Christian Wirth, September 10, 2026, Constitution Protection Office

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/93, pp. 11497-11498.

Frau President. Herr Minister. Valued colleagues.

In the year 2016 - ten years ago - the addition in the Federal budget for the 
Federal Office for Protection of the Constitution amounted to some 260 million 
euros. Since then, the Constitution Protection clearly receives almost every year 
a growth of means. In the year 2025, the means already amounted to 577 million 
euros. In the present budget for the year 2026 we have reached 690 million euros. 
In the budget plan for the year 2027, it is as per the government draft 860 million
euros, again an increase of some 25 percent in comparison to the previous year. 
What have the taxpayers received for that as a return? Since the CDU-led Federal
government under Merkel opened the borders, numerous Islamist terror attacks 
have been thwarted. Some unfortunately could not be prevented. In nearly all 
thwarted cases, if not even in every, single case, the decisive evidence came 
from secret services of our foreign partners. The Federal Office for Protection of 
the Constitution is blind. 

Why is that so? For one, the Federal Intelligence Service and the Federal Office  
for Protection of the Constitution [VS] lack authority and, for another, the 
German secret service for years is misused for criminalizing unfavored opinions 
of citizens and the opposition. A unique proceeding among democratic states!
The Federal government now wants to work on the problem of the absent 
authority, yet with its planned reforms clearly goes too far. For Interior Minister
Dobrindt has overtaken from his predecessor the partisan political narrative that
the greatest danger proceeds from the extreme right. 

Instead of, at enormous expense, gathering crimes of opinion and construing an 
unconstitutionality beneath the threshold of criminal culpability, the VS should 
apply itself to the actual threats to our free, democratic basic order. Those are 
espionage, terrorism and violence-prone extremism.

The Constitution Protection shall however in the future not only observe, 
evaluate and report, but itself covertly intervene in the reality. Among other 
things are foreseen the access to private IT systems, entrances of domestic 
dwellings, interventions in data connections, as well as the deletion or 
falsification of stored information. Those affected, under circumstances, could
never come to know of such measures. 

Especially alarming is the planned possibility of recruiting of 16 and 17 year olds
as confidantes. Minors would thereby be made paid informers of a domestic 
secret service. This is no harmless instrument of inquiry, ladies and gentlemen, 
but an attack on trust, family, school and social cohesion. A state, Herr Minister, 
which makes spies of minors tends not to freedom but to denunciation. 

Still more heavily weighs that the Constitution Protection's draft shall enable 
diverting or altering data streams, providing false information and deleting or 
falsifying stored data. The secret service thereby from observer becomes actor.
And the control is not convincing. An independent control council is indeed 
foreseen. In urgent cases the authorities' administration shall nevertheless be able
to immediately carry out measures. The control then follows subsequently, while 
a report on the Mebrofenin [radioactive tracer] can be permanently omitted. The 
control board in addition shall be elected by the parliamentary control board on 
which the largest opposition delegation, the AFD delegation, is denied a seat on 
partisan political grounds, even though it is legally entitled [rechtlich zusteht].

Konstantin von Notz (Green): You will not be elected! In a 
democracy elected! You are entitled to absolutely nothing!
[Ihnen steht gar nichts zu!]

The obviously partisan political misuse of the Constitution Protection now certainly
becomes public when party politicians of all colors strike an alarm shortly before 
a possible AfD-led State government. The State Office for Protection of the 
Constitution may in the end be accountable to an AfD interior minister. Hear, hear!
Involuntarily comic and self-revealing!

The chief of the Thüringen Constitution Protection Office and SPD member 
Stephen Kramer wants in the future to withhold from the Sachsen-Anhalt 
colleagues, for example, information from the Constitution Protection association,
and have specific agents and sources withdrawn and overtaken by other authorities.
Many citizens may ask themselves in regards such plans what then is actually sought
to be hidden with such measures. 

Ladies and gentlemen, the AfD stands for a domestic secret service which occupies 
itself with the actual threats. 

Sebastian Fiedler (SPD): Say for once something on Russia! I'm
listening! What do we do with Russia?

Those are terrorism, espionage and violence-prone extremism. Here, we extend the
hand, Herr Minister. 

