Götz Frömming, November 13, 2024, CDU and Democracy

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/199, pp. 25915-25916. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

“…parliament is a deliberative assembly of one nation, with one interest, that of the whole; where, not local purposes, not local prejudices, ought to guide, but the general good...” [*] 

            Hendrik Hoppenstedt (CDU/CSU): Amen! 

            Patrick Schnieder (CDU/CSU): Claims for which you have never been fit!

So far Edmund Burke in his famous speech to the voters of Bristol in 1774. Ladies and gentlemen, let us compare the present situation of this parliament with the ideal of then. 

            Patrick Schnieder (CDU/CSU): You might need to get out!

This, what you have made of our parliament, is the exact opposite in comparison to what Burke described, ladies and gentlemen. 

Real deliberations, the struggle over the best solution for the good of the people, no longer take place. 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): No self-evidently! 

            Patrick Schnieder (CDU/CSU): You’ve never done it!

SPD, CDU, Greens and FDP have come to an understanding for a trimmed daily order of the German Bundestag. Only urgently necessary points of the daily order shall spoken on. Initiatives of the opposition – the actual opposition – shall be set aside with or without debate. Ladies and gentlemen, that is unparliamentary, that is undemocratic, that is an assault on the heart of our democracy. 

It is evident, ladies and gentlemen, for you, the general good does not come first, but your party interests. We presently in fact have a minority government. That has been seldom acceded to in German parliamentary history, but is commonplace in other countries. There, one has no fear of the free struggle for the best solution. Minority governments, ladies and gentlemen, need not necessarily go along with a parliamentary standstill. They could be stellar moments of democracy. Yet for that is required authentic and courageous democrats. 

            Patrick Schnieder (CDU/CSU): Then you need to get out!

Of those, ladies and gentlemen, we have too few in this parliament. It also does not help that you yourselves always mutually dilute being democratic. Now, where it would come to that, you deny democracy, ladies and gentlemen. 

What then would be so bad if members for once really follow their consciences when a good motion achieves a majority only with votes of the opposition? Yet as I hear, you want no votes from the wrong side. Honored colleagues of the CDU, when it is about the good of our country, then there is no such wrong side. 

Patrick Schnieder (CDU/CSU): The level was already low, but now it becomes subterranean.

You then stand with your firewall on the wrong side. 

            Patrick Schnieder (CDU/CSU): You are always on the wrong side!

Following the frightful terror attack at Solingen on the 23^rd of August of this year, the CDU/CSU  delegation chairman wrote an urgent letter to the Chancellor. I may cite therefrom: 

“Release…the vote in the Bundestag on the the required laws…We want no participation in your government and no offices; we want that you fulfill your oath of office and avert harm from the German people. For that, with us you have a majority in the German Bundestag…” 

            Jürgen Braun (AfD): Aha! Hear, hear!

Thus far the Chancellor. In what concerns forgetfulness, Friedrich Merz in fact has a Chancellor quality, ladies and gentlemen. 

In fact in September the CSU/CSU brought in such a motion. Its content: To limit the migrant flow and begin with a return. Not by far enough, but a step in the right direction. And what have we experienced? Last week, precisely this draft law was on the daily order for a second and third reading. It would have been able to receive perhaps a majority with the votes from the ranks of the FDP and AfD. Yet precisely on this account it was withdrawn by the CDU/CSU. 

            Jürgen Braun (AfD): Ach, here, someone is afraid!

You were afraid that your own motion could pass, ladies and gentlemen. That allows a deep look and says much of your understanding of democracy. 

Who should at all still believe that your motion was seriously meant by you, which you previously presented and in which was written a bit in the AfD sound? Did you perhaps only present all of these motions because you know that they will be rejected, and now where you could receive a vote in favor, 

Hendrik Hoppenstedt (CDU/CSU): No, we want to pass them, only not with you! That is the only reason! 

you present no more such motions. 

The long since running secret negotiations on a new government with the Greens or the SPD should not be encumbered. Ladies and gentlemen, you have the entire time only simulated opposition. That is shabby. 

