You have already heard about the “Smurfs Girl” whose story The Gateway Pundit reported on recently: The 16-year old Loretta had posted a TikTok video wherein she made a reference to Germany’s right-wing party AfD. The party’s signature color is blue, so she compared its rising popularity to the Smurfs by showing a blue map of Germany with the poll results in each state.
Sounds innocent enough, right?
Well, one day she was dragged out of the classroom by her principal and three policemen. They gave her a “formal police warning”, because they had been given an anonymous “clue” about her right-wing content. Basically, this was a not-so-subtle police order to stop voicing her opinion or they will have to actually investigate!
It was later revealed that Loretta’s Smurf video was not the main piece of “evidence” that the principal had received. The “clue” consisted of screenshots of her social media accounts with patriotic content like the German flag and the statement, “In Germany, one speaks German”. Moreover, the clue-giver had noticed that she was wearing a pullover with the initials HH on it. Could it be… Heil Hitler? No, it stands for the brand name “Hally Hanson.” Not a niche brand either, but apparently a quite popular one.
Now The Gateway Pundit has reached out to the mother of Loretta to hear her version of the story. Many critics have accused the family of performing a social media stunt with the Smurfs story. As it turns out, the family never wanted the attention. Loretta just assumed that it must have been her latest Smurf video they had come across. Because she is fully aware of the systemic media’s negative portrayal of the AfD.
To this day, Loretta has not shown her face and wishes to stay anonymous. The mother is very protective of her daughter and doesn’t typically use social media at all.
This is what really happened behind the scenes:
After the story went viral, Loretta was devastated. Nosy journalists gathered around her school and even interviewed random pupils. What if they did not like Loretta and portrayed her as the “Nazi” that resentful people want to see in her? The mainstream journalists were invading the social fabric of TEENAGERS! That is predatory behavior!
Loretta started hiding on her way home from school so she could get away from prying journalists. Her mother had to take a vacation from work to be there for Loretta. Sometimes, teenagers would come and bang at the door and windows. The family disabled the doorbell. For a while, they had lost all confidence in their freedom of speech. But they got it back!
Now the family is ready to confront the real criminals in this case and go to court against the police and the school’s principal. According to Loretta’s mother, the lawyer was advised by someone of higher authority to reject the case (she does not know by whom) but he said: “There’s no way!”
It will be very interesting to find out how the principal will defend himself. Because, as we found out, the school was previously instructed by political authorities to take these measures and involve the police in case there were signs of right-wing tendencies in students: It was reported that the principal had claimed he was following an order from the ministry of education that had been given out to all schools.
Who is responsible for this new policy that parents are not being made aware of? And why is there nothing about it on the ministry’s website?
And most importantly: Who was really the anonymous clue-giver? It remains to be seen whether we will find out the whole truth in the upcoming trial.