Stephan Brandner, October 18, 2024, Internet Censorship

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/195, pp. 25551-25552. 

Herr President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

Friday afternoon – important themes of freedom of opinion. The Federal Network Agency [Bundesnetzagentur] comes along with a modest name, scarcely anyone knows it, is thereby meanwhile in fact the commanding censorship authority in Germany. 

            Tobias B. Bacherle (Greens): That is just rubbish!

What is that for an agency? With the dissolution of the Postal Ministry, in 1998 founded as a regulatory authority for telephone and post, then also competent for gas and electric lines, later for the railway network. Meanwhile, it has almost 3,000 co-workers settled in the work area of green Economy Destruction Minister Habeck, and the chief is the Green party friend Klaus Müller who since 1990 is with the Greens, and since 2022 leads the Federal Network Agency, this censorship authority. He is now in fact the chief of the German commanding censors. He names so-called trusted flaggers. As a member of the German Language Union [Vereins Deutsche Sprache], it is clear to me: Who has something to hide, he speaks Denglish, or tries to with anglicisms, and precisely so is it here. 

Tobias B. Bacherle (Greens): As opposed to you, most people meanwhile understand that.

Trusted flagger is officially translated as trustworthy whistleblower [„vertrauenswürdige Hinweisgeber“]. At first, it sounds quite good. Yet for we citizens, they are plainly not trustworthy, but only for those rulers sensitive to criticism; wherefore in our view the better fitting translation is “digital block warden”, “thought police” or “government spy”; since that is what they are. 

Tobias B. Bacherle (Greens): You now again show that you do not manage the translations so good.

Here is driven another massive frontal assault on Article 5 of the Basic Law, the freedom of opinion, one of the most important basic rights, and core component of a living democracy. The idea of course is only illegal content shall be reported by internet spies and internet accusers equipped with exclusive access to the platforms. Yet the answer to the question, Who specifically shall that ultimately be?, leaves the worst to be feared. Who can become an internet accuser? Non-government organizations, civil society actors, religious pedagogues, trades union members, thus anyone who in fact emits the left-green thinking. 

And so no wonder that the first reporting office, in good Denglish manner, is named “REspect”, in which is sheltered one of the Islam teachers trained in the notorious and suspected Al Azhar University in Cairo. 

Tobias B. Bacherle (Greens): Herr Brandner, we’ve heard all that from Reichelt! What’s new?

The reporting office belongs to the Youth Foundation Baden Württemberg, is nursed with tax money and thus arises – we all know of it – from the left-green swamp. And this troop of, among others, religious pedagogues shall now be qualified to decide over which expressions of opinion are legitimate and which not. Actually inconceivable, or? 

Ladies and gentlemen, I do not believe to go too far when I say: If there had earlier been censorship authorities as presently – there were as is known some better – then would have been unthinkable showbiz greats like Thomas Gottschalk, Harald Schmidt or Rudi Carrell. 

            Beatrix von Storch (AfD): And Helmut Schmidt!

They would no longer be allowed on the screen. We of course live in an increasingly homogenized [gleichschalteten] television- and in an increasingly oppressed digital-world, which sets up instructions and limitations, instead of open, substantial discussions. Tutored thought everywhere from the public broadcasting. 

The internet was still a bit of a free space. It becomes ever more limited. The rulers are watching. All that is unsuitable is out. Thus alternative media in Germany will be blocked, oppressed and hindered. Trusted flaggers become still more active, and will judge whether something is hatred, fake news or illegal. The worst is to be feared. 

And the worst is: There is nothing in the Basic Law in this regard. The state precisely knows it may not censor. Yet so as to attain the opposite, it privatizes the censorship. It circumvents, so to say, the Basic Law’s command, and sets up a terror of unity opinion [Einheitsmeinung], instead  of variety of opinion. We of the AfD stand for the exact opposite. We stand for variety and for freedom of opinion, and not for the unity opinion terror. 

The FDP participates. It cannot be believed what the former free, liberal party is thus doing. Herr Kubicki, who as President sits behind me, distances himself a bit from that, yet in the end he will again be for it. We, ja, know him; he is something like the Rambo of the FDP, who now and then may blink right, but then is precisely in line. That does not make the matter better. 

Alone, the Alternative für Deutschland remains as before a guarantor for democracy, for law, for freedom and especially for freedom of opinion in Germany. 

            Stefan Gelbhaar (Greens): Blah, blah, blah!

We therefore demand with our motion [Drucksache 20/13364] – you’ve all read it – simply: The Federal government shall block financial grants to organizations which want to effect the deletion of user contributions which fall under the freedom of opinion. We want the Federal Cartel Office to be instructed to know, to look into: How do the arrangements for hate speech function? That would be a mission for the Federal Cartel Office. 

