On January 12 and 13, a symposium was held in Dornbirn, Austria, entitled "Why education?
This involved a critical examination of the WHO guidelines for education and health.
The organizer, Erwin Rigo, is keen to highlight the dangerous plans being pursued with the
WHO pandemic treaty and the ongoing sexualization of our children.
He was supported by six renowned speakers:
Prof. DDr.
Daniel von Wachter, Univ.-Prof. DDr. Christian Schubert, Ao. Univ.-Prof.
Dr. Michael Geistlinger, the author Gabriele Kuby, lawyer Philipp Kruse and Prof. DDr. Martin Haditsch.
At this and other privately organized events in the past, information
was published on certain topics that contradicted the official narrative.
The organizers faced massive resistance from political institutions
and the mainstream media.
Organizers even had their venues terminated due to political interventions.
In addition, in November 2023, for example, the Kleine Zeitung denounced an educational
event in Carinthia on the coronavirus pandemic in advance, which is why it was removed from the
municipality's official event calendar.
Despite all the resistance, interest in such events is remarkably high, as could also
be seen at the symposium in Dornbirn.
The hoch2.tv team filmed the entire event so that you, dear viewers, can see
all the presentations in full length.
Kla.TV provides a brief insight into all presentations and panel discussions here.
The event was opened by the philosopher of religion Prof.
DDr. Daniel von Wachter.
His research focuses on metaphysics, analytical philosophy of religion, ontology,
causality, laws of nature and free will.
Daniel von Wachter: The roots and driving forces of sex education
I would now like to go back and ask where sex education actually
comes from and can we see where it comes from?
Can we understand what is going on in the minds of those who run them and can we derive something from this as to how we should react?
The first sex education, the first major sex education
program, was led by a man
named Georg Lukács, and Lukács was an avowed Marxist;
and he was involved in the brief communist soviet republic in Hungary for four months in 1919.
So this soviet republic lasted four months and he was deputy people's
commissar for education.
And in this function, he introduced a radical sex education program that the world had
never seen before and which came as a great shock to Catholic Hungarians - which was
also one of the reasons why this soviet republic came to an end.
But Lukács introduced a sex education program into the schools
with full force, encouraging unlimited sexual intercourse.
In other words, all the moral rules that people have normally always accepted were discarded and
the children were encouraged to discard these rules and then take action as early as possible.
This also encouraged children to rebel against their parents, as was
later seen in the 1960s in other European countries
and also in the USA.
And the women
should rebel against the men and everyone should rebel against the church.
That was the tenor and the program that he advocated
with unprecedented and unprecedented
zeal and directness [...]. Lukács and Reich are very close.
We can regard them as the founders of sex education. And they are both avowed, strong Marxists.
What I have not yet answered is the question of why they are Marxists or, more precisely,
why they, as Marxists, have pursued sexualization in this way?
What is the connection?
The connection does seem to exist, because it is not coincidental in their
biographies and in their work, but they have, as we have already seen
with Reich, and ultimately also with Lukács.
One motive for this is that they said that sexual morality was somehow standing in the way of the revolution.
[...] And overall, the goal is the destruction of
old values and the creation of new ones.
The creation of a new person and the creation of new values, and that always has an aspect of power.
So this act of destruction is not just an act of destruction,
but always also a seizure of power.
Univ.-Prof. DDr. Christian Schubert
is a psychoneuroimmunologist and professor at the Medical University of Innsbruck.
Dr. Schubert reports on a completely new view of medicine that differs fundamentally
from current conventional medicine.
In the so-called biopsychosocial model, body, mind and soul belong together, as do social and cultural aspects.
According to Christian Schubert, biopsychosocial medicine focuses on the immaterial and not on
the material, such as blood tests and ultrasound in conventional medicine.
In the coronavirus era, tests, masks, lockdowns and injections were
also at the heart of the action.
No consideration was given to personal sensitivities, emotions and relationships
- and the damage today is great.
Now listen to Christian Schubert himself: Christian Schubert: Geometry of the soul
You remember the last three years very well, when everything
was taken away from us in terms of self-efficiency, effectiveness and a sense of control.
We were treated like the last fools, with a baby elephant between us.