Many thanks and Glück auf!

[trans: tem]

Mary Khan, September 15, 2026, Ceuta

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2026)09-15(2-0231-000).

Frau President.

Ceuta within a few weeks has degenerated into a slum. And who denies that, 
he suffers from disorders of perception. Trashing is a side-effect. Due to the 
security situation, social peace is no longer a given. Nearly every day there is 
a sexual assault. Girls under 14 especially are endangered. Doctors and nurses
sound an alarm, and before all they confirm there are many raped children. 

And even Ceuta's mayor - Herr Magnus Brunner [EU Commissioner for 
Internal Affairs and Migration], you were also there - said in an extraordinary 
sitting of the LIBE [Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs] Committee 
that Morocco accepts no sovereign borders. And it is also very indicative
that Spain's interior minister is not at this sitting. And the message needs 
again be quite clear - and to you, Herr Marquardt: Na, quite clearly there are
protagonists who instrumentalize the whole. Yet who set the incentive? It 
was primarily Pedro Sanchez with his egoistic migration policy. Therefore:
Complete solidarity with the Spanish people, but not with this government!
It needs now before all be quite clearly dealt with. It is primarily about 
Morocco. Morocco needs to pay back every cent which it received from 
the EU for the border management. And  the second point is quite clear:
Spain needs to be temporarily excluded from the Schengen area.

[trans: tem]

Kerstin Brinker, July 2, 2026, Housing in Berlin

Berlin Abgeordnetenhaus, Plenarprotokoll 19/89, pp. 9106-9108.

Oh, man, that was class warfare rhetoric par excellence - without an economic 
understanding of the matter.

Right honorable Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. Dear Berliners.

Who works in Berlin, provides for a family, cares for relatives, or is every day 
concerned for that our city functions, needs naturally to be able to live here. 
That is a quite simple standard, and by which the Berlin housing and building 
policy needs to be measured.

Many Berliners however unfortunately experience the opposite. They find no 
suitable housing when their lives are changed. The Berlin housing market is 
quasi frozen. Who has an affordable dwelling remains housed there, even 
if it is no longer suitable. Who urgently requires a new dwelling finds none
which he can afford. That is the result of years and decades of false course 
corrections in the housing and building policy. Responsible are all those who 
in the last 30 years have sat here in the government, namely those who now 
so loudly brag and snort they knew entirely better. Nein! You are all 
responsible for this shortcoming, from left to black all. Just one little 
indication: Under red-red-green, the rent in Berlin doubled. Na, oh Wunder, 
how did such happen? - Through your senseless, fully incompetent economic 
Politik. 

Berlin requires not only corrections in individual laws or terms, Berlin
requires a change, primarily in regards costs and guidelines, and we 
require a rational investments climate. Therefore, these leftist 
expropriation debates need finally be off the table. Expropriation creates
no housing, expropriation however stands for more debts, for complicated
and expensive [aufwendige] processes, and an inflated new state economy. 
Honored Linke, Greens and SPD! Name me one country in which communist 
redistribution, thus the abolition of private property, lead to more prosperity
for all. You cannot do it. 

It plainly does not, because life does not work thus. Communism - what 
you want - leads to a scarcity economy, and straight to a shortage of housing. 
All, up to a small political caste to which you all openly want to belong, are
in the end in communism similarly poor. Should that be our future model of
living? Ours does not agree. 

Who wants to abolish property profanes the basic ideas of the sozial market 
economy, and needs not wonder about absent investments. Who wants more 
housing needs to make construction possible. That begins with reliable terms
and clear competences. Construction planning and approvals are not allowed 
to last longer than three years and buildings, before all, need to become less 
costly. For that, the construction guidelines need to be considerably reduced, 
and over-drawn additional obligations be dismantled. The law for simple 
construction is certainly a beginning, but it does not suffice by far. Every new 
obligation in the end makes the rents more expensive. Every unneeded
prescription makes new projects more difficult, and each regulation makes 
projects more difficult. Who wants affordable housing must thus speak 
openly of the real costs, namely those originating from the state.
The state's quota in regards construction - this, I've never heard here - 
is meanwhile at, believe it or not, 37 percent. For 100 euros of 
investments in construction, the state's quota costs 37 euros. The state is 
the costs driver. With taxes, levies, bureaucratic hindrances, the state, 
the lawgiver, thus you, makes more expensive the construction for us all. 
If this cost factor were cancelled, then rental costs in new construction
could be no more at 20 euros but at about 14 euros net per square meter. 
Here you see what a leverage effect this has. This applies for all things 
regarding the disastrous added energy requirements. Climate policy 
symbolism is not allowed to further increase the expense of housing 
construction. What costs much and brings scarcely anything may not as a 
rule be accepted. 

