Autor: DaLe

About individual liberty, and abortion

“If you don’t have freedom over your own body, none of the rest of it matters.”

Melissa Hortman made a very good point.

In the U.S., likely many associate this quote with questions about abortion. And that sure is also an aspect. But let’s first take a look at the issue at large.

That is the issue of cases, when someone didn’t or doesn’t have freedom over their own body. E.g. slavery – that was usually a case, where humans got treated like cattle. In Europe, during feudalism something similar existed until the end of the 18th century, called serfdom. And the list of cases goes on. Even getting punched, limits or violates a person’s freedom, when this person didn’t specifically agree to take part e.g. in a proper boxing match. And when the case is, that children receive corporal punishment in schools, which is still legal in some parts of the U.S., even worse.

So, quite a range of cases, where modern states usually agree, that every individual is their own person, who shouldn’t be subject to arbitrary limitations of their freedoms and rights by other persons – and that where the state i.e. imprisoning someone is concerned, it must have proper standards.

This means, for the State (police, courts, lawmakers) to get to forcefully enter a flat of an individual, or to arrest the person, there needs to be a “probable cause”. The threshold of when even a razzia may occur, such tends to vary a bit among countries, respectively among jurisdictions. But generally, a state which doesn’t take liberties, such state respects the liberties of all individuals, and even offers (legal) protection for these liberties (as in: “If not even the state gets to enslave civilians to build a pyramid for the head of state, then so shall no one else.”).

Due to the aforementioned, I perceive the modern State to be way more of a care-taker, than some patriarch authority of old, ruling about every matter of public and private matters. In example, if a restaurant offers one, two, or three bathrooms, even from the side of the state, I would say that it is their business, as long as there is some provision as agreed by the license to run a restaurant. Whereas some notion of that some council of elders decides how many bathrooms there have to be in every restaurant (such as Republicans apparently saying two), such notion seems quite absurd to me. That said, it would be nice, if restaurants would be more accessible to persons with a handicap, in particular in wheelchair, including accessible sanitary facility. But instead of forcing everyone to rebuild their restaurants, the “caretaking” involves rather to take a look at minimum inside-area requirements for new buildings with commercial use, where also e.g. an area for changing diapers is practical, such as at a shopping mall, or at train stations.

And as such modern state, with deep-rooted respect for individual liberties, when it comes to the topic of abortion, the main question is, at which point is an unborn considered an individual person, who comes with rights and freedoms, an abortion would infringe upon.

Like, when Catholics are asked, many seem to be like: “Even sperm is sacred, as it serves procreation, and that’s why masturbation is sinful, as it doesn’t serve procreation.” (a stance, which seem to be largely based on a passage in the Bible about Onan, where it may have been merely about the fact, that someone had to clean the floor afterwards). And when Rabbis are asked, they seem to say, that the soul enters the body with the first breath – that is, with birth, as the child didn’t breath itself in the womb.

Talking about this topic further, it even comes to stem-cell research being mentioned. That is the research, where some are basically dissecting human embryonic stem cells – at a stage such as 4 days after fertilization, at which point the human egg and sperm, have turned into around 100 cells.

Personally, I find it difficult to view these 100 cells as an individual. And where I am like: “Now it starts to get interesting.”, is around the 6th week, when the heart starts beating, and around the 8th week of pregnancy, when there starts to be electrical activity in the brain area.

In such context, to me it seems plausible, that professional medical assistance is available, when a girl or woman wants to abort a pregnancy, within a number of weeks since the pregnancy started. In Germany, this comes with a mandatory interview.

That said, it would be nice, if the situation would not occur, that someone wants to abort their pregnancy. Meaning, use of contraceptives, would help reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, to begin with. Or if it is about a couple, who despite employment can’t afford or find a bigger flat, they would need for a family life – some support and politics, which actually would help the couple, would make way more sense, than an abortion.

But generally, for the public, parliament, king, pope, or whoever, to say that they have complete authority over what is expected of the couple, in regard to them having consensually mixed their bodies with each other, in my view, that is overstepping a boundary into private matters of the couple.

Meanwhile, traditional values don’t need to get cast aside. But instead of wanting to uphold these values by restrictions, it would already help quite a lot, when there would be some help for young families to get a foothold in these crazy markets, where not everyone has like their own clan-corporation ship to live on – and such support perhaps even to an extent that both don’t have to work full time all the time, just to be able to afford rent and food.

