the Anti-Greta. Therefore it is very important to question all that he says and to try to find complementary information from other more or less trustworthy sources.

    • May 27, 2020 5:52 pm

      Monckton has alreade demolished the Reuters “factcheck”:

      See his comments at 7.34 pm

    • May 28, 2020 1:25 am


      You wrote


      The (grave) accusations that are made in this post are mainly based on opinions expressed by one of the most well-known climate threat sceptics in the world right now, Lord Monckton. As far as I know Monckton has no professional knowledge of German law and he also has invested heavily in promoting the image of Seibt as the Anti-Greta. Therefore it is very important to question all that he says and to try to find complementary information from other more or less trustworthy sources.


      The accusations are grave. It is important to find out what they are based on. They aren’t based on Monckton’s opinions though. But I agree to question all he says, like I do with anybody else, including you, if you get around to saying anything you expect me to act on.

      The accusations are either true or false. If they are true, and grave (as you admit they are), it is irrelevant to that serious situation that Monckton is a climate threat sceptic who knows precious little about German law – other than that it almost certainly has in it something like our British Human Rights Act, so that a knowledge of the Convention is all one needs to guess which way things ought to go in a case like this, however weirdly authoritarian the domestic legislation might be in Germany.

      The Reuters link you provided completely debunks certain false accusations. Greta hasn’t been banned from social media, or fined (yet). However, these don’t happen to be the particular, less sensational, albeit almost as “grave” allegations that Monckton is actually reporting, that she has been asked, by the state, to remove a couple of videos from YouTube, or else she’ll be fined automatically, and sent to prison if she doesn’t pay the fines. At least, that’s what I thought I’d read.

  23. May 27, 2020 12:53 pm

    I wish to publicly thank Founders James Madison and George Mason for the first 10 amendments to the US Constitution, known as the “Bill or Rights.” Germany never seems to learn and would do well to codify our First Amendment into their course of action.

    I also give credit to several of my ancestors, Sir Roger Bigod, his son Hugh Bigod (as Surety Barons for Magna Carta) and William Marshal for involvement in pushing it to fruition and for bringing it back from the papal trash bin as Regent for young Henry III.

    Magna Carta is dubbed the first “bill of rights.” It was used extensively in the Mayflower Compact, the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. Clause 1 became “Freedom of religion” in the First Amendment; Clauses 30, 31 & 39 became the 4th Amendment; Clauses 39 & 40 are incorporated in the 5th Amendment; and Clause 40 defines the 6th Amendment.

    We are incredibly blessed to have these incorporated in our Constitution. Of course we must constantly push the left back as they try to abolish them, especially with the election of President Donald J. Trump who actually believes in them. Always against the 2nd Amendment (right to bear arms) they are NOW against the first Amendment also. They want Donald Trump to be banned from tweeting. That tells you how very effective he is…..

  24. mark taha permalink
    May 27, 2020 8:08 pm

    I believe in climate charge but also in free speech so I’m on Naomi’s side.

  25. George Reagan permalink
    May 27, 2020 9:28 pm

    I’m trying to recall the use of “The Authority” in a utopian world from past. I believe it is the futuristic novel “1984” that uses this term. It seem that the german authority has read this book and taking a page from the USA’s demowit Marxist progressive political junk pile, after all old socialist Karl Marx was of German descent living off of his followers . I guess one could say that old Marx was the original “cottage industry”, sitting on ones arse while writing their thoughts. He died in poverty and disease. However his army spread the ideology of Marxism throughout Europe and the Americas in the 1880s with his “Communist Manifesto” (~1840s/50s). In any case we need to fight this crap with everything we have. Remember the past USSR ??? Mao’s China ??? Ho Che Minh’s Vietnam ??? and many other failed third world dictators. Regards, retired engineer (1973-2018), US Navy vet (1966-1970)

  26. Nigel Sherratt permalink
    May 28, 2020 1:44 pm

    ‘No such undertaking …’ very good. The Energiewende situation has developed not necessarily to Nord Rhein Westphalian bureaucrats’ advantage. A classic example of ‘Mau-Mauing the Flack Catchers’ and the mistaken belief amongst the flack catchers that the crocodile will eat them last. 50 years ago we lived in NRW where BAOR was standing guard lest the USSR decided to fire up their T64s and head across the Hannoverian Plain. Then we were four days (from start to ‘going nuclear’) from annihilation, the current ten years is an improvement no doubt.

  27. mikethurn permalink
    May 30, 2020 5:44 am

    Very disappointed with Germany. What has happened to freedom of speech.

    Intimidation & bullying a young lady because she holds beliefs and view that are contrary to Climate alarmists is utterly despicable, particularly when it is obvious that Germany does not practice what it preaches, when it comes to its importation (Poland ~ 45Mt annually) and use of black coal, and the importation of vast quantities of Natural Gas from Norway & Russia.

    Germanys renewables investments have proved an absolute disaster, as is its use of biomass, which is well for its high emissions of CO2. What a total con job.

    Leave this decent young lady alone, and stop acting like China’s Communist Party.

    Michael Thurn

  28. kramer permalink
    May 30, 2020 9:57 pm

    If she went to prison for expressing her climate views, that would make the left look like a bunch of crazed extremists.

    I think she should go to jail just for this reason.

  29. Terry Gillham permalink
    June 3, 2020 8:14 am

    Liberalism is a mental disorder. We need to build a huge place for liberals to all congregate together so they can all be happy it is called a mental hospital

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: