O’Brien lächelte leise. »Sie sind kein Metaphysiker, Winston«, sagte er. »Bis jetzt hatten Sie nie in Betracht gezogen, was mit Existenz gemeint ist. Ich will es deutlicher ausdrücken. Existiert die Vergangenheit konkret – im Raum? Gibt es irgendwo einen Ort, eine Welt greifbarer Dinge, wo die Vergangenheit noch in Erscheinung tritt?«
»Nein.«
»Wo dann existiert die Vergangenheit, wenn überhaupt?«
»In Aufzeichnungen. Sie ist niedergeschrieben.«
»In Aufzeichnungen. Und?«
»Im Denken. Im Gedächtnis der Menschen.«
»Im Gedächtnis. Nun, dann also gut. Wir, die Partei, kontrollieren alle Aufzeichnungen, und wir kontrollieren alle Erinnerungen. Demnach also kontrollieren wir die Vergangenheit, oder nicht?«
»Aber wie könnt ihr die Menschen daran hindern, sich an Dinge zu erinnern?« rief Winston, der wieder einen Augenblick die Skala vergaß. »Es geschieht unwillkürlich. Man kann nichts dagegen tun. Wie könnt ihr das Gedächtnis kontrollieren? Meines habt ihr nicht kontrolliert!«
O’Briens Verhalten wurde wieder streng. Er legte die Hand auf die Zahlenscheibe. »Umgekehrt«, sagte er. »Sie haben es nicht kontrolliert. Das hat Sie hierher gebracht. Sie sind hier, weil Sie es an Demut, an Selbstdisziplin haben fehlen lassen. Sie wollten den Akt der Unterwerfung nicht vollziehen, der der Preis ist für geistige Gesundheit. Sie zogen es vor, ein Verrückter, eine Minderheit von einem einzelnen zu sein. Nur der geschulte Geist erkennt die Wirklichkeit, Winston.
Sie glauben, Wirklichkeit sei etwas Objektives, äußerlich Vorhandenes, aus eigenem Recht Bestehendes. Auch glauben Sie, das Wesen der Wirklichkeit sei an sich klar. Wenn Sie sich der Selbsttäuschung hingeben, etwas zu sehen, nehmen Sie an, jedermann sehe das gleiche wie Sie. Aber ich sage Ihnen, Winston, die Wirklichkeit ist nicht etwas an sich Vorhandenes. Die Wirklichkeit existiert im menschlichen Denken und nirgendwo anders. Nicht im Denken des einzelnen, der irren kann und auf jeden Fall bald zugrunde geht: nur im Denken der Partei, die kollektiv und unsterblich
ist.
Was immer die Partei für Wahrheit hält, ist Wahrheit. Es ist unmöglich, die Möglichkeit anders als durch die Augen der Partei zu sehen. Diese Tatsache müssen Sie wieder lernen, Winston. Dazu bedarf es eines Aktes der Selbstaufgabe, eines Willensaufwandes. Sie müssen sich demütigen, ehe Sie geistig gesund werden können.«
Archiv: Parameter / Kriterien / Vorgaben / Definitionen / Leitlinien / „Definitionsmacht“ / parameters / criteria / specifications / definitions / guidelines / „power of definition“
1984 By George Orwell
In some ways she was far more acute than Winston, and far less susceptible to Party propaganda. Once when he happened in some connexion to mention the war against Eurasia, she startled him by saying casually that in her opinion the war was not happening. The rocket bombs which fell daily on London were probably fired by the Government of Oceania itself, ‘just to keep people frightened’. This was an idea that had literally never occurred to him. She also stirred a sort of envy in him by telling him that during the Two Minutes Hate her great difficulty was to avoid bursting out laughing. But she only questioned the teachings of the Party when they in some way touched upon her own life. Often she was ready to accept the official mythology, simply because the difference between truth and falsehood did not seem important to her.
(…)
War, it will be seen, accomplishes the necessary destruction, but accomplishes it in a psychologically acceptable way. In principle it would be quite simple to waste the surplus labour of the world by building temples and pyramids, by digging holes and filling them up again, or even by producing vast quantities of goods and then setting fire to them.