Why I don’t consider Crypto a good investment

I have been on the lower end of the income ladder for many years. Not as low, as $1 a day, as some folks in a number of countries. But at my first full-time job, pay was what would now be about 350 Euro a month, for 210+ hours worked – and that is quite low even compared to the current federal minimum wage in the United States, at $7.25 per hour.

Later, I was able to save up some hundreds of Euro, and I wondered where I would put it, so that it at least wouldn’t depreciate due to inflation over the years, and be of some use in retirement, as pillow for expenses such as a new fridge. And evaluating the options, I didn’t put even a single Euro in crypto.

Technically, it sure is possible to make a profit from trading crypto. But in my view, the main problem is, that the value of this or that crypto, it depends way too much on money flowing in by these trades.

In contrast, a company with public stock, such may be paying yearly dividends worth 5% of the value of the stock, based on the revenue it had with its business. So, even if the company doesn’t have skyrocketing growth over the next 10 to 20 years, the stock ends up paying for itself, even if it isn’t traded daily in large volumes. Whereas with crypto, there is no such revenue, nor are there assets (such as a factory of a company).

So, an investment in crypto, it is pretty much just a bet on that others will keep purchasing crypto as well. A bet which did turn out plentiful for some, but in my view, it doesn’t mathematically add up for everyone.

In example, let’s say I make my own crypto, the DaLe-Coin. It’s the newest hottest craziest thing ever, and all that. And I am offering one coin for merely $1,000, with only 1,000 coins in existence.

And now, someone may be like: “I take two.” – and price/value on the market goes up. So far, cool. I can already pay rent, and the purchaser of the two coins, they may be already doing free marketing for me, as they are now invested in this crypto with $2,000.

Next round, even more people start buying DaLe-Coin. Price goes up even further. And I am like over the moon, already dreaming about making it onto the property ladder, like a small place of my own. And the first purchasers are also glad. But, a new purchaser may now look at a price of like $10,000 a coin.

This is in itself not necessarily a problem. As I sell some of the last coins I hold, the first purchaser may perhaps also start selling the two coins they hold, and so on, still making it possible for the $10,000 “value” to increase, when there are still people buying. And even someone coming in at $10,000 may perhaps look at $20,000 after some time. But to achieve that, it still needs that viral momentum, for people to want to get this DaLe-Coin.

And without this momentum, the guy who went in at $10,000, they need to create that momentum, basically like the free marketing again, if they don’t want to lose out on possibly thousands of dollars. And so on and so on. And to me, that doesn’t seem much of a fair trade, because I would be leaving that guy with all the risk about DaLe-Coin, whereas with a DaLe-company stock, it would still be of mutual interest for the stock to perform well, largely due to the business running well.

And that’s why I am rather skeptical about putting money into crypto. Which isn’t to say, that there won’t be further growth to the crypto market. In particular, if some popular video game starts using (own) crypto as a sort of game currency (perhaps as reaction to legislation, saying that paid for in-game currency must be able to be changed back to cash), then that would likely be a large number of players, who would start buying crypto, to purchase in-game horse armor with, and whatnot. But that all sounds too speculative for my taste, in regard to putting some money aside for rainy days.

The fear of immigration

“King Frederick William I of Prussia welcomes the Salzburg Protestants, 30th April 1732”
– Painting by Konstantin Johann Franz Cretius

White rural America is very afraid, of being replaced by something else. At least a prominent Republican implied so, all while the same side associates crimes with immigrants to such an extent, that mass-deportations are supposed to solve it all. And what would the folks living their entire lives in villages and small towns know about it, when they are told by supposedly informed authorities, that foreigners are coming to get the girls – with cases, such as that Virginia Giuffre did indeed end up marrying a foreigner, after old-ish white Americans had their fun with her.

Personally, I do see things way more differentiated. In example, over here in Europe, there are sometimes violent confrontations between hooligan-fans of soccer-teams. So, when there is a soccer match, and hooligans from one town commit criminal acts in another town, i.e. 50 miles away, that could also be considered a sort of migrant criminality. Yet, to erect a wall between the two towns, that doesn’t really help about there being on both sides males, who want to be violent.

