Dear Editor,
I read Justin Ling's report on 5G and QAnon being involved in the Canadian Trucker-Protest (The Guardian, 8th Feb 2022, link below) and, yes, it sounds like there are some very weird views knocking around.
But I felt extremely uncomfortable by the way mention of a maximum number of radical (crack-pot) groups and views was squeezed into the article: It was as if, by giving this "weirdness" front-stage coverage, the reader then need not bother concerning him/herself with any potentially legitimate points.
It is my feeling here that this "blanket put-down" of opposing views by The Mainstream simply drives more people into radical camps.
One particular point which jumped out at me was the slant that questioning whether vaccine mandates might be illegal (e.g. under the Nuremberg Code) must be ridiculous (paragraph 4 in the article).
In article 2, paragraph 2 of the German Grundgesetzt ("Basic Law", created in the aftermath of WWII) the "integrity of the body" ("körperliche Unversehrtheit") is guaranteed. This clause reflects important historical precedents from the 20th Century so this question should not be discounted so flippantly.
This is not to say that vaccine mandates are illegal but we should, at the very least, be treading extremely carefully and reserving this measure as a very last resort.
And definitely not ridiculing those who ask this question!
Regards