But this would provide only the economic and not the emotional basis for a hierarchical society. What is concerned here is not the morale of masses, whose attitude is unimportant so long as they are kept steadily at work, but the morale of the Party itself. Even the humblest Party member is expected to be competent, industrious, and even intelligent within narrow limits, but it is also necessary that he should be a credulous and ignorant fanatic whose prevailing moods are fear, hatred, adulation, and orgiastic triumph. In other words it is necessary that he should have the mentality appropriate to a state of war. It does not matter whether the war is actually happening, and, since no decisive victory is possible, it does not matter whether the war is going well or badly. All that is needed is that a state of war should exist.
Dobrindts Geheimdienstreform: Wenn der Verfassungsschutz die Pressefreiheit beschützt, bis nichts mehr davon übrig ist
(July 20, 2026)
Die größte Gefahr für die Pressefreiheit ist nicht zwingend das offene Publikationsverbot. Viel wirksamer ist eine Atmosphäre, in der Informanten schweigen, Journalisten ihre Kontakte vorsorglich reduzieren und Redaktionen bestimmte Recherchen vermeiden.
Diese Selbstzensur hinterlässt keinen dramatischen Gerichtsbeschluss. Es gibt keinen verbotenen Artikel und keinen beschlagnahmten Drucker. Die Geschichte wird einfach niemals geschrieben.
Stasi 2.0: Die Brandmauerregierung plant und baut den Überwachungsstaat
(July 13, 2026)
Der Paragraph 60 „Schutzmaßnahmen“ hätte sicher Ulbrichts und Mielkes Zustimmung unter dem Label „demokratische Gesetzlichkeit“ gefunden, wenn der Entwurf feststellt:
„(2) Schutzmaßnahmen sind das verdeckte Einwirken auf
1. Gegenstände, die für die Bedrohung gegenwärtig oder absehbar eingesetzt werden, insbesondere durch
a) Beeinträchtigung der Funktion von Tatmitteln,
b) Umleitung oder Unterbindung von Datenverkehren oder der Übertragung von Informationen, einschließlich technischer Signale und Programmdateien, sowie die Veränderung der Übertragungsinhalte,
c) Bereitstellung falscher Informationen für Beteiligte,
d) Löschung oder Verfälschung von Informationen, die für Zwecke der Bedrohung gespeichert sind…“
Einer Demokratie unwürdig
Die Bundesregierung will BKA und Bundespolizei zudem bald weitere, extrem invasive Maßnahmen der automatisierten Überwachung erlauben: Eine Internetsuchmaschine für Stimmen und Gesichter und eine Megadatenbank mit KI-gestützter Analyse, wie sie auch Palantir im Angebot hat. Entsprechende Befugnisse für BND und Verfassungsschutz finden sich ebenfalls im Entwurf des Geheimdienstgesetzes.
Zusammengedacht ergibt das ein System, das vollautomatisiert kontrolliert, was Menschen in der Öffentlichkeit tun, sie bei unerwünschtem Verhalten identifiziert und dann gleich auch noch recherchiert, wo sie sich bewegen und mit wem sie bekannt sind.
Tabubruch bei den Geheimdiensten
(July 13, 2026)
Was die Bundesregierung hier plant, ist ein grundlegender Umbau der deutschen Sicherheitsarchitektur. Geheimdienste sollen hacken, manipulieren, aktiv eingreifen und Minderjährige als Informanten einsetzen dürfen. Wer ihnen solche Befugnisse einräumt, verschiebt die Grenzen staatlicher Macht weit in Richtung eines übergriffigen Sicherheitsstaates.
Die Bundesregierung will den Entwurf spätestens Anfang August durch das Bundeskabinett bringen. Jetzt gilt es, laut zu werden. Kubickis Appell ist eindeutig: Die Pläne „sind ohne Beispiel in einer liberalen Demokratie und müssen gestoppt werden“.