And historically, here in Berlin, there hasn’t been any problem with immigrants at large, until Nazis arrived and claimed that there is a problem. Berlin grew to a city with millions of inhabitants, by 1920 one of the largest world-wide, due to immigration from near and far. And quite a number of these were refugees.

In particular, in the year 1685, there was the Edict of Potsdam, after which approximately 20,000 Huguenot refugees settled in Prussia. Huguenots had been persecuted in France.

By 1731, many of the 20,000 Salzburg Protestants, settled in Prussia, after having been expelled due to the Counter-Reformation. Similarly, also Protestants from other places arrived, and refugees from Russia, and also folks e.g. from Turkey – in particular serving in the Prussian Army, see “Bosniak Corps” from the mid-18th century, and also i.e. diplomats, like Ali Aziz Efendi, who died in 1798 and had funeral according to Islamic rite in Berlin – and by mid-19th century, the Ottoman Empire had a plot of land in Berlin, that is since used as cemetery (now by Turkey).

And quite a number of other stories. I.e. in this picture here, Gustav Sabac el Cher in 1908, born 1868 in Berlin. He served as bandmaster in the Prussian Army.

So, to say, as some do, such as among AfD, or similarly the White House, that immigration is generally a bad thing, such notion seems quite absurd to me.

And, especially when there is humanitarian catastrophe, these days mostly man-made, it isn’t the refugees that are to blame. In example, Syria – permanent UN Security Council members seem to have fought a proxy-war over there, with also fanatics from Iraq involved – and then someone born in 2005 turned up at the border from Syria, and gets blamed for everything bad? That seems quite a ridiculous notion.

And as far as criminality by foreigners is concerned, there is also a lot to differentiate. Like, the homeless person from Poland, who somehow ended up in Berlin, and got caught stealing food or something to drink from a shop, such “simple theft” represents about 20% of all crime in Germany – and then it even differentiates further, in regard to that about a quarter of shop thefts are attributed to persons working there, and another quarter to gang criminality as such. And the homeless from abroad, when someone actually takes a look, they can see that these persons sit like in a ditch between the national Social security systems of EU member states. Like, no income whatsoever, and no local health insurance – pretty much existential poverty.

In this case, these persons may perhaps once have had a slim chance of not becoming homeless. But a wall on the border to Poland doesn’t help these people, who would likely just end up sitting in a homeless camp elsewhere, when politics in several countries are just like: “It’s everyone for themselves! Hundreds of billions in monthly profits of U.S. companies, and no dime even for our own homeless.”.

And stuff like that, where at least some humanism would be nice instead.

About nuclear weapons in Germany

There are nuclear weapons stationed in Germany. Specifically, the B61 nuclear bomb. Until recently, it were 20 bombs of the Mod 4, that were to be replaced with the modernized Mod 12, with a ‘yield’ of up to 50 kilotons.

These are U.S. bombs, stationed in several countries in Europe as part of NATO Nuclear Weapons Sharing. In case of use, these bombs are meant to be delivered e.g. by German pilots.

In total, there are about 150 of these B61 bombs stationed in Europe. This is far less crazy than back during the Cold War, when there were more than 7,000 nuclear weapons from the U.S., stationed in Europe. I think that it is still crazy though.

The general notion is one of: “Don’t throw nuclear weapons at us, or else, we will throw nuclear weapons at you.” Eye for an eye, basically, just like thousands of years ago – except now with the firepower to annihilate entire cities within minutes, and to make large swathes of land unhabitable.

I get that premise. And sure, I also wouldn’t want to have to live under the boot of someone, who is like: “Don’t you dare to speak about a man consensually kissing a man in front of children, and tell the children instead how to make the rivers overflow with human blood.”

But at which point, would a nuclear weapon actually be used? In example, when Mr Putin would order an unit near Minsk, to annihilate Berlin with nuclear weapons, would the decision maker in NATO order for Minsk to be annihilated?

And that’s where I have an issue with, for among other my death to be used as justification for killing other civilians. And depending on how even more crazy it gets, such as Mr Hegseth filling the heads of officers with the notion, that only a white planet can stand strong against the radical left aliens from outer space, coming to eat us all – are there really checks and balances, that would prevent NATO from being the ones, who start a nuclear war?