Ladies and gentlemen, the problem nevertheless is: Who votes for Merz, receives Habeck. How often have the two actually met for secret negotiations? 

            Till Steffen (Greens): What does secret mean? 

            Erhard Grundl (Greens): If you knew it, it’s not secret. 

            Sebastian Hartmann (SPD): What did you plan in Potsdam?

The citizens can vote for that they want, they receive always the same politics. Here, one need not be surprised by a political dissatisfaction. 

            Vice-president Aydan Özogŭz: Come please to a conclusion. 

Following the next elections, ladies and gentlemen, we will, in Edmund Burke’s sense, again make the parliament of our nation a deliberating and deciding assembly. 

Many thanks. 

            Gabriele Katzmarek (SPD): There, you contribute definitely nothing! 

 

[*] The Works of the Right Honorable Edmund Burke. 6 vols. London: Henry G. Bohn, 1854-1856.

[trans: tem]

Petr Bystron, November 26, 2024, Ukraine War

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2024)11-26(2-0018-0000.) 

Frau President. 

More weapons to the Ukraine – you do it for whom, actually? The colleague has just said it: The majority of Ukrainians want negotiations, want finally peace – and for that they will even renounce territory. This is now a current poll from the Ukraine. Ten million Ukrainians have voted with the feet. They have already left the country. Among which are 500,000 men of military service age, who do not want to die most miserably. An additional 500,000 certainly could no longer vote, since they are dead. Is that not enough for you? 

Even Zelenskyi now says he wants negotiations and a diplomatic solution. That is precisely what we demand for two years. All of you have insulted for two long years those who demanded this as Moscow’s agents, as Putin’s agents. So, is now Zelenskyi Putin’s agent? Of course not. He has only noted that the war is over. Trump has won the elections. There is an end to further weapons deliveries. You here want in all seriousness to further escalate and draw us all into a third world war – just before the war’s end? 

Here actually the question needs be asked: Whose interests do you at all represent? Not those of the Ukrainian people. Here, you only represent the weapons lobby, NATO and the secret services, since they conduct the war against Russia. Who now feel themselves already in a war against Russia legitimated by no one. No parliament at any time has voted for that. The people in the Ukraine do not want the war. Most Europeans do not want the war. So stop drawing us into the war. It is over. 

 

[trans: tem]

Beatrix von Storch, November 7, 2024, Anti-semitism, Israel, Trump

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/197, pp. 25719-25720. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

We stand today before the end of the quite grand illusion: Trump again President of the United States and the Ampel at an end – a real double Wumms! And now this admission of the former Ampel parties and of the Union with this common motion for Jewish lives: Yes, the exploding Judenhass in Germany has something to do with immigration and with Islam. 

            Kordula Schulz-Asche (Greens): And with the AfD!

I can still well remember all of your gasping here – primarily by the Greens – as the AfD warned of imported Moslem anti-semitism. Now we read in this motion – co-introduced by the Greens – of anti-semitism which is based on, cite: “Immigration from the countries of North Africa and the Near and Middle East”. 

            Leni Breymaier (SPD): And on rightist extremism!

Those are the Green figures for imported Moslem anti-semitism. You have restrained the reality. 

And the solution proposal in your motion also goes in our direction: Cite: “Exhaust punitive possibilities, especially in criminal and citizenship law, and in asylum and residency law”. In German: Remove Moslem anti-semites on the aircraft and in the homeland. “Tschüss!” and not “Auf Wiedersehen!”

You finally recognize that in addition to your mantra-charged, extreme right anti-semitism there are also dangers from the left. 

Britta Haßelmann (Green): With what chutzpah you at all speak here! Take a peek at the “Sächsischen Separatisten”! With AfD covering! It is not to be taken seriously, your contribution as an AfDer here, with your rightist extremism!

You name that the “leftist, anti-imperialist anti-semitism”. And for your fight, you now also take up our proposal. You want to test the ban on the BDS movement. Here you need test nothing and rediscover the wheel. Our motion to ban is long since put forward. That even a portion of the Greens meanwhile take up AfD positions, we name “Zeitenwende” [change of times]. 

