If You want to Sell Your Kidney, it is Your Right

The craziness and the restrictions on freedom in this country of mine, although I love Slovenia, are seemingly endless.

In only a few hours, the media called for and at the same time moralized on, the 60-year-old from Prekmurje, who published an ad to sell his kidney for 50,000 euros. To repay debts, repair the roof of the house, buy wood before the coming winter and feed the children. The man, in full consciousness, judged and freely decided to sell the kidney to someone that needed it and was willing to pay for it. The media, of course, started a commotion, calling it illicit trafficking in human organs and sending law enforcement to the man’s house. This was reported by the national television’s web-portal: “In this case, police officers want to prevent a crime. This crime would be committed by the doctor that would operate in such a case and by the organ trafficker. However, it would not be committed by the one who sells his body-part, explained to the police. TV Slovenia reported that the case was also checked by police officers, especially in order to prevent any kind of action and to offer some kind of help to the family. The man is not persecuted by law enforcement. The publication of the ad alone is not yet punishable”.

It is perfectly understandable that the man will not be persecuted. I hope that there is so much intelligence left in this country that it is clear that the man himself decides what to do with his own body. If he wants to sell his own organ, nobody can prevent it. It concerns his own body, which is his property and neither the state nor anyone else should interfere with it. Blood donors also give blood, that is, a part of their body. No one is persecuting the one who took the blood, nor the one who transmits the blood. In Austria and Italy, you get full payment for your blood, while in Slovenia you get a Carniolan sausage with a piece of bread and a day off work, that is, a payment. Then why is this a problem with a kidney? Would it be any different if a man went to the hospital and said that he gave the kidney to someone who needed it? The doctor would cut it out and the hospital would then forward it. If this would be a self-paying patient, he would have to pay for this operation. Why criminalize a doctor and a mediator if the entire process is voluntary? So, the donor, the doctor and the mediator would enter a voluntary relationship, there would be no compulsion. The state now somehow interferes, sending police, which means its repressive authorities. Totally unnecessary. A man is selling a kidney (his own, not anyone else’s, make no mistake) and it is his right to do with it whatever he wants. If he wants to sell it, that is all right, if he wants to donate, that too is all right. We can buy a wig made from human hair, creams that contain human embryos. Yet we cannot sell our kidney or buy one, although it is all voluntary.

The brave man from Prekmurje was obviously too proud to ask for and receive social assistance. He did not want to be a burden to the state or the taxpayers. If the state and the police were to persecute all those who exploit various forms of state and social assistance with equal vigil, they would not even have to deal with such cases, because the temporary assistance would be received by those who truly need it in the first place. According to media reports, the well-known Roma family Strojan, whose members are mostly not looking for work at all receives more than 150,000 euros a year from social assistance. There is a similar situation in other countries.

Just look at the hypocrisy in this country. Abortion is completely legal in this country, it is permitted, it is a kind of human (woman’s) right, while selling your organ by free-will is not. However, the doctor who carries out the abortion will not be persecuted, while the doctor who cuts the kidney, because such is the desire of the individual that wants to sell it, will be.

Anyone and at any time, whatever the circumstances, can sell their organs if they decide on their own and do it voluntarily. The state has absolutely no power to engage in such a decision. Each one is the owner of one’s own body and has the inalienable right to do with it what one wants if one does not endanger others and their property. Because, if an individual is not the owner of oneself, then who is?

  • Written by
  • Read: 23 times

Jordan Peterson: False Prophet

When I first came across a video of Jordan Peterson on Youtube, I was genuinely excited. Finally! Finally someone, who was willing to stand up to the craziness that had spread throughout academia. Finally someone who was able to communicate clearly and give good reason why freedom of speech was necessary and why the implementation of compelled speech was beginning of the end.

  • Written by
  • Read: 1265 times

100th Anniversary of a Great Patriotic Act

Last week, one hundred years have passed since General Rudolf Maister and his units in Maribor, in the early morning hours of 23 November 1918, disarmed the Green Guard (established by the Maribor authority, in favor of the preservation of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, TN).

