Bespoke translation by yours truly. Original article [A] by Danisch
In-article quotes from now on no longer using quote blocks, but indentation, so you can quote them more easily in replies if need be.
Guys, be watchful.
FOCUS claims: Greens are flooding the Internet with [German Vice Chancellor and Federal Minister of the Economy, also Green Party chancellor candidate, Robert] Habeck fan content - with it comes a risk
Just yesterday I described [coincidentally also republished by me here] that a Habeck fan insulted me as a "rat" and used the technique of calling me an idiot and immediately blocking me so I can't reply and, for onlookers, it looks like he had the last word and I retreated.
Today someone is attacking me - again with a Twitter block so I can't reply, and again pseudonymously - because of the Magdeburg terrorist attack. Just a week ago, I asked "Was the car manipulated?" [also translated by me here in Happenings] because a reader wrote to me about that. And I ask you to keep in mind that I did not agree to that message without qualifications in the text. I did write that running over a pedestrian is normally insufficient to deploy the airbag because the airbag is supposed to protect the passenger and not the pedestrians, and the impulse of impact is too small to threaten the passengers. An airbag only deploys when a really strong impact gets registered, so it doesn't deploy prematurely and is used up for a harsh secondary impact.
Even though I did not agree with the reader's message as is, this message is now - for whatever reason, the motivation is unclear to me - put into my mouth and rendered into an accusation:
The following are just excerpts:
Even though the man calls himself "torque" [Drehmoment], he obviously has no idea about cars. Because, as can be seen in a video of the culprit's arrest which has been played in many media, he was completely or mostly unharmed. The car was roughed up on the bumper and the windscreen, but nothing happened to the driver. So if there was no impact that could have harmed the driver, why should the airbag deploy? "Torque" is acting as if he were an expert, but isn't. He doesn't know what an airbag is and thinks it's some kind of cuddly cushion.
How it is for BMW, I don't know. I haven't driven a BMW in my life yet.
The car I've got on Cyprus (second-hand, a few years old, but full of electronics) has got something like that: If you get too close to a wall or another car when parking, the thing automatically brakes (and even quite early, the car does not like close parking). And I know that there are cars that try to avoid collisions while driving and trigger emergency brakes. So it's not completely out of the question.
And then it begins:
Curiously, he now writes exactly the same thing as I did in the article, namely that the airbag did not deploy because the impact was not sufficiently strong. So even though he probably did not read my article (or is intentionally deceptive) and, given the colors, the screenshot couldn't have come from my website, he is now blaming me for it:
Note: The word "insider" does not appear at all in my article. Just the opposite, I wrote "I don't know. I don't have much of an idea." - Still, he is now accusing me of pretending to be an "insider", And the writing style does not match mine at all: The alleged text consists of short, simple main clauses without subordinate clauses. Every reader knows that I write in a completely different way.
And that was just the prelude. Then he starts going really hard:
I see. Because I quote David Berger's claim that the culprit is a Shia Muslim (because he claimed in his tweets that he is no longer a Muslim), he turns that into
That is pure libel and defamation. Against me. Against David Berger.
Which is already false and nonsense because that was no screenshot in my article, but a quote, a citation from an e-mail to me.
You gotta imagine that. He allegedly only spent a "few hours" on me and others, first had to read about how an airbag works, can't tell a screenshot apart from a quote, doesn't notice that the screenshot in the social media can't be from my website because the HTML style doesn't match, but presents me as a liar, claims to have found a "purposeful network for disinformation" which "makes use of all right-wing and conspiracy theorist narratives" and calls others to action to spread it:
I am sitting in front of this and wondering: What is this?
He has no idea about airbags and websites. He just googled something together. He doesn't even know that he reached the same result I did in the article (namely that the airbags did not deploy because the impact was not strong enough to harm the passengers). He only spent a few hours with the matter and the "persons".
But he claims I am a liar, operate a network for disinformation, and make use of right-wing and conspiracy theory narratives.
Why? Because I write that an airbag does not deploy that easily and the culprit was a Shia Muslim. (Recently, there were a few articles according to which you can easily manipulate such a car, namely in the service menus of the onboard computer, and deactivate the airbag by pulling its plug underneath the dashboard. So it is in no way far-fetched that he could have manipulated the car, especially considering that he rented the car a whole week in advance. The mainstream press sees it in a similar way.)
But what agenda is he even acting on? Did you notice that he is accusing me of "disinformation", but neither makes concrete claims of what is wrong in my website or what is correct instead? Because, apparently, it's not about airbags, but about agitating against my website. It's not at all about doing some "fact check" or distinguish an (allegedly) true from a false information. It is just about attacking and defaming, discrediting me (and also Berger). Of course everything is done under a pseudonym and I am blocked in order to be unable to reply.