From what I gathered, that seems barely the case. In particular, the German federal parliament asked the government on 26th March 2010, to ask the U.S. to remove their nuclear weapons from Germany. But the government didn’t do that, and the more recent government then even spent billions to prep a new airfield for these weapons.

And I just want to say, that I don’t agree with a concept of: “Only a few know, what is in the interest of the people, and the people ought to accept that.”. Nor do I think that it helps geopolitics, when all the big players are just in it, to win with their team, even over the dead bodies of millions, and no one left, to be rather more of a neutral mediator. As in someone looking at things more objectively and putting some real effort into it, than to just move stacks of money for weapons and instead of looking at everything through a lense of self-interests of the team-members with no regard about how e.g. all of Africa ought to defend itself against nuclear annihiliation, when all of the permanent UN Security Council members are saying that such is possible only with even more nuclear weapons – which doesn’t seem to be a rational approach in regard to this planet of ours, and all of us living on it.

Did Charlie Kirk knew too much about Trump and Epstein?

After the murder of Melissa Hortman und her husband in June 2025, a number of prominent figures in the U.S., claimed that “the left” was to blame. The arrested suspect was a Trump supporter though.

And since some people are basically claiming that the murder investigation is already solved, blaming once again “the left”, even though the suspect is at large and no manifesto or anything – is it an attempt to mislead the public about what really happened?

After all, what is known at this point? A single sniper shot killed Charlie Kirk. That sounds like a professional was involved. But that in itself doesn’t imply that it had to be a leftist, unless one assumes that a politically right-oriented shooter would have been too drunk at that time of day.

Also, it happened in Utah. Utah has a Republican governor. And crime is according to some figures in the U.S. only a problem in states with Democratic governors.

So, could it have been an inside job, to clean the ranks of those, who are considered to be a problem for the administration?

Charlie Kirk clearly had at least access to the inner circle of the Trump administration, and he had some media reach. Based on that, he may have obtained information, that someone didn’t want the public to learn. Information, such as possible insight into the Epstein files – and possibly details about what Mr Trump and Mr Epstein were all doing together, before they had a falling out, apparently over Virginia Giuffre having worked for Mr Trump, and then having been hired to work for Mr Epstein instead.

The are other possibilities as well though. Charlie Kirk pointed out in 2023 that the second amendment comes with some gun deaths. He did consider it “a cost worth paying”, and was supportive of the second amendment. But perhaps some NRA supporter didn’t like, what may have sounded like a hint of criticism.

He was also talking about second amendment being there, “so that you can defend yourself against a tyrannical government” – and that doesn’t sound like something those would like, who want to decide for the people that Republicans ought to rule them forever and about everything – even telling the people what to think, despite no evidence even pointing in that direction, such as with the claims of a “leftist perpetrator” in the case of the murder of Melissa Hortman and her husband.

And further speculating, the murder could have been, because the girlfriend of the shooter, fell in love with Charlie Kirk, and she split up with the shooter over it – and now he is perhaps comforting her in his arms.

And another story, after the attack on Hamas leadership in Qatar, perhaps a retaliation was ordered.

That said, it sure may have also been, as is implied by some commentators, that a radical far-left organization is on the loose, killing Democrats and Republicans left and right, until none remains. But, based on the facts at hand, to claim it to be so, while the criminal investigation barely started, that sounds quite like a fictional thriller movie some want to sell.

Politically motivated – What does that mean?

Today, Tuesday, in Berlin, part of the city experienced a power outage, affecting about 50,000 households. Power won’t be restored for many of them, until Wednesday or even Thursday.

This was due to a fire damaging a power line, at 3:30 AM. Police suspect “politically motivated arson”.

“politically motivated” – this term may not be familiar to many. E.g. in the UK, they went to talking about terrorism already after some group painted an airplane, after they easily got into an supposedly secure area this plane was at.

So, please allow me to try to explain, what this term means.

In example, let’s take my political stance about road safety. I am a fan of individual mobility, but also a fan of people making it back to their loved ones, after venturing outside. In Berlin in 2024, this wasn’t the case for 55 persons, who died due to traffic accidents, with about half of them having been on foot.