The private housing business which is here so diabolized presents the 
largest part of the Berlin rental housing market. Those are the small and 
mid-sized landlords. Who incessantly frightens them off, diminishes the 
supply of housing, and who diminishes the supply of housing intensifies 
the housing emergency. Thus finally stop measuring all landlords 
by one measure. Black sheep are everywhere, and need to be and will be 
held to account. Yet surely the small, private landlords suffer even now 
under the prevailing regulations. 

Therefore we are also opposed to the rent registry. You will not manage
the black sheep with a registry, they always find the gaps. The honest 
landlord, he is always the dummy. That cannot still be! Ever more small 
landlords want to take leave from the housing market and sell. Three times 
they may consult with those to whom they then sell. - They sell to the large 
investors, to the internationals, to the funds, to the insurers. 

Tobias Schulze (Linke): You must find that good!

Do you notice something? You drive the Berlin housing market with your 
regulations into a complete dead end. You always achieve exactly the 
opposite of what you actually want to achieve. That for once finally needs 
to be realized, Herrgott noch mal!

Frank-Christian Hansel (AfD): Bravo!

What instead needs to happen? - In regards the housing construction 
promotion, Berlin requires a clear standard. Rent allowances and 
supplements housing money for WBS Berechtige [housing entitlement
certificates] can of course work faster than a promotion of individual 
objects. The sozial housing needs to succeed with those for whom it was 
conceived. False verifications need to stop. Sub-leasing of sozial housing
is not allowed to become a business model. Cooperatives need to be 
more strongly supported, and Berlin needs to make possible long-term 
property formation. Housing ownership protects against old age poverty, 
and that is no secret.

Frank-Christian Hansel (AfD): Right!

Housing ownership protects against dispossession and against dependency 
on the rental market.

Tobias Schulze (Linke): When the rents are too 
expensive, the people should stop buying, neh?

Here we see a top priority completely neglected for decades. A city 
which gives up on ownership for normal employees, takes from Berliners
opportunities for security and quality of life. 

Tobias Schulze (Linke): The market regulates that, 
Frau Brinker!

I say what you here can learn for once: In Berlin, the housing 
ownership quota is around 14 percent. Have you taken a peek at the other
major European cities?

Tobias Schulze (Linke): The market regulates that!

- Ja, wunderbar! - Paris: 30 percent, London: 50 percent, Budapest, Warsaw
even a 80 to 90 percent ownership quota! They do not have such a problematic
situation like Berlin, because we have never taken care to promote that 
the normal employees be in a position to provide themselves with housing
ownership. Precisely that is the problem.

The Berliners feel the consequences of the false housing construction policy
every day. Families find no larger dwelling, seniors find no smaller housing, 
young people do not leave the parents' house. Many businesses which keep
Berlin running can scarcely afford this city. The state-owned firms are here 
for that. The state-owned housing stock is, despite 400,000 units, a scarce 
public good which requires a fair distribution.

On that account, we are for that we allocate our state-owned housing to the 
Berliners. The state-owned undertakings, in 2024, rented on average at 8.81
euros Nettokalt [per square meter, without heat], the free supply price was 
around 14.50 euros. Thus who receives state-owned housing obtains a real 
opportunity to be able to live and remain in Berlin. Thus precisely is this 
allotment question of public housing no peripheral matter, but a central 
component of construction policy justice. 