Stasi 2.0: Die Brandmauerregierung plant und baut den Überwachungsstaat
Der Paragraph 60 „Schutzmaßnahmen“ hätte sicher Ulbrichts und Mielkes Zustimmung unter dem Label „demokratische Gesetzlichkeit“ gefunden, wenn der Entwurf feststellt:
„(2) Schutzmaßnahmen sind das verdeckte Einwirken auf
1. Gegenstände, die für die Bedrohung gegenwärtig oder absehbar eingesetzt werden, insbesondere durch
a) Beeinträchtigung der Funktion von Tatmitteln,
b) Umleitung oder Unterbindung von Datenverkehren oder der Übertragung von Informationen, einschließlich technischer Signale und Programmdateien, sowie die Veränderung der Übertragungsinhalte,
c) Bereitstellung falscher Informationen für Beteiligte,
d) Löschung oder Verfälschung von Informationen, die für Zwecke der Bedrohung gespeichert sind…“
Künftig darf der deutsche Inlandsgeheimdienst in die Privatsphäre eingreifen, in dem er Informationen beschafft, sie verändert, sie verfälscht. Er darf damit jeder politischen Partei und jedem Bürger gefälschte Informationen unterschieben, die er dann zum Anlass nimmt, gegen sie oder ihn vorzugehen.
(July 13, 2026)
Das ist das neue Gesetzesvorhaben von Merz/Klingbeil/Dobrindt. Wir alle werden nicht nur ausspioniert – sondern können jederzeit zu Verbrechern manipuliert werden.
US Supreme Court: Wo Trumps Macht endet
lIn den USA ist das Gericht nicht nur eine Instanz der Kontrolle von Weißem Haus und Kongress, sondern wird selbst als „dritte Säule der Regierung“ bezeichnet. Seine Entscheidungen haben das Land oft nachhaltiger geprägt als Präsidenten und Abgeordnete.
Das liegt zum einen daran, dass Richter auf Lebenszeit berufen sind und deshalb keine Wahlen fürchten müssen. Zum anderen haben Entscheidungen des Supreme Courts unmittelbar Gesetzeskraft.
The Court Gutted Congress’s War Power. It’s Time to Give It Back.
The War Powers Resolution of 1973 was designed to restore the constitutional balance in decisions to commit the United States to armed conflict. Its central provision — a legislative veto enabling Congress to direct the withdrawal of American forces by concurrent resolution — was cast into legal doubt by the Supreme Court’s 1983 decision in INS v. Chadha. But Chadha was wrongly decided, its reasoning is exceptionally weak, and the Court’s subsequent embrace of functionalism in separation-of-powers cases has left it incoherent as precedent. As the United States drifts deeply into a congressionally unauthorized war with Iran, the case for overruling Chadha, or at minimum limiting it to its facts, has never been stronger.
Justices: Current Members
John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice of the United States, (…)
Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice, (…)
Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Associate Justice, (…)
Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice, (…)
Elena Kagan, Associate Justice, (…)
Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice, (…)
Brett M. Kavanaugh, Associate Justice, (…)
Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice, (…)
Ketanji Brown Jackson, Associate Justice, (…)
Constitution of the United States: Article I
Section 8
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
Iran will enter talks with US only if framework agreed: Deputy FM
He reiterated Iran’s firm commitment to diplomacy even under the ongoing sensitive situation and urged the US to abandon its “maximalist approach” and respect international regulations in order to ensure „result-oriented diplomacy.“
Iran adheres to its commitments as per the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) but will never accept agreements which are not within the framework of international law, the diplomat emphasized.
“I have to be very crystal clear that Iran would not accept to be an exception from the international law. Anything that we are going to be committed will be within the international regulations and international law. We have responsibilities and rights,” Khatibzadeh stressed.
Pakistan PM says US-Iran ceasefire covers ‚everywhere‘, including Lebanon
Pakistan‘s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said on Wednesday that the United States, Iran and their allies had agreed to a ceasefire „everywhere“, including Lebanon, following mediation by his government to stop weeks of fighting.
„I am pleased to announce that the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America, along with their allies, have agreed to an immediate ceasefire everywhere including Lebanon and elsewhere, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY,“ Sharif posted on X.