            Stefan Gelbhaar (Greens): The Federal Cartel Office should examine the AFD?

Herr President, I come to an end; I see it blinking here. – In addition, the censorship measures on the European level need to be abolished. 

            Vice-president Wolfgang Kubicki: Herr colleague, come to a conclusion.

And the trusted flaggers, the internet spies, may have no future in Germany. 

Many thanks. 

            Stefan Gelbhaar (Greens): On what censorship is, you need to read up again.

 

[trans: tem]

Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla, November 7, 2024, The End of the Ampel

AfD Kompakt, November 7, 2024. 

The end of the Ampel is a liberation for our country. The exit for the self-named “progressive coalition”, which with great strides has led Germany into an economic abyss, was more than overdue. After the months-long standstill and the innumerable self-referential therapy sessions, we now require quickly a fundamental political new beginning so as to lead the economy and the entire country out of the serious crisis into which it has come by means of the ideology-driven policy of SPD, Greens and FDP. Chancellor Olaf Scholz needs now do the country a final service and immediately put the confidence question.

 

 

[trans: tem]

Tino Chrupalla and Alice Weidel, November 6, 2024, Donald Trump

AfD Kompakt, November 6, 2024. 

In the name of the Alternative für Deutschland, we congratulate Donald Trump on the election! Like the Germans, U.S. citizens have enough of state indebtedness, economic decline, endless wars and illegal migration. We offer support and cooperation in regards the solution of these problems. Donald Trump can enter history as a patriotic President of peace. 

[trans: tem]

Nicole Höchst, October 11, 2024, Illiteracy in Germany

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/192, pp. 25064-25065. 

Herr President. Valued colleagues. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen.

In this debate, it is about illiteracy, immigration dangerous to the state, and tax money squandering of the luxury class. 

            Josef Oster (CDU/CSU): Aha!

Our major inquiry [Drucksachen 20/9984, 20/11885] yielded: The phenomenon of primary illiteracy is an immigration one. Many immigrants are illiterate because in their countries of origin they never learned to read and write. 

            Kassem Taher Saleh (Greens): What percentage is that, then? How many                                people is that? 

            Götz Frömming (AfD): Questions regarding the facts!

Thus, for example, the 2021 illiteracy index in Afghanistan was at 37 percent. 

            Kassem Taher Saleh (Greens): What is the source? 

            Hendrik Hoppenstedt (CDU/CSU): And for that you needed to put a                                        major inquiry?

Ladies and gentlemen, we have over 400,000 persons from Afghanistan in the country, mostly young men, and almost one million Syrians. For the latter, the refuge basis for the most part has lapsed. They no longer require a literacy program, but a return home. 

Your expensive literacy program knows no total numbers for course participants. You do not know how many German citizens with a migration background are illiterates, from which countries these come, nor whether their children are in any way affected. You do not know how many illiterates are employed in Germany, and are working, and in which occupations. 

            Kassem Taher Saleh (Greens): So I ask: From where do you have the numbers?

Without this control knowledge, the tax money can only be squandered, and flow in senseless measure which indeed makes the establishment operators richer, yet all of us poorer. Integration cannot be achieved with such a squandering of tax money which sets action for action’s sake before efficiency. Only in homeopathic doses is it successful. 

The Federal governments since 2015 have expended six billion euros – that is a number with nine zeros – for integration courses; of that, 1.4 billion euros for literacy courses. The statutory goal is B1. That is a language level according to the Common European Reference Framework for Languages which Realschüler after the tenth grade need to show for their graduation in English. 

            Kassem Taher Saleh (Greens): Well recited!

Since 2015, scarcely 37,000 persons have at all attained this statutory goal for the German language. Your Start Chances Program with one billion euros of Federal funds per year aims at the same target group, namely those affected by and victims of your failed migration policy. How long shall this palavering continue, ladies and gentlemen? 

            Martin Rabanus (SPD): That’s just in fact false! 

            Till Steffen (Greens): You can read quite well up there! You can read so good!

You throw much money at the migration industry. Alone, the 71-page annex to our major inquiry lists over 1,000 language firms which have participated in the moderately successful literacy program without the state’s tightly woven result controls. And, ladies and gentlemen, what if many immigrants simply have no interest in literacy or integration courses? There is finally Bürgergeld. 

            Till Steffen (Greens): It is soon again recitation day in the Grundschulen!

The German taxpayers in addition pay for the necessary translation services. The language groups which require translators come principally from Syria, Afghanistan and other countries in which the Moslem belief dominates. 

Many participants in integration and language courses have often led in many statistics, in the main over-proportionately to their portion of the population, such as criminal statistics, education statistics, in the categories “without school and without vocational school completion”. They have led just so over-proportionately in the recipients of Bürgergeld statistics, and at the same time are often found in the statistics of those obliged to depart. 

