|
#NoOpinionSuppression
#NoCensorship
#NoConfidenceAbuse
#NoRightsViolation
#NoAntiSemitism
#HumanRights
#HumanDignity #ResponsibilityPerception
#FreeSpeech
#FreeThought #FreeOpinion #FreeExpression
Worldwide call
to boycott of the above companies
due to anti-Semitic attitudes,
as well as disregarding human rights
and fundamental ethical maxims.
Other
addressees of the petition:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please
sign my petition:
|
|
|
|
Recipients
of the Petition
|
|
|
Recipients
of the Petition
The
petition addresses:
to
David
Engel,
personally
liable shareholder
of PayPal (Europe) S.à r.l.
to
David
Ferri, personally
liable shareholder of PayPal (Europe) S.à r.l.
to
Rupert
Keeley, personally
liable shareholder of PayPal (Europe) S.à r.l.
to
Richard
Swales, personally liable shareholder of PayPal
(Europe) S.à r.l.
to
Tanja
Haller, Brand
Risk Management of PayPal (Europe) S.à r.l.
|
|
|
Claim
of the petition
-
The
petition calls PayPal on taking back the blocking of
donations calls in the documentation of the author.
-
The
blocking of donations call for documentations, which fulfills the
requirements of article 19 UDHR, article 10 of the ECHR
and article 5 of the German Basic law, constitutes a
disregard
of fundamental human rights.
-
In
addition, such measures show analogies to the sinister German
history where related to aryanization and deportation even
only rudimentary involved participants (such as banks and
insurance companies) used any means in order to prevent or hinder
the claims of perceptions of victims. Thus, only
anti-Semitic intentions can be certified to such
behavior.
-
With
its exposed partiality, due to blockage of donation calls, PayPal
shows against the world public opinion that it does
not have the intellectual, ethical and moral maturity
to cover the requirements for the key
role of future payment systems. As some years ago, the
largest German bank shook the confidence of investors to a large
German media group because of partiality, such kind of behavior
was exposed by everyone as unworthy and unethical behavior,
which are not appropriate behaviors of financial service
providers.
-
The
exposed partiality of PayPal indicates undoubtedly that
this company would acting ruthlessly, without any ethical and
moral considerations and thus a repetition of those human
rights abuses has to be feared, which is from the sinister German
history documented through irresponsible acting companies.
-
The
world's respected historian Timothy Garton Ash justifies a
restriction of freedom of expression by personality rights only
for child abuse or for so-called revenge porn. There is no doubt
that the undermining of the freedom of expression was justified
with an alleged violations of personal rights by all unjust
systems. Therefore such kind of alleged justifications lacks any
real legal basis.
-
The
European
Court of Human Rights
had
already repeatedly Germany admonished to keep in mind for topics
with public interest the primacy of the fundamental right of
freedom of expression against alleged personality rights. The
European
Court of Justice
had
thus repeatedly appealed to
the sense of responsibility of the German legal system due to its
burdened past
and therefore brought a not unfounded concern
to expression of a possibly repetition of the disastrous history
by just
ignoring its perception of responsibility.
-
The
elimination of free speech through referred measures as
well as to deletions, blocking or other disabling
mechanisms of accesses contradicts to any democratic
self-conception, as well as to the principles of rule of
law and leaves an impression of ignoring historical
lessons or of the perception of an effort to abrogate the
liberal order.
-
The
ruthless application of these measures points to an inhuman,
fundamental rights-defying attitude of the addressees of the
petition. The petition calls therefore for
a worldwide boycott of the addressed companies in
order to meet the demands on the responsibility perception
relating to the sinister German history thereby.
|
|
|
Justification
of the claim
-
The
documentation of the author comply without a doubt to the
requirements of the underlying fundamental rights regulations
relating to article 19 of the UDHR, article 10 of the ECHR and
article 5 of the German GG and are therefore explicitly protected
by those regulations. None of the underlying fundamental rights
justifies even only in the remotest way a restriction of the
fundamental human right of freedom of expression.
-
The
fundamental human right of freedom of expression was proclaimed
precisely due to the catastrophic occurrences of the 20th
century, where the violations of human rights were mainly caused
by functionaries within enterprises, institutions,
organizations, associations, clubs, offices, authorities, parties
and other groups.
-
Reversing
simply this causal link in retrospect, is undoubtedly a contempt
of the underlying intentions from those who participated once in
the drafting of the universal rights specifications.
-
A
such endeavor can be associated with only those legal
machinations which systematically undermined that perpetrators
could be held accountable by subtle interpretations and fanciful
derivation.
-
There
is no doubt that the fundamental human right of freedom of
expression derives its essential, unrestricted and
all-encompassing claim from the facts that it was perceived
during the era of injustice only by individuals, while all other
institutions had failed to take responsibility toward the
perception of their controlling function.
-
Within
of the global information culture of today's world the role of
bloggers are undoubtedly covering those critical controlling
function, which was covered in the traditional information
society by press media and which seems to be more and more
neglected by those. Thus is no doubt that the fundamental law
regulations relating to the freedom of the press must be applied
fully on publications of bloggers. A related impairment can
therefore only be considered as attack against the democratic
society and the liberal order.
-
Mechanisms
of justice for themselves, such as blocking of donations
call, deletions, blocking or other access
preventing with the intention to prevent publishing of
publications must be identified and de-legitimized as those
analogue attitudes of the injustice system, which caused once
that perpetrators pushed people in living body in incinerators or
into pits by shots in the neck, just because they had tried to
defy the expectations of their tormentors. People who still
considers such behavior patterns as adequate measures to enforce
their own will, have certainly not learned any lessons from the
burdened German history and underpin the profound fear by such
behavior of an almost inevitable disastrous repeating of history.
-
If
PayPal and in particular their employees Séverine
Ritter and Tanija Haller make themselves to the
henchmen of the attorney Florian Hensel, whose intention
seems to be the liquidation of opponents by documented behavior
from the sinister German injustice system, then PayPal and
its unreflective acting ladies have be attributed oneself
to the same unlimited responsibility. The scientific historical
research proves without doubt that victims of the German
injustice system were driven to suicide by analogue machinations.
And, as already confirmed by the history, we must again take
note, the straight women seem to develop a special fervour in the
implementation of injustice. Such unreflective behavior from
PayPal, Séverine Ritter, Tanja Haller and
the attorney Florian Hensel can no justification be met
with, but obviously manifesting those German affinity on
practices of injustice systems, which uniquely is only able to
explain the occurrences of the worst humanitarian catastrophe as
a result of a German character.
|
|
|
Please
sign my petition that the disregard of freedom of expression and
freedom of information as well as the perception of responsibility
will no longer be abused through advanced reasons and as a farce
of a commitment to democracy, the rule of law and the liberal
democratic basic order will be served. The disregard of these
principles leads at some point inevitably to an irreversible
sinister development – which we should have learned from our
history and consequently have drawn conclusions from it. No
democracy can survive without unrestricted freedom of expression
and freedom of information. Only with freedom of expression and
freedom of information can be established a culture of error
management in order to be able to detect such sinister
developments at an early stage to prevent such developments.
Please
support my petition. Many thanks for your help.
|
|
|
Further
links
|
|