I may even have got as far, as writing elaborate essays, such as about improved design of road intersections, and as far as speeches, such as:

“Why, people, why? Real life isn’t supposed to be like Hunger Games etcetera. Let’s stop this sort of social-darwinist lottery of death, in which every week someone gets killed (on average). And let’s instead improve public matters for everyone!”

But, to no avail for real improvement. CDU and SPD even announced another cut to the budget for pedestrian safety, bringing it to about 3 million Euro, which is apparently the entire budget per year, for improving e.g. pedestrian crossings, from a city budget of about 40 billion Euro.

And now to the hypothetical, let’s say I am all mad about it, that people are just a statistic to them people in charge, who drive around in their limousines. And with such rage about these things, I go out at night and slash the tires of cars, perhaps in some misguided notion of that such action will wake the people up, and perhaps even make them stand against this system, that cares so little about fundamental rights of humans, such as the right to life, to begin with.

But, once caught, I would get charged, for what is considered a crime. And, it wouldn’t be nice to the people affected, some of who may be working for little money i.e. as nurse, confronted in the morning with not being able to get to work by car, and having quite some hassle to get it fixed. And it would produce a lot of unnecessary waste.

And in such context, what local police would talk about, is a crime, that was politically motivated.

Not sure, where exactly such case would show up in the police statistics of “politically motivated crime”, where the categories are “right extremism, left extremism, and Islamist extremism”. But generally speaking, it seems a more reasonable approach to talk about these matters, than to consider a trespass already a terroristic act, due to which an entire group was proscribed as terrorist by the House of Commons on 2 July 2025.

The Battle for Chicago?

My assessment of talk about deploying military troops in Chicago.

As you may have heard, there is talk from the White House about sending military to Chicago, Illinois.

The overall notion by the U.S. administration seems to be, that the crime in Chicago is generally to be attributed to undocumented immigrants, and that by deporting them, it will solve everything.

Looking at the crime numbers for Chicago, compared to Berlin in Europe, it does seem quite high. I.e. homicide rate, in Berlin, it is less than 10%, of what Chicago has. Two aspects strike me as quite relevant about this though:

First, the general prevalence of firearms in the United States of America. Back in the days, being all alone with the family-clan on a ranch somewhere, it sure sense, wanting to be able to protect oneself, in case Billy the Kid, or any of them infamous gangsters of the first days, showed up.

These days, kids grow up with constant pictures of destruction, such as from television, and with romanticized tales about the them tough guys, such as Billy, and then they get access to a gun. That doesn’t seem to be a good combination anywhere in the U.S. – In example, see Houston, where there are also hundreds of homicides per year, and e.g. biker gangs.

Secondly, while cartels sure seem to have a presence in the United States, from what I have read, many of the gangs are homebrew. Especially in Chicago, a number of the gangs go back to the 1950s – and their recruits, pretty much U.S. citizen, are simply from poor neighborhoods, who had barely job prospects, and it wasn’t until 1968 that all forms of segregation had been declared unconstitutional. And by estimates, there are more than 100,000 gang members in Chicago these days.

And to me personally, it would seem to make sense for actual politics to happen, for youth to not even end up joining a gang, and for there to be more professional detectives.

So, ICE may rake up their target numbers a bit from Chicago, even though the people it affects may be even mostly cases such as a single mother with child from Mexico, just looking for a better future for their child, who gets deported to some cartel territory.

But in regards to actual criminal cases, I find it to be very doubtful, that it will improve anything with Mr Hegseth going in with the Department of War, with statements about a “white deadly army”, which is supposed to be even more efficient at killing, due to some notion of “Clone army has no diversity, and therefore is strongest.” apparently.

And with it being mostly U.S. citizen there, with them guns, I would say, that it could become an actual warfare situation, as the White House makes it out to be. As in, the gangs sure may lay low for a bit, and not start out digging trenches, to defend the city. But if the troops are by now mostly the guys, who are in it, to establish ‘white dominance’ and such stuff, I wouldn’t be surprised if things flare up quite quickly after an incident, involving such a American Neonazi in uniform, with a gun he can’t wait to pull the trigger on. Hopefully, that won’t the be the case though.

Cyberspace, und virtuelle Spielplätze

Stanisław Lem hat im Sachbuch “Summa technologiae” (1964), den Begriff “Periphere Phantomatik” verwendet. Damit hatte er was angesprochen, was dann bei William Gibson 1982 in einer Kurzgeschichte, und 1984-88 in der Neuromancer-Trilogie, mit dem Begriff “Cyberspace”, auftauchte.

