Home Columnists Mrs. Nataša, her “non-party manner” and her “values”

Mrs. Nataša, her “non-party manner” and her “values”

Dr Janez Remškar. (Photo: Demokracija archive)

By: Dr Janez Remškar

1.) In her presentations to voters, Nataša Pirc Musar constantly emphasises her non-party manner and two values: human rights and the rule of law!

2.) It is true that she is not a member of any party, but as an expert in the field of law and, as she declares herself, a defender of human rights, she takes the side of people, politicians, and their successors, who in the past and still today do not know and do not recognise some basic human rights!

3.) If, even as the President of Slovenia, she continues with the positions she represents in her recent media appearances, she will, in contrast to Pahor, divide Slovenian women and men!

4.) History will judge her, whether she wants to or not, by her actions and not her words!

Nataša Pirc Musar, a lawyer, is without a doubt educated in the field of communication, as she spent quite a bit of time as a journalist in the USA and the UK for this purpose! This means that she knows how to communicate, report, and comment. I believe she knows a professional, honest way of working in terms of informing viewers and listeners. I am sure she also knows how to mislead people and give them only partial information. She also knows how to avoid unpleasant questions or give vague answers. This suits Nataša.

In our, I emphasise our, i.e., of all Slovenes, RTV broadcasting house, journalists are still social and political workers, so there are almost no unpleasant questions for Nataša, because for them she is the only real candidate for the president of Slovenia! Through the analysis of past reporting and comments, it is proven that the journalists of the news programme are mostly in the service of one political point of view. In the last 30 years, when left-leaning governments were in power for most of the time, “fucking more” have accumulated, as Marcel Štefančič pointed out!

She did not distance herself from Janković’s shame

As mentioned, Nataša is a professional who knows how to follow the interests of the economically powerful with her actions, but with her words she presents herself differently! She will probably remain so even if she becomes president. I conclude this after watching her performances. I can write without hesitation that I believe that she will not represent all Slovenians. I was especially led to such thinking by her pale comments about the aggressive, indecent, I could say in the manner of left-wing politicians, “fascistic” performances of Prime Minister Robert Golob and Comrade Zoran Janković. The first said: “We will certainly not allow an SDS candidate to win the presidential palace, which would turn Slovenia into the dark times of the last two years, and certainly nobody wants that.”

I will not even mention the other’s statements at the Day of the Dead commemoration! Mrs. Nataša did not condemn these statements, although even the ombudsman should have addressed them immediately. In the editorial offices of neutral media, all the red lights should be lit, because we live in a democracy, but unfortunately everyone is silent! Only “dark” forces are speaking up, where apparently, I belong, according to both gentlemen. Nataša does not know how to distance herself or at least limit herself precisely from the people who, despite the available documents, the discovery of long-hidden skeletons in secret caves scattered around Slovenia, people killed after the war, remain in the trenches of the devastating revolution for the Slovenians!

And Nataša, who says that she firmly defends human rights, appears in the company of people who do not even recognise the right to a grave for the dead! It is quite possible that some of the grey heads that stood behind the speaker at St. Urh, has something more to say. Perhaps one has economic benefits in advocating extremely despicable, immoral, Srebrenica-like actions, such as the post-war massacres of all political opponents by the revolutionaries. I do not understand how someone who is a lawyer who defends human rights with words can do such a thing. Perhaps these reactions of hers should be forwarded to Europe as well! I recommend to Mrs. Nataša, if she has not already done so, to familiarise herself at least now with the pursuit and persecution of Boris Pahor, Edvard Kocbek, and Drago Jančar, recognised literary men in our country and in the world, by the Communists, because of their writings in connection with the massacres after the end of World War II, and the introduction, for the party, of unsuitable literature!

Does Nataša, the defender of human rights, really know nothing about this? The pursuit of Boris Pahor began in 1952 and eased somewhat in the 1980s (documents). As a lawyer and as a candidate for president of Slovenia, she should know everything about this, because something like this must never happen again! Boris Pahor wrote about this pursuit, which was prescribed by the communists and carried out with the help of the Udba, in the book Moje suhote: “And one had to be afraid of them, because they knew how to worsen your life.” So, what about her attitude to human rights under communism? Will she perhaps condemn them as a representative of all Slovenians? Will she prefer to associate with people who interpret these facts as falsification of history? Otherwise, it should be known that recently the revolutionaries have only resorted to talking about the national liberation struggle and know nothing about the revolution. Maybe Nataša does not know anything about it either!