  • Written by
  • Read: 129 times

The Situation Does Not Look Good in the Long Run

Even the Fiscal Council fell silent. Its last serious warning came at the end of September. The situation on global markets is cooling down and as a result companies are already facing lower demand for products and services.

  • Written by
  • Read: 139 times

»They Have No Heart, No Conscience, No Professionalism«

It is not publicly known of the rumors that the district judge Špela Koleta, who condemned Dr Milko Novič, will be rewarded with a promotion by the deep state. However, the fact is that her judgment was non plus ultra filthy. This is also confirmed by the judgment of the Supreme Court, which is a very serious blow to both the District Court Judge Špela Koleta and Stanko Živič, Milan Štrukelj and Tatjana Merčun, who upheld the first-instance verdict.

  • Written by
  • Read: 348 times

The EPP’s responsibility

Onwards to victory! – Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban held a very ambitious speech at the European People’s Party congress in Helsinki. According to Orban, without nations, Europe would lose its identity and would lose its spiritual and cultural character: “Europe will be a Europe of nations or it will be nothing.” He reminded that Europe has become stronger with the Central European nations,  strong nations have always made Europe successful, and that this is still true today: “Without successful nations, there is no strong Europe.”
The prime minister made it clear that he supports the EPP and he wants the party family to win the European elections in 2019. An important factor to this victory is – according to him – is that the EPP regains its own identity instead of giving in to the socialists, liberals and greens who „want a Europe which has lost its roots and its spiritual identity”. His vision is a Europe of nations, which has „twenty-seven faces” and which is Christian and democratic. This Europe needs an EPP regain the trust of the people, they should see the party family as „their own party, which belongs to them, which represents them and which fights for them”. This also means that the EPP should accept its responsibility for some failures of the last five years: not being able to keep the British in Europe and the migrants out of Europe.
Orban called the EPP „the party of winners” and urged his colleagues not to trust those „who build their personal ambitions upon bringing critiques voiced by socialists and liberals into the EPP”. Socialists and liberals, not to mention NGOs and even certain members of the EPP have urged the party family to expel Fidesz, but – as Orban also pointed out – listening to them is against common sense. Socialists, liberals and greens want the EPP to lose the elections, so why would anyone in the party family think that accepting those demands would benefit them? It seems that even though EPP parties voiced some criticism towards Fidesz during the congress too, the expulsion of Hungary’s ruling party was clearly not on the agenda and most experts have predicted that this confrontation would be a bad idea in the campaign.
The Hungarian delegation supported Manfred Weber’s candidacy. This is no surprise taking into account that the other candidate, Alexander Stubb represents the liberal wing of the family and does not want to share it with Orban’s Fidesz. „We respect you as someone who always knows when it is time for debate, and when it is time for unity”, Orban told Weber in his speech. Hungary’s prime minister agrees with the new EPP Spitzenkandidat that the time for unity is now, division within the EPP would lead to disintegration in a critical moment.
According to the Hungarian government spokesman Zoltan Kovacs, „by electing Manfred Weber, the EPP has closed ranks and has adopted a position that lies closer to the legacy of the founding fathers, including former German Chancellor, the late Helmut Kohl”. He also stressed that the “soul” and most important essence of Europe and the European Union is that it is made up of nations.
It’s not „only” the failures mentioned by Orban that should warn the EPP. One aspect of the party family’s identity crisis is the fact that no group has a majority in the European Parliament, so they are forced to constantly compromise. In theory this can of course be good but in practice the EPP is getting closer and closer to the socialists and the liberals. The other aspect is that those EPP members who are giving up their conservative and Christian democratic identity are becoming weaker.
It’s not only the logic of power that should stop EPP parties from embracing liberalism but also their responsibility towards the people of Europe. The continent is facing a number of serious challenges these days, one of them is mass immigration. Without protecting the identity of the European people the continent loses its ability to resist the „grand replacement”.
Without understanding this responsibility the EPP will not only lose the elections but also Europe, as we know her today.