Die Formulierung auf Wikipedia nutzend: “Gibson beschreibt den Cyberspace als konsensuelle Halluzination eines von Computern erzeugten grafischen Raums. … In seinen Romanen erzeugen die Menschen den Cyberspace – der von Gibson auch als „Matrix“ bezeichnet wird – indem sie sich über eine neuronale Schnittstelle an vernetzte Computer anschließen.”

Das Konzept findet sich in so manchen Filmen und TV-Serien wieder. Ghost in the Shell (1995 als Zeichentrick, davor 1989 als Manga/Comics) ist ein Beispiel. Dort gibt es eine virtuelle Realität, in welche die Protagonisten eintauchen, mit Antagonisten wie z.B. dem Puppetmaster, welcher über das Netz künstliche Implantate hackt, und die Träger der Implantate für seine Zwecke nutzt. Anderes Beispiel sind die Matrix Filme. Dort sind die meisten Menschen so sehr in einer virtuellen Realität eingetaucht, dass gar nicht mitbekommen, dass sich in einer virtuellen Realität befinden.

Also wie wenn man sich so einen VR-Helm bzw. Headset aufsetzt, und dann voll eingetaucht in einem 3D-Videospiel ist. Und ich selbst sehe unter dem Begriff “Cyberspace” auch eine Multitude an virtuellen Welten, welche auch nur per Smartphone-Bildschirm zugänglich sind.

Im Beispiel, ein online Chat:

Peter: “Da standen Paul und ich also bereit, den Dieb zu erwischen, wer uns davor einen Kuchen stibitzt hat, welchen wir da auf den Fenstersims zum Abkühlen hingestellt hatten. Ich voll an die Küchenwand gepresst, um zu sehen, wann der Kuchen verschwindet,”
Paul: “und ich hinterm Gartenzaun versteckt, und wartete auf Ruf von Peter.”

Und schon mag mancher Leser eingetaucht sein, in diese Welt der Geschichte von Peter und Paul. Und das mag so mancher auch unterhaltsam finden. Aber, es ist als Außenstehender nicht mal unbedingt klar, ob Peter und Paul zwei verschiedene Personen sind, oder ob je mal einen Kuchen gebacken haben, und so weiter. Und in dem Fall mag das auch komplett egal sein, weil es einfach um eine Geschichtserzählung geht. Aber mehroderweniger fiktive Welten gibt es online so manche, und nicht jede dieser Welten ist unbedingt bekömmlich, mit in so manchen Fällen sogar wie so ein Sumpf, welcher darauf ausgelegt ist, den User reinzuziehen, um jemanden einen Umsatz zu bescheren, u.ä.

Über solche Dinge mag man da zwar öffentlich etwas Aufklärung betreiben. Aber so Dingen beizukommen, wie z.B. Volksverhetzung auf einem Minecraft-Server, auf welchem Kinder spielen, und welcher der Weltöffentlichkeit zugänglich ist, das würde ziemlich viele Arbeitsstunden brauchen, um den Chat zu kontrollieren, und entsprechend strafrechtliche Maßnahmen einzuleiten.

Und in solchem Kontext, würde ich sinnvoll finden, ähnlich wie es auch öffentliche Spielplätze für Kinder draußen gibt, online etwas in der Art anzubieten. Zum Beispiel, falls Kids dieser Tage (noch) viel Minecraft spielen, dass z.B. je Landkreis einfach paar eigene Minecraft-Server betrieben werden, wozu es Passwort nur über Schulen im Landkreis gibt. Und dort können abhängen, und Minecraft spielen, ohne irgendwelche Typen welche nach Fotos fragen, und weiterem.

Des Weiteren, bei preußischen URLs (also mit Endung wie .pr), bin ich Fan davon, second-level Endung zu verwenden. Z.B. berlin.gov.pr – wo das gov für Governance steht. Und tagesblatt.jo.pr – mit jo für Journalismus. Und firma.co.pr – wo das co für Company steht, und halt nur von Webseitenbetreibern genutzt werden kann, wenn die genannte Firma auch wirklich in Preußen als Firma registriert ist.