This is not just politics, this is medicine.
All they have to do is go to the clinic and they immediately lose their dignity.
They immediately lose their psyche and their social relationship, their biography.
It's all handed over at the door handle at the moment
when you only understand them via blood tests and ultrasound and MRI and I
don't know what all is done there.
You disappear as a human being.
And after three years of the coronavirus crisis, I now consider this to be life-threatening.
This system of conventional medicine, in its current materialistic form, is deadly.
It is not simply a trivial offense to exclude the soul and the spirit and the social
from medicine; it is deadly.
[...]
I would say to the title of this event, what is the point of this education?
Because education in itself is okay, but this education? No.
Reductive materialism determines the Western view of humanity.
Training serves to maintain the status quo.
And it is naturally maintained by families through the genetics of children.
Man as machine, production power and commodity.
We are stealing our marketing.
There are cultures where people work when they need something.
In our culture, we only work.
There are cultures where products are created when I need them at that moment.
Yes, then I'll do that.
But for us, we can't get away from the pressure of production. [...]
The fact is, to end on a positive note:
The new paradigm, I would say, is biosemiotic-systemic, as I have shown you. It all belongs together.
And what is more powerful are the non-material factors.
Not the material, but what hangs above
it - our relationships, our biographies.
People are holistic and complex.
We urgently need a rehumanization of society and medicine, a
rehumanization.
It has to become human again.
Salutogenesis, the unconscious and the immaterial must be at the forefront of our education.
I am deeply convinced of this.
Our children need to learn this.
[...] Univ.-Prof.
Dr. Michael Geistlinger is an associate professor of international law, comparative law in the field of constitutional and administrative
law and Eastern European law at the University of Salzburg.
Michael Geistlinger: New version of the International Health Regulations (IHR) and the WHO pandemic treaty
This world statute of the World Health Organization and the first important legal thing I have
to tell you here now is to be understood as a simple federal law in Austria.
This means that it was approved by the National Council and the Federal Council at the time, was published
in the Austrian Federal Law Gazette and therefore has the status of a simple law.
None of this has been elevated to constitutional status.
All its provisions are no more than simple laws.
[...] The pandemic treaty is initially based on Article 19.
This is the actual legal basis. This is the upper part of this film.
And there you see that it must be adopted with a two-thirds
[majority] in the Health Assembly.
The whole thing is planned for the end of May 2024.
It must then be brought into force in accordance with the provisions
of the respective member state basis.
Right
at the beginning of the drafting process in 2021, the states agreed that it
would be subject to ratification.
The term "subject to ratification" refers to a treaty under international law that must
be approved by the national parliaments.
This means that, with regard to the pandemic treaty, Austria would initially have the
opportunity to prevent the two-thirds majority.
I will tell you later why this is now difficult to almost impossible.
Then it also has the option of not ratifying the treaty - in other
words, not approving it in Parliament.
Of course, this depends on the political composition of the parliament.
And then this must be justified accordingly and
communicated to the Director-General of the World Health Organization within a
period of 18 months [now 10], which you see here in Article 20.
[...
If this deadline is not used, this means that the international health regulations automatically come into force in Austria and in all other member states.
[...] Recommendations
are expressly not legally binding.
[...] The standards have been adopted at European level alone.
They therefore have no legal significance.
They only become legally relevant, as Dr. Rigo described to us at the beginning,
because they have been made binding at national level.
In a subsequent panel discussion, Ms. Leni Kesselstatt had her say.
She is a co-founder of the Family Alliance in Austria and, together with her husband Franz, is
active in the valuable sex education initiative.
Leni Kesselstatt describes the beginnings
In 2015, the time had come for the infamous sex education decree under Minister
Heinisch-Hosek.
And with this decree, you could say that the floodgates were opened in Austria.
[...]
The reality is that these standards, these WHO and BZgA from Germany, have long since arrived in schools, as I said.
So that's been over since 2015. Through this sex education decree and through these external associations.
Apart from TeenStar, there is no association that we are aware of, and we have an overview
of the whole of Austria that is not ideological.
The same applies to abuse prevention concepts and organizations or workshops, and the
same applies to children's rights.