Israel turning execution of Palestinians into official state policy
The penalty – execution by hanging – must be carried out within 90 days of sentencing, with no possibility of pardon. The death penalty will be determined in military courts where only Palestinians are tried. These courts have an approximately 96% conviction rate, based largely on “confessions” extracted under duress and torture during interrogations.
The death penalty will be the default sentence, and judges will be able to commute it to life imprisonment only in special circumstances. In addition, the judges will no longer be required to reach a unanimous decision.
Knesset Passes Apartheid Law Mandating Death Penalty for Palestinians
Racist National Security Minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, one of the law’s strongest backers, has repeatedly worn a noose-shaped lapel pin, symbolizing executions under the bill. He described hanging as “one of the options”, alongside the electric chair.
According to the Communist Party of Israel, “death penalty for Arabs law Is a racist legislation that entrenches legal apartheid against Palestinians.”
The Hadash–Ta’al faction also strongly condemned the Knesset’s approval today of the “Death Penalty for Palestinians law. “This law is not merely a punitive measure—it is an official declaration of the institutionalization of apartheid and racism, and the transformation of the legal system into yet another tool in the violent political repression of the Palestinian people.”
Based on the principle of the sanctity of life, Hadash–Ta’al opposes the death penalty under all circumstances and against any person, “but more when it comes to selective, racist legislation that contradicts Israel’s obligations under international law.”
On Iran, Gabbard Turned Intelligence Duties Over to Trump
Ms. Gabbard does not quickly turn on her allies, and she showed little desire to throw Mr. Kent under the bus or attack him. But she has remained in her position by being a careful student of Mr. Trump, and knows how to stay on his good side. And critiquing the president’s view of the threat from Iran was clearly not the way to keep your job.
So she came up with her line that it is Mr. Trump, not the intelligence community, that determines what constitutes a threat.
Constitution of the United States: Article I
Section 8
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany
Article 25
[Primacy of international law]
The general rules of international law shall be an integral part of federal law. They shall take precedence over the laws and directly create rights and duties for the inhabitants of the federal territory.
Article 26
[Securing international peace]
(1) Acts tending to and undertaken with intent to disturb the peaceful relations between nations, especially to prepare for a war of aggression, shall be unconstitutional. They shall be criminalised.
(2) Weapons designed for warfare may be manufactured, transported or marketed only with the permission of the Federal Government. Details shall be regulated by a federal law.
Trump Demeans Himself as He Attacks the Supreme Court
President Trump owes the Supreme Court an apology—to the individual Justices he smeared on Friday and the institution itself. Mr. Trump doubtless won’t offer one, but his rant in response to his tariff defeat at the Court was arguably the worst moment of his Presidency.
Trump Stuns Governors With Foul-Mouthed Rant at SCOTUS
“President Trump became enraged after learning of the Supreme Court’s ruling during the Governors’ breakfast,” Senior White House Correspondent Kristen Holmes wrote on X. “He at one point ranted against the decision and the court, saying ‘these f–king courts, ’ a source familiar with the matter told me.”
The Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision came down about 30 minutes into the annual governors’ breakfast on Friday morning.
Trump’s Attack on the Supreme Court Was Unhinged Even for Him
Perhaps, at next week’s State of the Union address, he’ll blame the actual Phantom of the Opera.
6 Takeaways From the Supreme Court’s Tariff Decision
(February 20, 2026)
The tariff decision was the first time the court had issued a merits decision, a final decision squarely on the legality of one of Mr. Trump’s second-term executive actions. It marked a muscular show of independence by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who wrote the majority opinion striking down the president’s expansive tariffs. Two of the three conservative justices appointed by Mr. Trump during his first term, Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Neil M. Gorsuch, joined the chief justice in rejecting the president’s signature economic policy.
LEARNING RESOURCES, INC., ET AL . v . TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, ET AL .
THE CHIEF JUSTICE delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I and II–A–1:
Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution specifies that “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises.” The Framers recognized the unique importance of this taxing power—a power which “very clear[ly]” includes the power to impose tariffs. Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1, 201. And they gave Congress “alone . . . access to the pockets of the people.” The Federalist No. 48, p.310 (J. Madison). The Framers did not vest any part of the taxing power in the Executive Branch. See Nicol v. Ames, 173 U. S. 509, 515.