Und Sinn des Ganzen, eine sozusagen wie virtuelle preußische Hauptstraße zu schaffen, an welcher nur die offiziellen Ämter, Firmen/Geschäfte, usw. sitzen, die es auch wirklich gibt. Und damit allen Internet-Usern in Preußen gewisse Orientierungshilfe gegeben, ob sich noch auf Hauptstraße befinden, oder in einer der mehroderweniger dunklen Seitengassen, von welchen manche wie zum Zirkusplatz mancher der “sozialen Medien” führen.

Dazu noch wäre auch gut, wenn es verbesserten Schutz vor den sogenannten Cyberangriffen, wie Hacking, und DDoS, usw. gibt. Also vielleicht wie Posten an den Enden der Hauptstraße, wo es Stopp heißt, wenn jemand mit wie Laster voll bepackt an Anfragen aus dem Ausland zu einer bestimmten Adresse möchte, welche üblicherweise eher lokalen Datenverkehr hat. Je nachdem was man da eigentlich so machen könnten, wenn man die vorhanden Einzeldinge mal etwas anders aufstellt, hätte man damit vielleicht viel Nutzen für die lokalen Betriebe, wenn nicht jeweils eigene IT-Abteilung nur für den Cyberschutz brauchen – sowie des weiteren vielleicht auch ziemlich tolles Argument für Ansiedlung von Servern (mit auch so: “Strom grün.” und “Abwärme von Servern direkt als Fernwärme genutzt.”).

Katastrophenschutz international

Wie zuvor genannt, ich bin dafür, dass Konzept der Berufswehr auszuweiten, dahingehend, dass es je Landkreis mindestens eine Hauptfeuerwehrwache gibt, welche für Zivilschutz in dem Landkreis so allgemein zuständig ist.

Betreffend Personalkosten ist dies übrigens nicht so ein Problem. Im Beispiel, Landkreis mit 150.000 Anwohnern, pro Kopf 5 Euro im Monat, damit RTWs und Feuerwehr für Notfälle 24/7 bereitstehen (und z.B. über “Landkreis Council Tax” verrechnet), dann sind das 750.000 Euro monatlich. Davon kann mit z.B. 350.000 Euro, ein Gehalt von je 3.500 Euro für 100 Mann bezahlt werden. Und halt dem Landkreis überlassen, ob sich 100 Mann vielleicht doch etwas wenig anhört wenn es auf 24/7 Schichten gelegt wird, und vielleicht doch paar Mann mehr.

Aber, wenn nicht viel los, natürlich schon toll, wenn die Frauen und Männer da nicht rumgammeln. Zum einen würde ich da über Zusatzaufgaben reden, wie z.B. Wasserproben aus Gewässern zu entnehmen. Und zum anderen, das eingeplant wird, dass paar Mann für einige Zeit zum Katastrophenschutz abgestellt werden.

Der Katastrophenschutz, was ich damit meine, ist eine nationale Zentrale, welche bei großflächigen Schadensereignissen, das Zentrum für Koordination ist, und z.B. ein zentrales Lager verwaltet, wo man Dinge hat, wie 100.000 Decken, damit bei einer Evakuierung eines Gebietes, z.B. wegen Sturmfluten, nicht jeder Landkreis selbst solche Anzahl an Decken auf Vorrat haben muss (bzw. auch nicht die Logistik tragen muss, um es an die 100.000 evakuierten Personen zu bringen, für welche z.B. auch verfügbar, dass Zelte mit Pritschen aufgestellt werden. Und damit es in solchem Schadensfall halt die Mann gibt, welche die Zelte und so aufstellen, dafür würde sich die Zentrale jeweils paar Mann je Landkreis nehmen.

Und wenn das in dem Sinne aufgestellt ist, dann würde sich auch anbieten koordiniert Hilfe für andere Länder anzubieten, wie z.B. in Fall von Erdbeben in Türkei, oder bei den vielen Wildbränden diesen Sommer, in Portugal, Spanien, Italien, und Griechenland.