I can understand the motivation behind getting attacked when you write that Ricarda Lang is fat or Robert Habeck is a knucklehead.
But who has an interest - and what interest is it? - to frame the question of whether the culprit of Magdeburg manipulated the car as disinformation? Who benefits? And in what way?
Especially: Isn't this nonsensical and preposterous? Didn't they present the culprit as an AfD supporter and Elon Musk sympathizer? Wouldn't it logically follow that, incited by the AfD and Musk, he deliberately planned and prepared it, sabotaged the safety systems in the car to make the thing looks more perfidious?
Why are they now spreading something that goes against the stance, which was first circulated in all media, that the culprit is an AfD supporter?
Other readers wrote to me that they found it strange that the topic of Magdeburg suddenly, and as if on command, disappeared from all the media and has not been mentioned again. Which is not quite true. Because there is discussion on why there were gaps in the roadblock through which he was able to drive. Those were access roads for emergency services, in front of which there should have been police cars as mobile barriers - but which weren't there. And at least a few people want to know why they weren't there.
This attack can only mean that something stinks about the entire story, and right now they are trying to counteract it if something were to get attention during campaigning. So that the thing about AfD supporter (because of one, two tweets as "proof") or the Islam apostasy apparently is untrue. I found it very striking that the media were making a huge noise that he's not in the Allahu Akbar group, but an AfD person, and that fell down very quickly. Meanwhile, readers are writing to me, I don't know if this is true or just a hoax, that a private security firm called "Mekka Security" was responsible for the Christmas market in Magdeburg.
This smells like as if something could come up in Magdeburg that is very inconvenient in campaigning, and that is why the lapdog media were ordered to no longer mention the topic.
And they are now trying to systematically defame the non-lapdog media such as me (or Berger).
Pay attention to it.
They are starting a nasty propaganda and disinformation war, being waged as some kind of grassroots movement from below with very illicit means.
In-article quotes from now on no longer using quote blocks, but indentation, so you can quote them more easily in replies if need be.
Green attacks on the net
Guys, be watchful.
FOCUS claims: Greens are flooding the Internet with [German Vice Chancellor and Federal Minister of the Economy, also Green Party chancellor candidate, Robert] Habeck fan content - with it comes a risk
The Greens want to utilize the Habeck fans in order to outshine the competition in matters of Internet presence. This is supposed to be achieved with an elaborate, but foolproof toolset. But there is a risk: The party members could end up only doing campaigning for their own people [as in, preaching to the choir].
[...]
But the Green presence in the net is not just because of the top candidate for the general election . Behind it is an elaborate strategy by the party on how their members are supposed to flood the social media with Green content.
So far, this has been the biggest strength of the AfD . Again and again, studies have shown that the partially right-wing extremist party is far above the competition when it comes to reaching especially young people. Whenever other parties are successful on Instagram or Tiktok, then only with individual resourceful politicians.
That is why, at the party headquarters, they want to make use of the vigor of their own members and supporters. There are many of them. Since the collapse of the traffic lights coalition [SPD-FDP-Greens], over 20,000 people joined the Greens. To the supporters' network "Team Robert", more than 50,000 people signed up.
Among other things, what the Green Party website tells them about is one of several participation alternatives: "Campaigning is also happening in the digital realm. Head over to our channels and share, like, and comment to increase our reach."
Habeck fanposts for friends and family within seconds
To be as punchy as possible with as simple means as possible, the party offers curated content that can be customized with a few clicks and sent out to multiple platforms right away. These consist of images or videos of Habeck, but also templates for your own posts.
[...]
The political advisor Martin Fuchs, who has specialized in digital campaigning, among other things, praises their approach at X. The Green post machinery is not a new idea, but very well implemented on a technical level. "What I find particularly smart is the simple instruction accompanying the process, including text which is automatically saved to the clipboard and can be added to postings via one click."
Foolproof instructions, good templates, motivated supporters - other parties could also imitate all of that.
[...]
In other countries, such as the UK, such toolsets have long been in use. However, there is criticism of it: You do create the impression that you have a big Internet presence - but ultimately just reach your own bubble.
[underscores = emphasis added by Danisch]
And I am genuinely noticing how aggressively they are doing it.Just yesterday I described [coincidentally also republished by me here] that a Habeck fan insulted me as a "rat" and used the technique of calling me an idiot and immediately blocking me so I can't reply and, for onlookers, it looks like he had the last word and I retreated.