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): Almost 70 percent of the Syrians are working!

That is no secret. 

The uneducated Talahon immigration bred by you has long since integrated into parallel societies. Thus, why learn the German language? The language of conquerors is initially Kanak, already recognizable in kindergartens and school classes, yet in many places is already Arabic and Turkish.

            Hendrik Hoppenstedt (CSU/CSU): You yourself can do better!

Many disdain our way of living, our laws, our people. 

Yet entire branches of industry have arisen: The refugee industry, the anti-racism industry, the integration and language course industry, which present nothing other than an unholy alliance between Islamists and woke leftists. Even the leftist-woke trimmed churches profit. 

Yet all the mere bleating here, all the commanded silence and glossing over, is not longer of use in view of the abuses which are recognizable by all. For the well-being of the German people, whom you either hate or whose existence you deny, you do nothing. We do not want your Great Transformation which makes us poor, woke and ever more Islamic. 

We all have good friends from all cultures, 

            Vice-president Wolfgang Kubicki: Frau colleague, come to a conclusion, please.

who want to live together with us here peacefully and in all friendship in mutual respect. It was never about them, ladies and gentlemen. 

            Till Steffen (Greens): You learn nothing from them, then?

And now I am curious 

            Vice-president Wolfgang Kubicki: Frau colleague, please come to a conclusion.

how you here again talk your way out of it.

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Tino Chrupalla, October 28, 2024, Electro-mobility

AfD Kompakt, October 28, 2024. 

Politicians and and short-sighted business functionaries have hastily and one-sidedly decided for the electro-mobility. This decision does not correspond to the wish of the consumers and to the well-being of the workers. The economic war against the east leads to high energy prices and harms Germany as a business venue [Standort Deutschland]. So as to save the works, politics and business need to change the strategy. The recipe reads: Openness to technology, realistic limit values and advantageous energy. 

[trans: tem]

Barbara Benkstein, September 26, 2024, EU Data Act

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/188, pp. 24461-24462. 

Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. Valued colleagues. 

We debate today a Union delegation motion for implementation of the EU Data Act. For a clarifying debate, it is nevertheless important to come to speak once again of the Data Act itself. This must by September 2025 be converted into the national law of the EU member states. 

Valued colleagues of the Union delegation, Frau colleague Hoppermann, in regards your motion, I see light as well as shadow. How do I come to this evaluation? 

Let us first look at the EU Data Act. As so often, the EU Commission also with the Data Act intervenes in the business and everyday life of the people. With the decree, it wants to break up the existing data oligopoly of the large tech concerns and facilitate the access of KMUs and start-ups to valuable, machine-readable data. From that, the Mittelstand also should profit. A thoroughly good goal! It remains to await how that actually in practice is implemented. 

Right honorable ladies and gentlemen, I want now to give attention to an important problem point of the EU Data Act. It remains unclear in regards the users’ right to the access of their data. Here should be distinguished between commercial and private users. Private users presumably rather have the interest that their data, when it is already uploaded, be stored only for a brief time. And thus the question occurs to me: Valued colleagues of the Union, will your motion, in view of these areas of tension, legislate the required implementation of the EU Data Act? 

Your motion for the implementation of the EU Data Act hides some of the Act’s deficiency; for example, the public emergency named in the text of the decree. By means of this, businesses can almost be compelled to make available their database to the pertinent authorities. 

Franziska Hoppermann (CDU/CSU): The Data Act has been decided. Nothing                       needs be hidden! 

I find this problematic in no place in your motion. 

The risk of an abusive data delivery in the name of a public emergency is not at all fabricated. Here is also required besides a clear definition of unmistakable enforcement regulations [Durchführungsbestimmungen]. 

Next critical point. Your demand to entrust the Federal Network Authority with the role of a data coordinator, we view critically. As a Federal supervisory authority, the Federal Network Agency belongs to the operating area of the Federal Ministry for the Economy and Climate Protection. Thus the independence is limited, despite all the bundled professional competence. We thus hold it better to create an autonomous office for data coordination, as for example is the case with the Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information. 

            Franziska Hoppermann (CDU/CSU): Who is meanwhile a woman!

Right honorable ladies and gentlemen, a strengthening of the German digital economy’s innovation and competition capability is unquestionably important. This however is in direct relation with the performance capability of a modern society and also with the digital rights of the consumer. These are not appropriately valued by the Union’s motion, as well by the EU Commission. Valued colleagues of the Union, you in your motion thereby fritter away the possibility of at least partially removing the Data Act’s weaknesses by its implementation in national law. 

So far, I still see in your motion some shady sides which we in the digital committee can in common polish. 

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]