Sincerely Independent News & Opinions

The genie is out of the bottle: The dictatorship is a fact


Dictatorship is a fact
Well, we are ready. The Emergency Act has entered into force, as a result of which the Netherlands falls under the authority of one person definitively and for an indefinite period. In spite of all hollow talk and allegations to the contrary in The Hague, the Netherlands definitely fulfills all the characteristics of a dictatorship.
In recent decades we have slipped from a would-be democracy, through a dictacracy to the current dictatorship. For those who are not familiar with the term dictacracy, this is a form of government between democracy and dictatorship in which the parliament and judge only participate for bacon and beans and power rests solely with the government.

Urgent Act was drawn up according to the correct procedure
Now that the Machiavellian duo Mark R. and Hugo de J. have been elevated to supreme rulers, they consider it a job duo, the genie is really out of the bottle. Power is wonderful! And absolute power is simply impossible to resist. And what is power when you are not using it, isn't it? The measures are therefore an expression of how much The Hague enjoys this unbridled power. With the entry into force of the Emergency Act, the compulsion to comply with all kinds of absurd, incomprehensible and non-scientifically substantiated measures has increased enormously from the authorities.
The entry into force of the Emergency Act also eliminates the argument from dissenters that the corona measures are illegal. The corona-ists can finally say the measures have become legal and have been established according to the correct procedure. Note the phrase "following proper procedure." This is crucial in this regard. By the way, if they have now become legal it also means that they were illegal before.

A common enemy
The Urgent Act makes legalized lawlessness and violations of fundamental fundamental rights the norm. Just as Sharia is above secular law, the Corona Church's Confession of Faith is above Universal Human Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights, the Constitution. The corona doctrine transcends any fundamental law.

The faithful and high priests of the Holy Corona Church think no measure is too crazy, no punishment too high for those who do not wish to adhere to the measures. In fact, not believing in the corona doctrine should be punishable by many. Lock up those guys without trial and throw away the key!
The thought police is a fact and an outgrowth of governments' incitement to hatred of dissidents. After all, the statements of the governments leave no room for doubt. Dissenters pose a threat to overall social well-being. Their protest rallies are the main source of contamination and thus they pose a threat to general public health. They are the cause that the virus cannot be controlled by the very effective and scientifically substantiated government measures. After all, other causes that the virus cannot be contained are excluded because the wisdom of governments is absolute. Corona is no longer the cause of the social disruption but the dissent. These and similar statements were regularly found in all MSM over the last six months.
In short, a common enemy has been created upon which the press and mob can vent their anger and frustration. And all of this, of course, with the sanctimoniously denied approval of Mark R., and Hugo de J ..

Formal Procedures versus Ethics and Morality
'Nie wieder' is the popular expression when referring to the horrors of the Third Reich. An inky black page in world history. A benchmark referenced during every May 5th celebration; no one!
But make no mistake. Hitler had been elected through democratic elections and was also the head of government in Germany. Parliament agreed to elevate Hitler to sole ruler after the Nazis set the Reichstag on fire to create a crisis. All laws were established in accordance with the formal, democratic rules. Also those laws that took away the unwanted their rights, oppressed them, outlawed them, persecuted them and drove them into the gas chambers. Jews, gypsies, disabled people, freemasons, union members and leaders, intellectuals, anyone who did not adhere to the doctrine, resistance fighters, and so on, were declared by law to be second-class citizens, to Üntermenschen.
But no one can, or more strongly should, deny that these laws were inhumane laws even though they were created in a democratic way and according to the correct procedure.

The historical parallels are striking
When the rumors about the Emergency Act spread, alarmed dissenters took action, with the non-MSM in the lead, of course, supported by all kinds of action groups such as Virus Truth, Free and Social Netherlands, etc., etc., etc. Many wrote protest letters to parliamentarians. , ministers and perhaps even to the king. And, as befits the civil service, everyone, I suppose, also received an answer.
That answer consisted of a letter in which it was explained in detail that the Urgent Act would be established according to the correct procedures, what those procedures look like and, here it comes, there could be THERE nothing wrong with that Urgent Act!
What was missing in every letter from The Hague was a substantive response to why the Emergency Act was supposedly so necessary. The concern was not allayed but smothered in formal smokescreens. That is downright cowardly. It shows to what extent The Hague did not want to enter into a discussion, could not, because they had no leg to stand on in terms of content.
The historical parallels between the constitutional manipulations of Mark R. and Hugo de J. on the one hand and Adolf Hitler on the other cannot be denied. Parliament has been sidelined, legislation has been formally corrected but morally and ethically completely rotten in terms of content.

The Nuremberg Principles
After WWII, the Allied prosecutors who prosecuted Nazi war criminals in Nuremberg had a problem. How can you prosecute them for the implementation of democratically passed laws? According to the formal legal rules, there was really nothing to argue against that.
As a result, the Nuremberg principles came into being. It is a system of basic international principles in law that go beyond national legislation. For example, discrimination may be legal in a country by law, but not under international criminal law!
The Nuremberg Charter incorporating the Nuremberg principles made the trials of Nazi war criminals possible. The aim was to enable prosecution against those who enacted immoral and ethically perverse laws that had unfortunately been enacted in a 'democratic' way.
These Nuremberg principles are now considered the basis of international criminal law.

Those principles boil down to this. Anyone, regardless of whether a private person, an official in office or a head of state, who commits an act against international law is liable and can be punished for it. Even if that act does not provide for a penalty under national law.
Anyone who obeys an order that constitutes a crime under international law is also liable and punishable for it, provided that a moral choice was possible. All suspected of a crime under international law have the right to a fair trial.

What then are those crimes under international law? This is stated in three articles, the first two of which are about warfare and all the atrocities that people do to each other on behalf of politicians while waging that war and / or the occupation of another country.
Article 3 deals with crimes against humanity. Think of systematic attacks against a civilian population. These do not necessarily have to take place during a war. Think of murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation or coercion of the population, discrimination, persecution of any identifiable group on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural or ideological grounds, imprisonment, violation of morality or bodily integrity or other acts that intentionally cause great suffering or significant harm to body, mental or physical health. Almost the entire list can be found in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court which, ironically, is located in The Hague.


Crimes against humanity by corona-fooled states

  • Many government corona measures are crimes against humanity. They can wet their chest because the charges won't be wrong. In addition, the burden of proof for the prosecution has never been easier; one shot for an open target:
  • Imprisonment without trial or judicial intervention of hundreds of thousands of elderly and disabled persons;
  • Transport to camps or detention without judicial intervention of those who refuse voluntary quarantine and / or vaccination;
  • Harm to mental health such as depression and loneliness or physical health such as stress-related health problems and suicide;
  • Forcing the population: for every social context the 'desired' behavior is enforced under penalty of fine, prosecution, company closure, social exclusion, etc., etc ..;
  • Forced vaccination: violation of physical integrity;
  • Discrimination: those who do not wish to be vaccinated (will) be excluded (discriminated against) from certain professions and / or activities.


Dissenters or Üntermenschen?
The group of dissenters in the Netherlands is already labeled by the current regime as second-class citizens, a threat to state security, social cohesion and public health.
As soon as the 'redeeming' vaccine is available, everyone will have to be able to demonstrate that he / she has a Corona Ausweis when participating in any public or corporate activity.
People who think differently, vaccination refusers are of course obliged to be immediately recognizable at the latest. After all, according to the corona doctrine, they pose a threat to vaccinees, which is of course a complete fallacy. The vaccine, manufacturers and governments claim, after all, provides absolute protection.


Is this going a bit far? I hope so from the bottom of my heart.
But states, and dictatorships in particular, consider nothing beneath their dignity to force every citizen, including those who think differently, to live on their knees when it suits them.
The historical evidence for this was provided by the GDR under Honecker, Franco's Spain, the colonel regime in Greece, Pol Pot in Cambodia, Stalin in Russia, Hitler in Germany, Hoxa in Albania, Idi Amin in Uganda, Ceaușescu in Romania…. What they also had in common was that they were going under their own regime. Let's hope that will be the case in the Netherlands in the very short term.

I wish you wisdom.
Karel Nuks

Spread the love
  • 1

Share this article!

Subscribe now
Subscribe to
May be your real name or a pseudonym
Not required
newest most voted
Inline feedback
See all comments
nl Dutch
What is your response to this?x