To the point, we want and we require a transparent allotment model of 
state-owned housing by way of a reasonable point system, as is possible 
and was implemented in other cities. It considers the local connection, key 
and scarce occupations like tradesmen, nurses, police officers, firemen, 
honorary officials. In any case shall be considered as well additional 
sozial criteria: Handicap, old age mobility, cramped living conditions of 
families, income from the housing entitlement certificates. These are all 
people who require the sozial housing of the state-owned firms. Decisive
is thus: Who here lives, works, overtakes responsibility, he shall receive a 
publicly promoted dwelling. That would be just because it considers the 
roots and the Berliners who over decades finance the housing construction
with their taxes and duties. 

Ario Ebrahimpour Mirzaie (Greens): Housing space 
for white Germans. You want that!

It is a sozial point system because it includes the actual need. It is practical
because it creates a standard which all citizens can understand and examine. 
The standard for us is simple. 

Ario Ebrahimpour Mirzaie (Greens):  Racism is your 
standard!

Who keeps Berlin in the running needs to be able to live in Berlin.
I am grateful for your attention.

Frank-Christian Hansel (AfD):  Bravo!

[trans: tem]

Alexander Jungbluth, August 12, 2026, AfD Excluded from Local Elections

EU Parliament, August 12, 2026.

Written Question E-003265/2026.

Following the exclusion of several AfD members from local elections in Rhineland-Palatinate and North Rhine-Westphalia, a large number of AfD candidates have now been prevented from running in the local elections on 13 September 2026 by the electoral committees in Lower Saxony. The candidates in question are Member of the Lower House of the German Parliament Martin Sichert (Friesland council election), Member of the State Parliament Thorsten Moriße (Wilhelmshaven mayoral election), Justin Vogel (Herzberg am Harz mayoral election) and Reinhild Goes (Nörten-Hardenberg mayoral election). What’s different about the situation in Lower Saxony is that the decision has been made on the basis of the new local election law adopted in April 2026 by the SPD–Green state government, which provides that, in cases of doubt regarding loyalty to the constitution, recommendations from the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and the Ministry of the Interior may be taken into account – although the AfD has not been banned.

1. Does the Commission consider the exclusion of democratically elected party representatives from local elections solely based on the fact that they are part of the AfD to be a possible violation of fundamental democratic principles of the EU?

2. What does it make of this case, considering that it effectively constitutes an exclusion of a party through the back door, when such a decision should be the sole responsibility of the Federal Constitutional Court?

3. In view of the above, will it consider initiating a procedure under Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) against Germany?

Stephan Brandner, July 9, 2026, Surveillance State

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/89, pp. 10939-10940.

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

One aspect so far comes up somewhat short, namely, the activity of the 14 state
media institutions financed from compulsory fees, the duty of which is to secure
the variety of the offerings and of the opinions, to protect the media freedom and 
supervise private broadcasters.  It should be thought, with that, these institutions 
were used to capacity. Yet a couple of days ago we read what these institutions 
may still put out. By means of artificial intelligence, they uninterruptedly 
rummage through the internet, thus without cause spy on all citizens and pass on 
the knowledge thus gained to those of the so-called Constitution Protection 
Office, the domestic secret service. And what they thus thereby put out, can be 
imagined in one’s darkest thoughts.  

With a software which bears the nice name of KIVI, media guardians sift
through the internet. How, what, where, exactly how gathered remains
a secret. We nevertheless know: From 2022 until today, KIVI has identified
nationwide over 130,000 alleged violations of the law. These offenses were
automated and reported to the Federal Criminal Office. Contact data, photos, 
audios, videos, data, region, reactions, religious and ideological convictions, 
political opinions, data on sexual orientation – these state media institutions 
filter all of that from the internet. One needs imagine what is loose there, 
ladies and gentlemen. 

The good George Orwell once accordingly expressed himself, cite:
“To need live in belief every noise made was heard, every movement
observed.” – Dark words of Orwell from the novel 1984, which meanwhile 
are sadly a mournful reality. 

The state surveillance apparatus grows and flourishes, ja, it routinely blooms. 
The compulsory financed public broadcasting serves in fact the uncontrolled 
manipulation of opinion and the propaganda. The state media institutions
on the other side overtake the surveillance on the internet. How precisely 
and with which consequences remains in the dark. The intimidation 
apparatus unfortunately functions very well in Germany. 