Mariann Őry, head of foreign desk at Hungarian conservative daily newspaper Magyar Hírlap

  • Written by
  • Read: 269 times

The Roller Coaster of Death: from Strasbourg (1975) to Marrakesh (2018)

On Thursday, October 27 2005, the police investigated a robbery in the Paris suburb of Clichy-sous-Bois. Ziad Benna (17) and Banou Traoré (15) fled by climbing the three-meter fence of an electrical power station and hid. The result was predictable: the teenagers got electrocuted and died. When the firefighters and police officers arrived to retrieve the bodies, migrant neighborhood gangs attacked them.

  • Written by
  • Read: 289 times

Bernard Brščič: The Betrayals in Marrakesh

In 2018, Marrakesh is Europe's most vulnerable city. On 2 May 2018, 31 European and 26 African countries signed the so-called Marrakesh Declaration, which is part of the Rabat process of the Euro-African dialogue on migration and development. Between 10 and 11 December 2018, the signing of a global agreement on migration is envisaged in the same city by the United Nations. For Europe, both events are some of the worst since the signing of the Barcelona Declaration in 1995, marking the start of the organized invasion of illegal migrants from Africa and the Levant to Europe. The signing of the Global Migration Agreement (Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration – GCM) means the surrender of Europe to the hordes of illegal migrants and the actual suspension of sovereignty of national states. The sovereignty of the state stands and falls with the ability to control entry into and exit from the country. A country that is incapable of securing its borders is not a sovereign state.

Both the Marrakesh Declaration and the Global Agreement on Migration are part of the multicultural globalists’ plan aimed at destroying national states and the individual's attachment to gender, family, people, race, culture and civilization. In this wonderful new world, all would like to be cultured individuals, robbed of their identity, just idiotic consumers under the dominance of global multicultural oligarchs. According to their view, races, nations and nation-states are social constructs, an obstacle to the creation of a better future. This vision was formulated by Austrian Jew Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi in his masterpiece Praktischer Idealismus in 1925. One of the modern practitioners of Coudenhove-Kalergi’s ‘great substitution’ plan, is the French President Emmanuel Macron who sees the fate of Europe tied to Africa. Europe is supposedly old and needs rejuvenation. Given the great "affection" that this French puer delicatus shows to charcoal youngsters, we can understand his dreams of EUAfrica. However, we are not all catamites and we do not see the potential for the progress of civilization in the Africanization of Europe. In the book The Rush to Europe, Stephen Smith estimates that in the next 30 years in Europe the number of people belonging to the negro race will increase from today’s 9 million to 200 million. He sees the Africans as a catalyst for the establishment of the multicultural United States of Europe with the hybridization or racial mixing as a prescribed policy. The realization of Coudenhove-Kalergi's prediction of the ‘great substitution’: "The man of the future will be racially mixed. The Eurasian-Negro race of the future, in appearance similar to the ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of nations with the diversity of individuals." Its model is today’s Sweden, a country with extensive prosperity and open borders. A country that is the first in Europe to commit its demographic and cultural suicide. Emmanuel Macron, Stephen Smith and their like-minded multicultural globalists want to apply it in Europe as a whole. The implementation of the Global Agreement on Migration is an important step on this path.

The agreement stipulates the equalization of legal and illegal migration or, in other words, prevents countries from discriminating migrants according to their status of entry into the country. In fact, it is a decriminalization of illegal entry into the country. Inconceivable. The illegal migrants are, by analogy, burglars. The first contact with our country is a violation of our laws. Burglars do not deserve asylum procedures and a life of "dolce far niente" at the expense of taxpayers. They deserve only one thing – immediate deportation. The agreement makes it extremely difficult and it practically prevents the involuntary repatriation of illegal migrants.

The agreement stems from the view that all migrations, both legal and illegal, are beneficial. The signatory states commit themselves to persuade the domestic population of this and to incriminate all of us who oppose it. The thesis about the universal benefit of migration is one of the biggest scams of both the neoclassical schools and the Frankfurt School based on the multicultural LGBT Marxism. If the migrants were really "programmers, doctors and engineers", as evidenced by the prevailing multicultural narrative, we could talk about positive effects on the productivity of receiving countries. However, the truth is different, the illegal migrants pride themselves on zero human and negative social capital. They are not coming here to solve the problems of our supplementary pension system, but with social parasitism, the best guarantee for the collapse of the welfare state. Milton Friedman warned long ago that open borders with unlimited migration and the welfare state are incompatible. You have one or the other.