Today someone is attacking me - again with a Twitter block so I can't reply, and again pseudonymously - because of the Magdeburg terrorist attack. Just a week ago, I asked "Was the car manipulated?" [also translated by me here in Happenings] because a reader wrote to me about that. And I ask you to keep in mind that I did not agree to that message without qualifications in the text. I did write that running over a pedestrian is normally insufficient to deploy the airbag because the airbag is supposed to protect the passenger and not the pedestrians, and the impulse of impact is too small to threaten the passengers. An airbag only deploys when a really strong impact gets registered, so it doesn't deploy prematurely and is used up for a harsh secondary impact.
Even though I did not agree with the reader's message as is, this message is now - for whatever reason, the motivation is unclear to me - put into my mouth and rendered into an accusation:
Currently, the screenshot of an "insider" is being shared around, who suspects that, regarding the horrible attack in #Magdeburg, there was a "manipulation" of the rental car that the culprit used, because the "electronic crash-induced load-shedding system" hadn't been triggered
A few words from me
1/21
— Maximales Drehmoment (@MaximalesD) December 29, 2024
(The text has been published by me, but the color doesn't match my website.)The following are just excerpts:
And this rabbit hole is very deep...
So let's dive in
Let's start with the facts:
Did the car used to commit the attack in #Magdeburg have a system called "electronic crash-induced load-shedding system" and is its function like claimed in the screenshot?
3/21
— Maximales Drehmoment (@MaximalesD) December 29, 2024
At the end, he underscores his "fact-based theory" again
Although, to be fair, the question of the not-deployed airbag is the only justified one
So why did the airbags not deploy when the culprit drove into the crowd?
6/21
— Maximales Drehmoment (@MaximalesD) December 29, 2024
Even though the man calls himself "torque" [Drehmoment], he obviously has no idea about cars. Because, as can be seen in a video of the culprit's arrest which has been played in many media, he was completely or mostly unharmed. The car was roughed up on the bumper and the windscreen, but nothing happened to the driver. So if there was no impact that could have harmed the driver, why should the airbag deploy? "Torque" is acting as if he were an expert, but isn't. He doesn't know what an airbag is and thinks it's some kind of cuddly cushion.
How it is for BMW, I don't know. I haven't driven a BMW in my life yet.
The car I've got on Cyprus (second-hand, a few years old, but full of electronics) has got something like that: If you get too close to a wall or another car when parking, the thing automatically brakes (and even quite early, the car does not like close parking). And I know that there are cars that try to avoid collisions while driving and trigger emergency brakes. So it's not completely out of the question.
And then it begins:
Conclusion:
On a technical and subject matter view, the screenshot of the "insider" that is wildly being circulated is completely far-fetched, which this thread should have proven thoroughly and definitively
But who even is this "insider"?
14/21
— Maximales Drehmoment (@MaximalesD) December 29, 2024
Curiously, he now writes exactly the same thing as I did in the article, namely that the airbag did not deploy because the impact was not sufficiently strong. So even though he probably did not read my article (or is intentionally deceptive) and, given the colors, the screenshot couldn't have come from my website, he is now blaming me for it:
The screenshot first appeared on 23.12.24 on a private blog website by Hadmut D.
He reported in the article called "Was the vehicle manipulated?" that "a reader" send him that message
(Surprise - The anonymous insider)
15/21
— Maximales Drehmoment (@MaximalesD) December 29, 2024
Interesting
So the anonymous "insider" of the screenshot that is being circulated as "facts" is not an "insider" at all, but a reader of Hadmut D.'s blog
Or was it even D. himself?
The writing style is very similar to his other articles
16/21
— Maximales Drehmoment (@MaximalesD) December 29, 2024
Note: The word "insider" does not appear at all in my article. Just the opposite, I wrote "I don't know. I don't have much of an idea." - Still, he is now accusing me of pretending to be an "insider", And the writing style does not match mine at all: The alleged text consists of short, simple main clauses without subordinate clauses. Every reader knows that I write in a completely different way.
And that was just the prelude. Then he starts going really hard:
Which, by the way, makes use of all right-wing and conspiracy theorist narratives that you can imagine and which you can find lots of on that platform.
A blog entry leads to the website of "Philosophia Perennis" and David B.
17/21
— Maximales Drehmoment (@MaximalesD) December 29, 2024
I see. Because I quote David Berger's claim that the culprit is a Shia Muslim (because he claimed in his tweets that he is no longer a Muslim), he turns that into
Which, by the way, makes use of all right-wing and conspiracy theorist narratives that you can imagine and which you can find lots of on that platform.
That is pure libel and defamation. Against me. Against David Berger.
