Legal means against Drone Terror from Ramstein

Ramstein is a horrible exception. Otherwise Germany more or less refrains from state-organized Terror since 1945 and 1989.

MQ-9 Reaper - 090609-F-0000M-777

To stop the Drone Terror, Ramstein must be closed

According to Andreas Schüller from European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights, the Drone Terror should be taken before a court in the USA. Carsten Luther cited Mr. Schüller’s on Ohne Ramstein keine Drohnenangriffe (=without Ramstein no Drone Attacks.) Luther explains why victims try to take legal action against the Drone Terror in Germany as a accomplice of the crime.

If the German people do nothing against the Drone Terror, who would do? For sure, not the strategists of terrorism. To global terrorism, the Drones represent an invaluable gift from heaven. Or, as the British Guardian cites four US-American Whistleblowers: „Obama’s drone war a ‚recruitment tool‘ for Isis, say US air force whistleblowers.“

The strategists of global terrorism never will ban usage of cell-phones entirely. They are interested in the USA to always find somebody to take aim at. Without state-organized Drone Terror non-state Terror organisations could be at risk to lose supply of recruits.

The strategists of the military-industrial complex never will oppose the Drone Terror, which is vital to their business model.

Project-Ideas need to be proven by legal experts

I don’t want to be a hero, and I don’t want to incite anybody else to do something heroic. That’s why I want to ensure that my propositions are less risky and better suited to succeed then the actions of the white rose. The members of this opposition group are famous for the sacrifice of their own life. But as far as I know, their engagement against state organized terror did not lead to any documented success.

I want to ensure that my propositions are legally unchallengeable. Their legal justification must be very solid. That’s why feedback from legal counselers in particular is very welcome. My interpretation of german laws need to be double-checked by experts.

Would you like to participate? Or do you think of legal concerns? Please let me kow – contact me!

§129a StGB as a Tool against Terror organisation CIA

Aim of this Project: By pretending to support the Terror organisation CIA provoke a legal examination wether support of the CIA violates §129a StGB. Hopefully the result of this examination will create a situation where the support of the CIA is officially considered illegal in germany. This should put an end to Drone Terror out of Ramstein.

Assumption: The CIA is a terror organization, as stated by Günter Grass 2001 in Spiegel. Or to cite an unknown US-american protester: „The CIA is a terrorist group. Human torture is a crime.“ Or from a leaflet, which the Daily Pennsysvanian cited: „[the CIA is] the most destructive terrorist organization in the world today.“ See report of british Guardian from 2013 about the „global kidnap, detention and torture operation“ of the CIA. The CIA qualifies as a „kriminelle Vereinigung“ (=criminal organisation) according to §129 StGB, and a „terroristische Vereinigung“ (=terror organisation)  according to §129a StGB. Paragraph (5) of the latter tells that support of a terror organisation is illegal.

The FBI may have had a criminal past under Hoover but apparently not a history of Terror. That’s what „Revolution on Ice“ explains (1976, from Lowell Bergman and David Weir in Rolling Stone.)

I suppose most people don’t want to support the CIA. But they will support the CIA anyway – as long as they purchase US-American products which involve taxes and income to US-American treasury. Accordingly, many people do support the CIA and Drone Terror in a hidden way without being aware of. Nevertheless German prosecutors could not be less interested in German customers supporting the CIA.

Actions to realize within this Project:

  • Verify the amount of income to US-American treasury associated with the purchase of a bottle of Coca-Cola in Germany. If Coca-Cola has installed tax-avoidance schemes which eliminate this income, then identify an alternative US-american product without tax-avoidance schemes.
  • Organize a main event in an appropriate environment. A kind of Happening, were the sovereign may escape his role as a consumer and do engage in politics, just by consuming something seemingly banal like Coca-Cola
  • Decide in a random way (lottery / draw lots) which participants shall pay the bill for the Coca-Cola, and thus shall support the CIA in a material way.
  • Decide in a random way, which participants shall drink Fritz-Cola. Fritz-Cola is a delicious soft drink from Hamburg, which involves almost no risk to pay for state-organized Terror. The other participants shall drink products from Coca-Cola Company.
  • Decide in a random way, which participants shall file charges against whom, based on §129a StGB.
  • Some consumers of Coca-Cola may even file charge against themselves. These charges are meant to force prosecutors to take action.

§32 StGB as a Tool against Drone-Terror

Aim of a Project would be to block one single operation of Drone Terror under protection of §32 StGB. This should provoke a legal examination, and put an end to todays „we close our eyes on Ramstein“-policy of the German Administration. Hopefully, this would put an end to the illegal killings.

German self-defense clause §32 StGB is astonishingly powerful. §32 StGB justifies to defend oneself or third people against an imminent illegal attack. The Defense needs to be necessary to block the illegal attack. Typical US-american Stand Your Ground Laws are no match, as German §32 StGB is not even limited to the territory of Germany. So an illegal attack from Ramstein against third people in a remote country should be covered.

Actions to realize within this Project:

  • Establish means of communication to a remote country were Drones are operated.
    This is needed to establish a situation of immediacy. §32 StGB does not allow for defense against possible future attacks. (Ironically, this is similar to the legal justification of the Drone Operations. The US-Administrations pretends, that their drones are a ressort to prevent immediate attacks from the people on their kill-lists.) If you have live images e.g. from Pakistan documenting an immediate illegal attack, live images which are sent to an operational Team in Ramstein, then this Team in Ramstein probably could operate protected by §32 StGB.
  • Definition of a meaningful non-lethal defense
    The defense should cut the connection between a paid killer operating e.g. from Nevada and a Drone e.g. in Pakistan. Probably it’s out of question to enter Ramstein-Airbase. The base is home of 57.000 US-american patriots, a great share of which are prone to authoritarianism. These „patriots“ may kill people according to kill-lists. And they may kill people which are not placed on kill-lists. It’s out of question to bomb Ramstein-Airbase out of a safe distance. This would not be reasonably supported by §32 StGB. Though §32 StGB does not limit the defenders options to non-lethal means. But when there isn’t any non-lethal option, I will refrain from this project.
  • Cut Ramstein-Airbase’s Electricity supply. This seems to be a reasonable defense which could be justified by §32 to prevent an act of illegal killing. But how to block every emergency power supply?
  • Take aim at the Satellites. The killer’s commands are transferred via Sattelite. May be the Satellite’s software has bugs and backdoors which would enable a remote blocking. But who has detailled knowledge?

The second approach, based on German §32 StGB, seems to be nearly impossible to realize. I mention this approach just for the purpose of discussion. Just as a reminder: even though the German administration decided to support the Drone Terror, the people may – hypothetically – take actions against it.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email