These are the three major areas where hard-core ideology is brought into schools.
It now looks as if the external clubs come to the schools, the teachers
are mostly excluded, although there is this very strong law, i.e. the School Supervision
Act, that the teachers have to stay in the classroom, even with external clubs.
[...]
This means that the teachers are sent out, they no longer know what is happening in the classroom.
The children are told not to talk to anyone about what is happening.
[...] Now we have a new situation as of last fall.
There are new curricula that the ÖVP - I am sorry to say - has launched.
The curricula mean that from the first year
of elementary school, children's
identity is questioned across all subjects.
[...] Teachers who come fresh from the academies, from the training courses, from their studies, they are really gendered, that's what I call it.
They no longer have any differentiation.
Unfortunately, they are often people who don't have children themselves and they think they are doing it right.
So what should we advise parents to do now?
Go to the school, ask around.
What is the situation?
Will sex education be taught in this class this school year?
When does it happen?
Then go again and
write down the
date.
Go back and
ask:
Do you give the lessons, does
an external association come?
And try to have a nice, proper conversation with the teachers to find
out when this will take place.
[...]
So it's very important to know that the situation has now changed dramatically, from first grade onwards.
Gabriele Kuby is a sociologist and author of 16 books.
In 2008, she was voted Journalist of the Year by the evangelical weekly magazine idea.
Gabriele Kuby: Does sexual liberation lead to freedom?
I published my first book against gender ideology back in 2006.
[...]
At the time, everyone thought she was exaggerating, that she could hear the grass growing.
Indeed, I have heard the weeds growing that are choking our freedom.
Nobody says that anymore.
On the contrary,
we are stunned by the madness in which a society that has placed the autonomous individual on the
throne of God can become entangled.
[...]
Uwe Sielert's Institute for Sex Education set the tone, trained people and managed to get the idea accepted: Children need sexuality.
This is an absolutely false thesis that is not supported by any science.
On this surfboard, our culture is being changed and children are being abused.
[...]
If he [man] does not orient his freedom towards truth, he becomes the serf of his desires.
[...]
In a short time, in 2010, this whole struggle, this belief was going on: mothers, children need education and they should put them in daycare.
Children need a bond.
This is crucial for children's lives.
They need a firm, stable, loving bond.
And then the personality
can develop [...]
In the annals of history, there is no example of a society that had high social energy over a certain period of time, unless it was absolutely monogamous.
Therefore, the limitation of sexual gratification must be seen as
the cause of cultural progress.
End quote. [...] I will briefly touch on the subject of gender.
The sexual revolution has begun under the banner of sexual liberation and the liberation
of women from the slavery of motherhood.
A term used by Simone de Beauvoir in her book
The opposite
sex from 1948 [...].
Not happiness, but depression, loneliness and fear are the bitter fruits of the sexual revolution.
[...] [ A society free of domination] - it has smashed everything.
Friendship with God, the integrity of the person as the unity of the spiritual soul with the body,
the love between man and woman, the bond between the child and its biological parents.
It has left human existence at the mercy of the blind arbitrariness of desire.
Far from giving freedom to the person who lives this way, he becomes a slave to
his desires and thus dominated by his body, which he wanted to dominate.
LawyerPhilipp KruseisLawyer for tax law and constitutional issues Philipp
Kruse: WHO pandemic treaty - totalitarian dystopia at the expense of democracy and fundamental rights
I have been
a simple lawyer for 26 years;
I was admitted to the bar in Bern, Switzerland, and started out as a commercial lawyer.
As of 2003 tax law, tax
law is intervention administration.
There you learn as a lawyer, but also from the tax authorities, under what conditions
the state is allowed to reach into our pockets and curtail our sphere of wealth.
And, surprisingly or logically, these are very analogous rules to those that are applied
when fundamental rights are infringed.
And that's why, at the time of the lockdown in March 2020, I paid particular attention to when
the conditions were right for such a colossal intervention in our lives, in our economy
and also in our health - not to mention many people who had their treatment postponed or
were told to stay at home - which was also
an intervention in their health.
I have still not found this justification.
[...] Misleading.
Another example from Ambassador Nora Kronig.
At the end of this interview, NZZ editor Fontana asks: What's next?