There, David B. openly brags that he has been banned from Facebook for the term "Islamization" and can now use his own platform "Philosophia Perennis" to launch his (very strongly racist) opinions into the ether
And he also likes Julian R.
18/21
— Maximales Drehmoment (@MaximalesD) December 29, 2024
Personal conclusion:
The screenshot of the alleged "insider" that motivated this thread starts with "This entire thing stinks to high heaven"
The only thing that stinks here is this screenshot and the people who are behind it
19/21
— Maximales Drehmoment (@MaximalesD) December 29, 2024
Which is already false and nonsense because that was no screenshot in my article, but a quote, a citation from an e-mail to me.
I have not published all findings that I have on these persons within the past few hours, but I can confirm that this rabbit hole goes much much deeper, keyword "purposeful network for disinformation"
20/21
— Maximales Drehmoment (@MaximalesD) December 29, 2024
You gotta imagine that. He allegedly only spent a "few hours" on me and others, first had to read about how an airbag works, can't tell a screenshot apart from a quote, doesn't notice that the screenshot in the social media can't be from my website because the HTML style doesn't match, but presents me as a liar, claims to have found a "purposeful network for disinformation" which "makes use of all right-wing and conspiracy theorist narratives" and calls others to action to spread it:
This thread has become long and there's a lot of work in it, that's why I would be very thankful to you if you could share it and thus help get the wind out of disinformation networks
I thank you for reading, sharing, and consideration
Your Maxi
21/21
— Maximales Drehmoment (@MaximalesD) December 29, 2024
I am sitting in front of this and wondering: What is this?
He has no idea about airbags and websites. He just googled something together. He doesn't even know that he reached the same result I did in the article (namely that the airbags did not deploy because the impact was not strong enough to harm the passengers). He only spent a few hours with the matter and the "persons".
But he claims I am a liar, operate a network for disinformation, and make use of right-wing and conspiracy theory narratives.
Why? Because I write that an airbag does not deploy that easily and the culprit was a Shia Muslim. (Recently, there were a few articles according to which you can easily manipulate such a car, namely in the service menus of the onboard computer, and deactivate the airbag by pulling its plug underneath the dashboard. So it is in no way far-fetched that he could have manipulated the car, especially considering that he rented the car a whole week in advance. The mainstream press sees it in a similar way.)
But what agenda is he even acting on? Did you notice that he is accusing me of "disinformation", but neither makes concrete claims of what is wrong in my website or what is correct instead? Because, apparently, it's not about airbags, but about agitating against my website. It's not at all about doing some "fact check" or distinguish an (allegedly) true from a false information. It is just about attacking and defaming, discrediting me (and also Berger). Of course everything is done under a pseudonym and I am blocked in order to be unable to reply.
Cui bono? [Who benefits?]
I can understand the motivation behind getting attacked when you write that Ricarda Lang is fat or Robert Habeck is a knucklehead.
But who has an interest - and what interest is it? - to frame the question of whether the culprit of Magdeburg manipulated the car as disinformation? Who benefits? And in what way?
Especially: Isn't this nonsensical and preposterous? Didn't they present the culprit as an AfD supporter and Elon Musk sympathizer? Wouldn't it logically follow that, incited by the AfD and Musk, he deliberately planned and prepared it, sabotaged the safety systems in the car to make the thing looks more perfidious?
Why are they now spreading something that goes against the stance, which was first circulated in all media, that the culprit is an AfD supporter?
Other readers wrote to me that they found it strange that the topic of Magdeburg suddenly, and as if on command, disappeared from all the media and has not been mentioned again. Which is not quite true. Because there is discussion on why there were gaps in the roadblock through which he was able to drive. Those were access roads for emergency services, in front of which there should have been police cars as mobile barriers - but which weren't there. And at least a few people want to know why they weren't there.
This attack can only mean that something stinks about the entire story, and right now they are trying to counteract it if something were to get attention during campaigning. So that the thing about AfD supporter (because of one, two tweets as "proof") or the Islam apostasy apparently is untrue. I found it very striking that the media were making a huge noise that he's not in the Allahu Akbar group, but an AfD person, and that fell down very quickly. Meanwhile, readers are writing to me, I don't know if this is true or just a hoax, that a private security firm called "Mekka Security" was responsible for the Christmas market in Magdeburg.
This smells like as if something could come up in Magdeburg that is very inconvenient in campaigning, and that is why the lapdog media were ordered to no longer mention the topic.
And they are now trying to systematically defame the non-lapdog media such as me (or Berger).
Pay attention to it.
They are starting a nasty propaganda and disinformation war, being waged as some kind of grassroots movement from below with very illicit means.