No, migration is not a human right. The illegal entry into the country and the over-indulgence at the expense of Slovenian taxpayers are even less so. It is therefore imperative that the signature of the Global Agreement on Migration be rejected. The US and Russia have already done this. In our neighborhood, Austria and Hungary will do the same. I cannot imagine Croatia or Italy signing it. I wonder only who the hero will be to dare to commit this betrayal in the name of Slovenia.

Gašper Blažič: From Marrakesh with love

The infamous Marrakesh Declaration has been so much talked about that there is hardly anything to add. Perhaps the only thing left to say is that Marrakesh is the site of a historic event, dating eight centuries ago. It is the site where the martyr St. Berard was executed with his companions, from the Order of St. Francis of Assisi, the first martyrs of this community, who preached the gospel to the Moors of Morocco. Bloodthirsty men whipped them to the bone, spilled hot oil and vinegar on their wounds, rolled their bodies over stones, and severed their heads.

What was the real reason for their martyr death? Not only were the Sultan and his courtiers irritated by the gospel preaching but were even more irritated because the Franciscans remained faithful to the gospel. Loyalty and identity are not appreciated in the world of the leftists. When I read in the media of how many countries in western and northern Europe give up and even abolish traditional Christian denominations (such as Christmas fairs and concerts) in order not to offend the non-Christians who arrive there, I often recall what was said at the time when the Christian roots were erased from the preamble of the European Constitutional Treaty. It was said that this does not mean anything yet, that I should not worry, that Europe is still Christian, and that the mention of Christianity in the Constitutional Treaty is a matter of prestige. It turns out it was not so.

Regarding the European Left, I would rather not waste my words, anyway we all know that its purpose is to destroy the existing identity of Europe and to trigger a clash of civilizations by encouraging immigration from Muslim countries. What is more surprising is that some Christians naively follow this logic. In fear of being accused of racism and hate speech, they quietly support the vicious plan of the invasion from Muslim countries.

Well, as of the impoverishment of Christian roots, they speak the same of the Marrakesh Declaration – that it is "nothing out of nothing", that we should not be alarmed by it. Why did they even invent it if it does not bind anyone?

Slovenia Least Influential in European Union

A few days ago, we remembered the 100th anniversary of the foundation of the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs (SHS), which was ceremoniously proclaimed at the Congress Square in Ljubljana on October 29, 1918.

  • Written by
  • Read: 210 times

The Price for NLB is Obviously Low Enough

In these days, the public offer for the purchase of shares of the state-owned bank Nova Ljubljanska banka (NLB) has expired. It started on October 29th, and it will end today (November 8th, TN). The NLB also published a pamphlet, which specifies the price range for a share, ranging from EUR 51.50 to EUR 66.00. With this, the shares officially started selling according to the IPO process. The final price per share was supposed to be known tomorrow (November 9th, TN).

  • Written by
  • Read: 142 times

Jože Biščak: The End of European Men

The first story goes like this: "It happened on a public bus in Sweden. A Swede man screams at a black woman sitting down: 'Get out of here!' The woman gets up, scared, and retreats. The man swears at her: 'Damned black woman.' " The leftists would undoubtedly say this is racism and call for a public lynch of the autochthonous Swedish man. The second story goes like this: "It happened on a public bus. The black man screams at the white woman sitting down: 'Get out of here!' The woman gets up, scared, and retreats. The local swears at her: 'Damn you, Swedish woman.' " The leftist would ignore it or they would merely comment that this is a completely normal response of a person with emotional problems living in a land of white people. These white people are pushing him to the outskirts of society, so he has problems with socialization in the new environment. They would say that in the country he comes from, the cultural habits are just such that men sit and women stand on the buses and that is a fact. So, we must have full understanding for people who behave like this in Europe.

  • Written by
  • Read: 602 times

Bernard Brščič: The Two Years of Donald Trump

On November 8, 2018, it will be two years since the election of Donald Trump as the 45th President of the United States. The analysts and most media were convinced, up until the early morning hours of November 9, that he could not succeed and that the Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton was destined to win. Trump was regarded as a political ignoramus, a clown, representing the postmodern deviation from the American democracy. True, his personality hardly impresses. The overabundance of self-love, the bouts of authoritarianism, and the poor proficiency are hardly good incentives to occupy the most important political position in the world. However, the critics have ignored the key issue, his political instinct and his ability to maintain his contact with reality.

Mariann Őry: Thomas and the human traffickers

It hasn't gone unnoticed in Hungarian press that – according to The Telegraph – popular British children's television series Thomas & Friends (Lokomotivček Tomaž in prijatelji) is to introduce a new character, a homeless Kenyan female refugee train called Nia. She's not the first multicultural character living on the Island of Sodor, and according to the article, “gender-balanced storylines were developed with the assistance of Tolulope Lewis-Tamoka, the UN Women’s Africa Programme Adviser”. Lewis-Tamoka told The Telegraph that “we’re able to bring the idea of a refugee into the mind of a young person without calling them a refugee: someone who looks different to you might end up being your neighbour and very good friend”.

This sounds innocent, doesn't it? From one point of view Thomas & Friends is a good platform to teach children tolerance and show them that people are different and so on. But from another point of view, I can't help but notice that there's something deeply disturbing about this. Shaping people's minds by the power of language, limiting their way of thinking by a kind of “linguistic dictatorship” is a common phenomenon in dystopias, and the fact that the UN has designed a character for a children's tv show is pretty close to the scary worlds of these novels.

As I have noted in my editorial for Magyar Hirlap (“Propaganda in the kindergarden”), Nia the refugee train is by far not the only tool the UN has to shape our minds. The Global Compact For Migration – which has been rejected by both the US and the Hungarian government – seems to have the same naive attitude towards migration as a children's programme. According to recent remarks by Austrian Minister of Interior Herbert Kickl, the Compact focuses only on the positive aspects of migration and doesn't even distinguish between legal and illegal migration. The Hungarian government has been criticising the document since the first draft and they even left the process when it became obvious that the direction wouldn't change. It's no surprise. As Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban recently said in Kossuth Radio's programme: “across the world the number of countries from which migrants come is far greater than the number countries which they aim to enter; and so we can venture to say that in the UN – where every state in the world is represented – pro-migration forces will always be in the majority”. “We have to make it clear that the clauses and rules of the Compact which they now wish to adopt do not apply to us. The Americans were the first to recognise that they should leave the talks – and if they cannot prevent something, then Hungary will hardly be able to. Then we were the next to withdraw. Now more and more countries are beginning to realise that this is a dangerous game, and in the period ahead they will leave the Compact or voice their reservations: they are beginning to distance themselves from the UN’s document, in case they are later required to take in migrants on that basis – because this is the danger it involves,” he stressed.

I have already quoted Kickl on this issue, and his opinion indicates that at least half of Austria's right-wing conservative government is definitely against the Compact. There's already pressure on Austria's government to reject the Compact, the campaign called “Stop the Pact” has already received massive support in German speaking countries. According to the campaign, our democracy, identity and sovereignty are in danger and this Compact is part of the social experiment called “multiculti”. These concerns are justified, because the document – as Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Péter Szijjártó has warned on numerous occasions – serves the interests of the countries of origin, not Europe. The Compact's goal is not only to encourage migration but to silence anti-migration forces, to dispel “misleading narratives that generate negative perceptions of migrants”.

The Compact serves the interests of those forces, who – as Viktor Orban said in his speech on Hungary’s national holiday on October 23 – want “to replace the European Union of nation states with a multicultural empire of mixed populations”.

Mariann Őry, head of foreign desk at Hungarian conservative daily newspaper Magyar Hirlap

  • Written by
  • Read: 449 times

Jože Biščak: The Fourth Branch of Government

I do not know where the expression ‘fourth branch of government’ for the media comes from, nor am I interested. Such a name is complete nonsense. The media is not in power, the media does not rule, but it certainly influences public opinion. However, this power that the media has does not mean actual political power to rule. The media is at most an anti-authority, a counterweight to the current government, its counter-power. The media therefore reports and examines whether the legislative, executive and judicial branches of government act in accordance with what people have entrusted to and conferred on or whether they abuse their power. The fact that this expression was established in Europe in particular, that the media is the fourth branch of power, is an attempt to give it importance. On the other hand, this is a perfect oxymoron, similar to that of non-governmental organizations, which are far from being independent from the government, since they are almost entirely financed from the budget.