Constitution of the United States: Article I
Section 8
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
Trump EPA repeals landmark carbon dioxide regulation
There is a consensus in the scientific community that human activity, especially the burning of fossil fuels, is heating up the planet and worsening extreme weather.
Some climate damage could be irreversible if the planet heats up enough to cross “tipping points,” such as significant melting of ice sheets that can’t be reformed.
President Trump and Administrator Zeldin Deliver Single Largest Deregulatory Action in U.S. History
In finalizing this rule, EPA carefully considered and reevaluated the legal foundation of the 2009 Endangerment Finding and the text of the Clean Air Act (CAA) in light of subsequent legal developments and court decisions. The agency concludes that Section 202(a) of the CAA does not provide statutory authority for EPA to prescribe motor vehicle and engine emission standards in the manner previously utilized, including for the purpose of addressing global climate change, and therefore has no legal basis for the Endangerment Finding and resulting regulations. EPA firmly believes the 2009 Endangerment Finding made by the Obama Administration exceeded the agency’s authority to combat “air pollution” that harms public health and welfare, and that a policy decision of this magnitude, which carries sweeping economic and policy consequences, lies solely with Congress. Unlike our predecessors, the Trump EPA is committed to following the law exactly as it is written and as Congress intended—not as others might wish it to be.
Leaked DHS Memo Reveals ICE Claiming Expansive New Warrantless Arrest Powers
Stanford University political scientist Tom Clark questioned the validity of the memo, which appears to directly conflict with the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution, which requires search warrants as a protection against “unreasonable searches and seizures.”
“So, here’s how the law works,” he wrote. “People on whom it imposes constraints don’t get to just write themselves a memo saying they don’t have to follow the law. Maybe I’ll write myself a memo saying that I don’t have to pay my taxes this year.”
ArtI.S8.C18.7.1 Overview of Congress‘s Investigation and Oversight Powers
Article I, Section 8, Clause 18:
[The Congress shall have Power . . . ] To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
Congress’s power to conduct investigations stands on equal footing with its authority to legislate and appropriate. Although the „power of inquiry“ was not expressly provided for in the Constitution, it has nonetheless been acknowledged as „an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function“ derived implicitly from Article I’s vesting of „legislative Powers“ in the Congress. This implied constitutional prerogative to gather information related to legislative activity is both critical in purpose, as Congress „cannot legislate wisely or effectively in the absence of information,“ and extensive in scope, as Congress is empowered to obtain pertinent testimony and documents through investigations into nearly any matter. Included within the scope of the power is the authority to initiate investigations, hold hearings, gather testimony or documents from witnesses, and, in situations where either a government or private party is not forthcoming, compel compliance with congressional requests through the issuance and enforcement of subpoenas.
‘They’re Delusional If They Think This Is Going to Go Away’
Khanna told me that he was discussing next steps with Massie and others on the oversight committee, which may include contempt of Congress or articles of impeachment for Bondi and Blanche.
“We’re exploring all options—including impeachment,” Khanna said. “They’re delusional if they think this is going to go away.”
Unfortunately, today’s document release by @AGPamBondi and @DAGToddBlanche grossly fails to comply with both the spirit and the letter of the law that @realDonaldTrump signed just 30 days ago. @RepRoKhanna is correct.
(…)
The DOJ’s document dump of hundreds of thousands of pages failed to comply with the law authored by @RepThomasMassie and me. One document, 119 pages of Grand Jury testimony, was completely redacted.
I explain what is missing and what the survivors and their lawyers are still expecting to be released.
S.2557 – Epstein Files Transparency Act
(3) DECLASSIFICATION TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT POSSIBLE.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General shall declassify, to the maximum extent possible, any information that the Attorney General would otherwise withhold or redact as classified information under this section.
(B) UNCLASSIFIED SUMMARY.—If the Attorney General determines that information described in subparagraph (A) may not be declassified and made available in a manner that protects the national security of the United States, including methods or sources related to national security, the Attorney General shall make publicly available an unclassified summary of the information.