Attention! It is true that in today’s society it is difficult to cultivate memory. Historical memory is objectively documented past events, social memory is what people choose to remember, and cultural memory consists of stories, events, people, and other phenomena that a society chooses to remember as a material of their identity! So, there must be no misrepresentation because history determines our identity! The more totalitarian in nature a regime is, the more it tries to force people to forget their cultural memory. People remember only what they are taught today to remember. We know from the history of communist totalitarianism how this can be achieved through the media monopoly over information and with the help of the educational system. This happened to us, and is still happening to us today, in Slovenia, in the time of democracy, right before our eyes! This is possible because there are “fucking more” of some. And they want to put things “in the right place, direction” – if necessary, even with the so-called trade union struggles, force? In a little while, all the actors who participated in the independence of Slovenia from the beginning will be dead, and it will be known among people that Milan Kučan was the first and only “emancipator”. Yes, he did participate, and well, but only after a clear decision by the people. His statement that independent Slovenia was not his option can still be heard today!

In relation to cultural memory, for Mrs. Nataša’s key question is what she thinks about the Resolution of the European Parliament of April 2nd, 2009, with which the EU Parliament condemned, and it was emphasised that no political party has the exclusive right to interpret history. At the same time, the resolution regrets that even 20 years after the collapse of the communist dictatorships, access to documents is still unjustifiably restricted in some member states (most of them were burned here in May 1990 under the leadership of the last head of the UDBA, Comrade Ertl). So, what does Nataša think about it? And is it acceptable that this document has not been adopted by our parliament to date?

And last but not least, her position regarding human rights and the functioning of the Constitutional Court is also interesting. Nataša obviously does not know or does not want to know the expertise of Prof. Dr Lovro Šturm regarding the government’s decisions during the covid crisis and the decision of the Constitutional Court from the point of view of the principles of legality and proportionality. Professor Šturm clearly wrote that everything that was done was done solely to protect human lives!

In all international legal acts, documents, resolutions of the UN, WHO, the inviolability of human life is at the top of the list of unconditionally protected constitutional values. Everyone in the world was looking for ways out of the predicament. And this was about the time of COVID 19, when we knew nothing about the virus and had no medicine! Does she dare to assert that the proposals of the minority government of Janez Janša, in terms of movement restrictions, would be accepted? At this point, regarding the objections to the restrictions in our country, let me once again mention the comment of Dr Mario Fafangel, that in Trieste, where he lives, a soldier was standing in front of his house, as a result of which movement was limited to 200 meters! There is no point in wasting words on the treatment of the demonstrators. It is clear that they wanted to close, obstruct traffic, it is clear that they were violent, it is clear that they wanted to obstruct foreign representatives in Ljubljana, during our EU presidency!

Let me remark that, as a doctor, I am most appalled by our media and some politicians, who have systematically misled us all the time regarding the actions of the health authorities around the world and their success (the example of Sweden). Again, I am asking all readers, and of course Mrs. Nataša to look at the document: Policy Response to the Coronavirus Pandemic. By the way, with the otherwise difficult situation we had in Slovenia, with the completely disordered conditions in our homes for the elderly and many deaths, we are nevertheless “only” in 11th place in Europe in terms of the number of deaths due to Covid-19. Compared to the rest of the countries, this is not the result of poor work by professionals and politicians. Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, England, Sweden, and Belgium are ahead of us in terms of the number of deaths per million inhabitants!

And if I conclude! Nataša was never a left-wing political centre. Maybe with words, but not with actions! According to the available information, she, and her husband (who believes her that she knows nothing about her husband’s business and has nothing from them) worked in business in tax havens, i.e., in optimising taxes! Mrs. Nataša refers to the fact that everything was legal! But we all know the statement of Zdenka Cerar, who stated that all filthiness is not criminal! At the so-called optimisation of taxes, operating in tax havens, without a doubt, is about avoiding paying taxes at home! With this avoidance, the entrepreneur damages our state budget and thus the financing of education, health, fire, and police! Her statement that she earned everything through hard, honest work is also interesting. With 2 thousand euros? Even with Ruska dača? Who could believe that?

Let me conclude that in the past we had uneducated revolutionaries, communists who were popular in their words, but in terms of property or the use of confiscated houses, villas, equipment, and lifestyle, they were far from that. Even in the field of health care, for which Mrs. Nataša mentioned that her first concern would be its arrangement, the ancestors of those with whom she now associates, who are her like-minded people and who are supposed to be her voters, took care of themselves first with the special sanatorium Emona and with special money.

So much for the principles of the presidential candidate!

  1. Now it would be interesting to hear the statement of Dr Erik Brecelj on what he thinks about the presidential candidate. I guess he will not answer, even though he is a known screamer!
Exit mobile version