  • Written by
  • Read: 253 times

Bogdan Sajovic: The Lie is the Immortal Soul of Communism

Nowadays, the Slovenian leftists are talking nonsense. They say that the current Slovenian Armed Forces carries on the tradition of the Slovenian Territorial Defense, established in 1968, as if the Slovene Bolsheviks were already preparing the inception of the Slovenian army for when independence would take place.

When "that time" actually came, however, the communists began to disarm it, while their soon-to-be Deep State boss, spread the news that an independent Slovenia was not intimately his option. The leftists do not lack imagination in creating a lie for their daily political goals. A few years ago, during the traditional days of raving at the festivity for the reds in Dražgoše, someone screamed that they, the "reds" liberated Slovenia first in 1945 and then again in 1991. In 1945, they took power and ruled practically until 1991, then freed us again, from themselves. This statement, in my opinion, exceeds the area of lies and passes into that of psychiatry. Another false myth is the one about the Partisans being the Slovenian army. When in fact, in a few months’ time, their beloved Marshal sent them the Montenegrin communist Pero Popivoda (an elusive Stalinist who had been taken to Moscow during the Informbiro period) to take over the actual command of the Slovenian partisans. It was this "Slovenian army" that began to break apart on its own right after the end of the war, lingering only a while longer in the first post-war weeks to slaughter several Slovenians, more than the invaders have during the entire war.

To conceal these awkward facts, the reds invented a new myth about the devoted and honest partisans. However, every small partisan unit had, from the beginning to the end of the war, a communist politician with regular obligatory political classes. They were the ones that discussed the eradication of "anti-national elements" and the expropriation of "capitalists and kulaks". Given the countless practical examples of these eradications and expropriations that occurred during the war, only complete retards could be "misled" into believing otherwise. The honest partisans could not have existed at all because any honest man would have abandoned a murderous gang.

  • Written by
  • Read: 106 times

Lucija Kavčič: Destructive Global Contradictions

The videos of starving children from the refugee camp in Yemen were broadcast on national television in the past week in one of the newscasts.

The situation there is really bad and these people really need help. All those who have fled war zones need help with everything: food, clothing, medicine, housing, and above all, they need peace in their countries and the means to start the economy when they return, so that they can live normally. I believe that most refugees want this, but they are losing hope. Next, they say that refugees are coming here, however I cannot believe it. Because it seems that those who really need help – the children, the women, the sick and the elderly; those who are really the refugees, are those who remain in refugee camps, hungry and without everything. And then they show them on television... Will something be done about it? Next, I read the report of our journalist who traveled to Bihać in Bosnia and attended the protests there. The people were demanding security over migrants, because the migrants break into their houses and behave – in the words of one of the protesters – as if they were in their own country, as if they were the citizens, not the newcomers. Certainly, no children and no women were breaking into houses – the men were doing this, as migrants are mostly young men. It is known exactly where they will go from Bosnia. What should we expect? What will be done?

Next, in the past several days, a lot of us worked on the magazine’s call for fairy tales, which was completely misunderstood by many from the outside... Someone made a great deal of effort and sent a story in which he wrote: "I think you have enough love for him too. I think you have enough reason to see that the more you stand behind the trenches and refuse to help the ones in need, thinking that this is how you defend and love someone, the more what you so dearly defend and love will disappear from you..." I understand very well what you want to say, dear writer. However, I do not know if you understand me, us. Because I do not think that in our editorial office there is anyone who, in any concrete case, would not immediately come to the aid of someone in need, if he or she thought it was the right thing to do. Our so-called anti-immigration view is an entirely different story: it is a warning to the general situation regarding migration, which is not good for anyone and requires a wider solution, because it will become devastating for all.

Petra Janša: Parkinson's Law on Experts

In March 2018, the National Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia adopted the Law on Judicial Experts, Judicial Analysts and Court Interpreters, which will enter into force on January 1st 2019.

