217
Nazi Europe is starving two babies because their father reported on genocide (thelemmy.club)
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by [M] to c/europe@lemmy.ml
82 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Edit: Article with explanation written by the journalist on Twitter

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -14 points 6 months ago (12 children)

Sure, but they are not going to starve as written in the title. That's just a blunt lie. They live in Germany and there are plenty of support options.

If the parents commit a crime related to their bank account, it's reasonable to block these accounts.

The more relevant question is whether anything illegal has happened through his wive's bank account. If so, block it. If not, don't you dare block it. Simple as that

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 16 points 6 months ago

    https://x.com/hussedogru/status/2038203613567144354

    How far-reaching the consequences of the sanctions regime have become, according to the defense, was made clear by lawyer Gorski in an interview with Berliner Zeitung. The lawyer said that his client is not permitted to receive monetary donations and is also not allowed to accept food assistance. When asked whether a neighbor could already make himself liable to prosecution by bringing Doğru bread, Gorski answered: “Yes, the neighbor would theoretically make himself liable to prosecution.”

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    You seem to assume that she did something illegal based on the account being blocked, but that doesn't always work like that

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Did you even read my comment? This is precisely the point. If something illegal happened through her bank account, that would be the only viable reason to block it. If not, there is no justification to block it.

    The account blocking has taken a form recently that I condemn, I don't think this should be used in the political discourse.

    From the information I could gather about the case, I can't say what happened through her account. There are some vague statements from the Bundespressekonferenz that make it seem like the government/EU takes that position. The family and lawyer claim the opposite.

    In this case, I would tend to side with the family until we know more. My point was just that there is quite a stretch between blocking a bank account and starving children.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    there lre plenty support options

    name them

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    Caritas, Diakonie, churches, several others. You must be trolling at this point

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

    no, i'm german with a disabled wife andstwo kids. I know you are talking out your ass because those institutions don't offer services to poor people in terms off food assistance. The only notable such service is "die tafel" but good luck finding one that isn't booked up for the next two years. There are some "lebensmittelrettung" whatsappgroups but they are first-come first-serve and usually just want to offload their stuff asap which, for people with kids this means you usually get the leftovers of what already are leftovers.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Caritas und Diakonie geben bei Bedarf z.B. Einkaufsgutscheine raus, weiß ich aus erster Hand. Das ist doch Quatsch, wir können doch nicht behaupten hier verhungern Kinder weil ein Konto gesperrt wird.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago

    Du kannst doch nicht ne vierköpfige Familie mit Diakonie und Caritasgutscheinen ernähren? Erstmal ist dies eine außerordentliche Situation da die Armut dieser Familie gezielt durch EU Sanktionen herbeigeführt wurde, es also rechtlich alles mögliche unklar ist, einschliesslich ob solche Hilfe nicht selbst schon EU Sanktionen verletzt.

    Dann sind diese Einkaufsgutscheine in der Regel nur als temporäre Maßnahmen gedacht, von persönlichen Spenden finanziert, das ist doch keine Lebensgrundlage während man gegen eine internationale Regierung kämpfen muss??

    Ausserdem gibts es Kinderhunger und Armut in Deutschland, Leute die sterben weil sie keine Krankenversicherung haben etc. Meine Mutter bspw. hatte ein halbverhungerten Säugling in der Beratung weil dessen Mutter nicht genug zu essen hatte und deswegen keine Milch produzieren konnte. Gerade unter Leuten die am Rande der Legalität leben müssen (wie im Fall Dogru hier) ist die Not teilweise immens. Unser Sozialsystem ist längst nicht so robust wie die meisten Leute die nicht darauf angewiesen sind denken. Sie hat nur sehr gute PR und Kritik daran kommt bei den arroganten Deutschen (aber ich wiederhol mich ja) immer sehr sehr übel an als ob man das ganze Land mit den VSA oder schlimmer noch nicht-NATO Ländern vergleichen könne....

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago

    Sure, but they are not going to starve as written in the title. That's just a blunt lie. They live in Germany and there are plenty of support options.

    There aren't support options because the way sanctions work is that anyone offering them any help becomes guilty of "violating the sanctions" and becomes sanctioned themselves. That is how the wife became sanctioned, by paying bills he could no longer pay due to sanctions. This means if anyone offers them any money, goods or services, including food, they automatically count as "attempting to circumvent sanctions" and will receive the same treatment. The sanctions are designed so that there are no support options other than having your children taken away by the government due to inability to feed them.

    If the parents commit a crime related to their bank account, it's reasonable to block these accounts.

    Neither of them have committed any crime whatsoever. They were not legally charged with anything and they have no right to a court trial. These are EU sanctions. That means they don't need to be legally justified and there is no court other than in Brussels where they can be appealed, but the sanctions include a travel ban which means he cannot travel to Brussels, or to any country where he is not sanctioned. This is effectively a slow death sentence. He was sanctioned for journalism which the EU alleges "destabilizes society" (by reporting on the Gaza genocide), and she was sanctioned for supporting their family financially.

    The more relevant question is whether anything illegal has happened through his wive's bank account.

    Nothing illegal happened through her bank account, nor through his. I repeat: this is not about a crime. They have committed no crime nor have they been charged with a crime.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent