Showing posts with label Alexander Jungbluth. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alexander Jungbluth. Show all posts

Sunday, September 13, 2026

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?


Sunday, March 8, 2026

Alexander Jungbluth, February 11, 2026, Slovakia

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2026)02-11(3-0290-0000). 

Frau President. 

With a change of the constitution, the Slovaks have rebuilt the unrestricted primacy of national law ahead of EU law. That is a victory for the national identity of the Slovak people and the sovereignty of the country. Yet when the Slovaks protect their own people, they will of course be requited by the EU by means of a treaty violation procedure. Brussels wants to annex to itself ever more rights and thus further undermine the sovereignty of the member states. In that regard, the EU emblazoned on the flag the motto “United in Diversity”. Yet real diversity means confirming and defending the distinctive cultures, peoples, identities in Europe. The woke agenda counteracts precisely these goals. We should therefore be grateful to the Slovaks that they defend themselves against this attack from Brussels. 

 

[trans: tem]

Sunday, December 14, 2025

Alexander Jungbluth, November 26, 2025, Digital Euro and Cash

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2025)11-26(3-0547/49-0000). 

Herr President. 

Thousands of citizens have in the last weeks turned to the peoples’ representatives of the European Parliament. Their demand: No digital euro. 

They are right – a digital currency is not progress, it is an instrument of control. The Commission wants to convince us that the digital euro offers security and independence vis-à-vis the U.S.A. and China. In truth, every purchase, every beer with a friend will be tracked. They want the transparent citizen. 

We want cash [Bargeld], we want freedom: Anonymous, direct and independent of electricity outages. Cash defends against debanking. He who pays cash, retains the command over his own wallet. It would be democratic if the citizens were allowed to decide by means of a referendum on the introduction of the digital euro. We thus demand anchoring the right to cash in the national constitutions. 

…Herr  colleague, I believe the decree is only one of many which this house here undertakes so  as to in the mid-term abolish cash. That is one of the quite large problems which we have, and precisely against that are we defending ourselves. 

 

[trans: tem]

Saturday, November 1, 2025

Alexander Jungbluth, October 22, 2025, Hungary, Soros, EU

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2025)10-22(3-0378-0000). 

Frau President. 

The Digital Freedom Fund, the Hungarian ostensible research portal Direkt36, and the German NGO Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte have much in common. For example, all three organizations are co-financed by the Open Society Foundations of George Soros. The GFF, for example, receives since 2018 nearly 280,000 U.S. dollars from the pockets of dubious U.S. billionaires. All three organizations participate in the so-called clarification of the supposed espionage accusations against the Hungarian government. 

The Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte, which also receives money form the Digital Freedom Fund, thus EU money, supports the EU member Daniel Freund in regards his complaint against Orbán. Herr Freund accuses the oh-so-evil Orbán of having installed a spyware. These allegations are themselves inferred by the press – a sequence of concurrences. There is little evidence for that, yet a quite a lot of need for revenge by Daniel Freund. Thus why do we occupy ourselves with such unimportant matters? Because Soros orders and the EU elites carry out. 

[trans: tem]

Wednesday, February 26, 2025

Alexander Jungbluth, February 12, 2025, EU and Trump

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2025)02-12(3-0432-0000). 

Frau President. 

If we listen to the debate which we have conducted today, then we may state: There are actually two things to which we can confine ourselves: One is actually just the insulting of Donald Trump. He was designated as an autocrat, a capitalist monster, the U.S.A. finds itself on the way of a Neanderthal. And it goes further. We have one member here, for example, who said that he did not have all the plates in the cupboard. That is Frau Strack-Zimmermann who is after all chairman of the Defense Committee. Point one. 

Point two is the endless blathering because he has just withdrawn from the senseless Paris Accord, because he has withdrawn from the WHO. And I in fact ask myself: If all of that is in fact criticized and he is continually insulted, why would one actually believe that Donald Trump in any way listens to this house? 

Donald Trump finds the EU so unimportant that not even an Ursula von der Leyen was invited to his inauguration. And if that is not the case, what interest to a Donald Trump is it when some big mouth here in house insults him? That simply does not interest a Donald Trump. You really interest Donald Trump not at all. 

 

[trans: tem]