Je nachdem worum es geht, wird dafür nicht mal unbedingt ein Flugzeug benötigt. Szenario, Wildbrand, welcher auch mal über Tage geht. Und wenn man da mit Bahnlokomotive bei Berlin paar Personenwagen ankoppelt, in welchen paar von Berufsfeuerwehr der Landkreise, und direkt hinter der Lok schon angekoppelt ein Waggon, welcher wie ein Feuerwehr-Löschfahrzeug, aber halt auf Gleisen. Und mit dem Ding dann geholfen, z.B. einen Flächenbrand auf der einen Seite der Gleise auch auf der Seite zumindest zu halten. Und zur Unterstützung auch dann noch paar Straßenlöschfahrzeuge auf weiteren Waggons. Und so ein Zug braucht dann zwar paar Stunden, bis z.B. Italien erreichen würde. Aber mit so Beladung und Entladung eines Flugzeuges, ist es u.a. sowieso ein Zeitaufwand. Und da würde ich so primär auf Bahn setzen, um dann auch mal 500.000 MREs (Meal ready to eat, also wie Konserven aus Vorratslager), z.B. den 100.000 evakuierten Personen aus überflutetem Gebiet, bringen zu können, ohne deswegen eine Flotte an LKWs zu brauchen.

Altlasten

Altlasten sind auch nach Jahrzehnten noch ein Thema. Wie den Angaben des Landesamtes für Umwelt Brandenburg entnommen, im Altlasten- und Bodenschutzkataster sind mit Stand Juni 2024 rund 30.000 Flächen erfasst, wovon bei 67% der Fläche die Gefahrenermittlung beziehungsweise Bearbeitung und Sanierung noch nicht abgeschlossen ist.

Und je nach Art der Altlast, da kann schon sein, dass nicht nur eine Fläche an Boden (bis zu x Tiefe) kontaminiert ist, aber von der Altlast noch weitere Kontaminierung für weiteren Boden oder auch Grundwasser einhergeht. Damit geht potentiell mehroderweniger auch Gesundheitsrisiko einher, wozu es kein wirkliches Monitoring gibt, wie das von Gemeinde zu Gemeinde aussieht.

Also, es gab zwar z.B. Krebsatlas Deutschland, als ein Gemeinschaftsprojekt von der Gesellschaft der epidemiologischen Krebsregister in Deutschland e.V. (GEKID) und dem Robert Koch-Institut (RKI). Aber dort wurde nur so erfasst, dass z.B. in Bremen die Neuerkrankungsrate für Lungenkrebs mit über 70 je 100.000 Einwohner bundesweit am höchsten ist. Und da mag es zwar plausibel sein, zu mutmaßen, dass es mit in Bremen angeblich relativ hohem Raucheranteil zu tun hat. Aber, es könnte auch sein, dass der Lungenkrebs vermehrt bei denen auftritt, welche in Nähe von A1 wohnen oder arbeiten, oder bei denen unter Flugschneise vom Flughafen Bremen, oder bei einer Industrieanlage, u.ä., bis hin dazu, dass vielleicht noch manches Haus Asbest hat, und sich der Wohneigentümer eine Sanierung nicht leisten kann.

In Anbetracht dieser Dinge, ist es wünschenswert, die systematischen Bemühungen zur Beseitigung der Altlasten, zu vertiefen. Neben besseren Umweltbedingungen, und verringertem Gesundheitsrisiko, würde sich auch die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung vereinfachen, wenn Flächennutzungsinteressent nicht derjenige ist, auf welchen die Dekontaminierungskosten wie derzeit so ziemlich abgeladen werden, obwohl es teils auch um Restbestände der Wehrmacht geht, welche dann manche bei sich im Garten entdeckten, und dann mit den Kosten so ziemlich alleine dastanden, u.ä.

Und in dem Kontext, würde ich gut finden, sich nicht nur auf externe Firmen zu verlassen, und beim Zivil- bzw. Katastrophenschutz paar Personen im öffentlichen Dienst mit Expertise, welche man dann auch anderen Ländern anbieten kann, wo es auch so mancherorts Altlasten gibt. Siehe z.B. in Indien, Bhopal, wo es 1984 zur Entweichung von mehreren Tonnen giftiger Stoffe in die Atmosphäre kam, und erst im Januar 2025 wurden 337 Tonnen Giftmüll vom Unglücksort zur Entsorgung abtransportiert. Und da wäre generell schon toll, wenn man international bei solchen Dingen viel zügiger vorgehen kann.