And not only that: Free podcasters will in addition be blocked by the state 
media institutions intervening for statements thought to be false, and these 
are immediately presented or classified as not true. Otherwise in the blather 
shows and news bulletins in the state broadcasting at ARD and ZDF: 
There, lies and propaganda can be spread unfiltered and unpunished. Never 
have I understood that Lanz, Hayali and consorts were requested to contradict 
falsehoods with moderation, or keep to the truth. Two different standards! 
And that is scarcely communicable [vermittelbar], ladies and gentlemen.

Freedom of opinion ends there where the over-reaching state begins, and there 
we are already too far. The state media institutions make themselves a part of 
this apparatus for accomplices and for a Zenzurapparat. They all know as of  
September Leif-Erik Holm in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and our friend Uli
Siegmund in Sachsen-Anhalt will clean up and this construct will be brought to 
a collapse. For that, we work dawn to dusk, ladies and gentlemen.

Many thanks. 

[trans: tem]

Leif-Erik Holm, July 9, 2026, Public Broadcasting

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/89, pp. 10933-10934.

Dear citizens. Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen.

The theme of public broadcasting [öffentlich-rechtlicher Rundfunk, ÖRR]
affects very many people. They are rightly discontent with an extremely 
expensive broadcasting which we all need to finance and which at the same
time often reports without balance. When over 40 percent of the citizens no 
longer trust the ÖRR along the path, then is clear: We need to change 
things, and that we will do. I personally will also do that in my 
homeland in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern if I should become the next 
minister-president.

The question is: Is in the digital age still at all required so large a public 
broadcasting? The media supply is meanwhile gigantic; there are many 
free providers on the internet. And that is thus good. In this place, I thank 
all who are active on the internet, for thus has been developed a corrective
for a public broadcasting very close to the state. I say in addition not 
everything on the internet pleases me. Yet there is a distinction to public
broadcasting: I need not pay for it. 

Martin Renner (AfD): So it is!

And exactly that is it. While we need pay for everything on the ZDF, even 
for a dose of poison like Böhmermann, things can be freely received on the
internet. I can really understand anyone who no longer wants to finance 
the format like “Böhmermann” and Co. 

Maik Brückner (Linke): I don’t want to finance you!

That of course goes for me exactly so. Unfortunately, there are too many 
examples of it.

It is ever again the problem in the public broadcasting: It plainly does not 
report as it would be in its contract, objectively and balanced, but it ever 
again has a slant. We see that in the talkshow invitations, in the ever again 
tendentious reporting. For example, it was asserted in the NDR, in regards 
me in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, our government program had a völkisch-
nationalistischen keynote – completely absurd!

Everyone who has seen the program sees it. Even other journalists shake 
their heads over it. Or it is seen in the “Correctiv” fairy tales, or in the attack
on Elon Musk, he had called for a hunt of migrants. That completely
by-passes the truth. On that account: The ÖRR need not complain about its
loss of trust.

The citizens do not want to pay 9 billion euros so as to then receive 
curated [betreutes] television. They want an honest service provider which
says to them what is, which shows them the entire picture in a debate so 
that the people themselves can form an opinion. And here the public 
broadcasting ever again fails. 

Maik Brückner (Linke): Just don’t scream so!

In addition, the costs run out of control. When intendants earn more than 
the Federal Chancellor – over 400,000 euros per year – that can be 
explained to no one. We will change that. 

We need also end the power of parties in the supervisory boards. I find 
it an unequalled impudence that in regards to me in Mecklenburg-
Vorpommern, the Minister-president Schwesig deployed two active State
legislative politicians in the NDR broadcasting council. I find that simply
not suitable.

One thing is clear, ladies and gentlemen. If the AfD in the autumn 
overtakes responsibility in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, then there will be 
reforms. For the broadcasting clearly needs to become cheaper. It needs 
to guarantee a balanced reporting. And the partisan clique at the 
broadcasting and administration council needs to stop.

Therefore, my promise: As minister-president, I will directly after 
overtaking office cancel the NDR broadcasting contract

Vice-president Josephine Ortleb: Your speaking time is 
at an end. 

because it is necessary. 

[trans: tem]