Unfortunately, we do not find any provisions in the law on the criteria that the court should apply for appointing experts: alphabetically, randomly, by territory or otherwise. This choice continues to be completely left in the hands of the court. This raises serious concerns and doubts for the parties in the proceedings about the impartiality of both the court and the expert, especially in cases where certain experts are "selected" by the court and regularly appear in court proceedings. In such cases, the parties are entitled to think that the the court and the expert are allied and that the expert fulfills the expectations of the court, rather than doing his job completely independently and impartially. The accumulation of rules and bodies, according to Parkinson's law, is also reflected in the repetition of patterns from the time of the socialist self-management: the so called Expert Council is supposed to oversee the work of experts and report to the minister once a year. So far, the field of experts, evaluators and interpreters has been fully mastered by some employees from the Ministry of Justice.

Now, the Expert Council will be composed, according to the self-management model, by external, internal and other members. The law does not solve one of the essential issues of expertise in civil procedures, namely, supplying them with funds for their work. We should mention here that, for example, a disabled person, treated incorrectly at the University Medical Centre, was asked by the court to provide in a months’ time an advance of 20,000 euros for a foreign expert, for the translation of the documentation. This is a mission impossible and it has nothing to do with a social or just state. When it comes to psychiatrists, the law does not provide adequate professional education or training in their selection by the court as experts. A possible alternative, it should me mentioned, is the example from Croatia. There, they have long been acquainted with special training in forensic psychiatry, the Centre for the Implementation of Psychiatric Experiments is in charge of the training at the Psychiatric Clinic Vrapče.

  • Written by
  • Read: 222 times

Gašper Blažič: It is Not Only About the Symbols, it is about The Practice!

The problem is not so much in that the Supreme Judge, a few years ago, came dressed up as a Yugoslav Pioneer and displayed her nostalgia for Tito through social networks.

The real problem is that this same judge honors precisely these values and practices law according to them in such a way that the judiciary becomes the striking fist of the revolution. That is what happened in the Patria case, in the condemnation of Milko Novič, and in the case of the priest Franc Klopčič. Today, this is happening in the Kafkanian process against Tadej Strehovec. The only good thing about it is that some people in the Church are finally aware that Slovenian democracy is actually a simulation of something that does not really exist. Even though many will persist in the politically correct fiction of the "Emperor's New Clothes" – either from intellectual laziness or from conformism and opportunism. Forgetting, by the way, that people set up by the Deep State despise constitutional decisions.

Do you understand why the red star is now appearing even at official celebrations and why it is (yet again) dishonoring the symbol of the Slovenian Armed Forces? It is precisely because of the official doctrine that our country is a continuity of the previous regime. Is this really what we fought for? No, we did not! Therefore, it is all the more perverse that the 50th anniversary of the Slovenian Territorial Defense is celebrated in our country. Before 1990, it had nothing to do with the current Slovenian Armed Forces, apart from the name, which the Slovenian army kept for several years after independence. It seems as if nothing happened between 1990 and 1991!

Is it therefore at all surprising that in the last few months, the exponents of the Deep State picked on and pressured in various ways the weekly Democracy Magazine? The last attack was about the magazine’s call for a patriotic Slovene fairy tale. True tragedy: a degenerate writer's society, now only a shadow of its former reputation when it was led by Rudi Šeligo, in connection with many public money suckers, is giving orders on what we can do and what we cannot. All the while they are financed from the budget, even for these actions, while we have to prove ourselves on the market. The difference is more than obvious!

Jože Biščak: The War Against Us

Personal, economic and political freedom are values we swear by at the Demokracija Magazine. These values stem from the freedom of speech. The opportunity and the right to give your opinion on all matters and speak freely, has enabled Western civilization to progress impetuously. Freedom of speech, however, does not only mean that you may speak, but that you should listen to others as well, even the ones that have diametrically opposite views from yours. Even if you think the ideas of the opposite side are bad, sometimes even harmful and offensive to you or a particular group, the freedom of speech is to confront such ideas with your own ideas and views and try to convince people of your own right. It is by no means acceptable to censor, ban, or physically and materially destroy the one you disagree with.

  • Written by
  • Read: 268 times
Subscribe to this RSS feed