Can Parliament and the people have a say in the pandemic pact?
And then she says about the health regulations - and that is the crucial point.
She says: "The adjustments to the international health regulations
are minor and technical in nature.
This does not necessarily require a parliamentary resolution.
We are being led to believe in all our countries that what is happening
now is a minor technical adjustment.
A diplomat could not speak to us in a more misleading way.
[...] My counter-thesis: I say the opposite is the case.
These new, adapted health regulations will certainly empower the WHO to intervene
in the most fundamental pillars of our democracies, in our sovereignty.
They will massively damage democracy, make the separation of powers and, above all, the effective
protection of human rights virtually impossible.
And these are all elements that constitute a constitutional
state. If one of these is missing, then we no longer have a constitutional state.
[...]
WHO is the number 1 fake news disseminator in the world - WHO!
And I go even further.
The WHO is a bigger threat to our health than Covid-19 [... ]
Essential data is suppressed.
[...] The good Paracelsus
from Einsiedel would
not have stopped spinning in his grave.
[...] Do we not rather see here a change in our basic constitutional order?
Because we place an authority above our highest authorities.
An entity that we can no longer control.
Which we can no longer prove right
and which is not accountable to anyone.
This is what you call a fundamental constitutional revision.
And I would go so far as to say that it is not even possible to make such a decision.
Because you renounce your rights.
One relinquishes one's property rights.
[...]Prof. DDr.
Martin Haditsch is a specialist in hygiene and microbiology, virology and infection epidemiology, infectiology and tropical medicine.
Martin Haditsch: WHO pandemic treaty and WHO guidelines on sexuality for young children
Sex education in schools must be age-appropriate.
And age-appropriate is defined as, please hold on tight:
Masturbation at the age of 0 - 4 years, homosexuality 4 - 6 years, and that includes mutual groping.
It's unbelievable.
Contraception 6 - 9 years, gender orientation 9 - 12 years and practical sexual
experiences at the age of 12 - 15 years.
And I will then briefly show you how this is interpreted, what possible
interpretations there are.
This is a so-called hidden agenda.
In other words, all this was decided without involving teachers, parents, education experts,
doctors, psychologists or ... in the process.
This has therefore been decided under the radar, so to speak, but is binding
for the institutions involved.
[...] The child is curious, explores, asks questions.
An appropriate family structure provides the right environment for children to gain
knowledge and experience in line with their age.
In a secure and intact family or in the circle of friends that has grown up,
every child will find suitable contacts for the questions they have.
In a happy and carefree childhood, countless topics are on the agenda because children are curious.
But sex is certainly not one of them.
Parents know their child's stage of development
best and then also know what is appropriate for the child in which situation.
And these requests also include a no.
You can also say: You're still too young for that.
I mean, I gave those two examples, didn't I?
I don't give a three-year-old a razor just because he might
have to shave later on;
and I won't give him a car key, even if he later becomes a racing driver.
This is not age-appropriate.
[...] The family is the place for sex education, the school is the place for education and knowledge transfer.
I think it's very important to keep that apart.
We don't need a nanny state.
The state has to serve the people.
[...]
Final appeal: Stand by your opinion as best you can, but don't try to proselytize.
Missionizing creates pressure.
You can do this in a discreet way, you can try to make people curious.
And then the questions come automatically.
Inform yourself about so-called alternative media, now it's called
new media, but remain critical.
[...] But always ask yourself: What could a political or health policy decision
mean for me or my children and grandchildren in the very worst case?
[... ]At the end of the second day, there was a question for Gabriele Kuby in the panel discussion:
Can you imagine taking your grandchild out of early sex education classes?
Your answer may be helpful for some parents:
As a grandmother, I don't have the authority to take my grandchildren out of class.
I am of course in discussion with the parents.
Parents must lead this fight
and I call on fathers to go to schools.
So far, it's the moms who go to parents' evenings and say: but my child, etc.
The fathers (!) have to fight for their family
and the fathers have to fight for their children and go to school and say: Not with my child!
and in this tone.
Dear viewers - the successive publication of the presentations in full length has already begun on hoch2.tv. The links can be found under this program and will be added to on an ongoing basis.