The problem with all of these resolutions is: With you, action never follows. Only the AfD will implement what you ever only demand, 

            Britta Haßelmann (Green): Think of your Gauland! “Vogelschiss in der                              Geschichte”! Gauland citation! Enough! 

            Konstantin von Notz (Greens): “Sächsischen Separatisten”, Frau von Storch!

and that quite practical and concrete; for example, no more public money to colleges and cultural undertakings for Judenhass and Israel enmity. 

It is little surprising that resistance to that comes from the left wing of the Greens. 

            Britta Haßelmann (Green): Is it about Jewish lives in Germany here? 

Katharina Droge (Greens): Of course for Frau von Storch it’s not about Jewish lives in Germany! Who comes from so extreme a rightist party, is certainly not interested in Jewish lives in Germany!

The Greens’ national working groups for migration and refuge, for peace and international and for culture, fear, cite: “The instrumentalization …by rightist actors, and the targeted defamation and undermining of civil society work”. 

Translated into German: You are afraid that the AfD has seized the theme, and leftist and Moslem anti-semites lose their state feeding troughs. Here, I can only say to you: You are fully right to be worried. 

In the political left, there is an obsessive hatred of the State of Israel; for this anti-imperialist left, Israel is a racist, a colonizing, a white apartheid state which should disappear from the map. 

Britta Haßelmann (Green): Look at “Sächsischen Separatisten”! And the state associations which have been classified extreme right! 

The leftists hate Israel because the Jewish state represents all that Europe once was, and what they hate: A strong state, self-conscious, national, religious, prepared to protect its cultural identity and defend its borders. These Greens have spoken out against their own resolution because they know that the fight against anti-semitism today primarily affects the left and its darling Moslem minority. It’s not right-wing extremists who occupy universities, drive Jewish judges from the podium, and gather in masses in the streets behind the flags of Hamas and Hezbollah and chant “from the river to the sea”. Those are Moslems and leftists. 

Does anyone believe that without Merkel’s border opening Jews would not live here more safely? Do you believe that, Herr Merz?  Do you believe that, Herr von Notz? You know that I am right. 

Reality can be pushed aside, yet reality sooner or later catches up. That is unavoidable, and that has come to pass. 

The time of lies and extenuations is over. The defenders of Jewish lives and the friends of the Jewish state are today not found on the left, but on the democratic right side; with the AfD, with Geert Wilders, with Viktor Orbán, and with Donald Trump in whose election all democrats in this house very heartily rejoice.

 

Many thanks.

 

 

 

[trans: tem]

René Aust, November 14, 2024, European Defense

EU Parliament, Brussels, P10 CRE-PROV(2024)11-14(2-0018-0000). 

Frau President. 

In the past decades, the European Union has neglected to coordinate the member states’ security policy so that a maximum standard is guaranteed for our citizens. Whether it be the defense of the air space, the ending of mass migration or the protection of our raw material or commercial routes on the world seas, we are generally dependent on the structures of the United States of America. In none of these areas are we currently in the position to independently defend our security interests. 

Yet the EU itself is guilty of this dependence. It invests much money in ideological projects – from gender questions to climate protection – it worries about all possible things, but does not correctly worry about what is important. It is therefore necessary to dismantle [zurückzubauen] the European Union: Fewer competences, fewer duties, fewer expenditures. The European level should concentrate on fewer, yet decisive, duties for all; one of which would be a coordinated defense and security policy at the European level; for example, fewer weapons systems instead of 150 in the European Union today, few of which are comprehensively compatible for the armies. 

Yet it needs be clear: More security policy cooperation does not mean the creation of a common European army. It would be a nightmare if the EU bureaucrats and Frau von der Leyen were allowed to decide on the mission of German, French, Polish and other European soldiers. The further distant from the citizens are the decisions over war and  peace, the greater is the danger that decision makers thoughtlessly undertake a war – and nothing is further from normal life, from we citizens, than Ursula von der Leyen. To summarize: We say yes to more cooperation in defense and security questions, but a clear Nein to any phantasms of a European army. 

 

[trans: tem]

Alice Weidel, November 13, 2024, Government and Politics

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/199, pp. 25840-25843. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable Chancellor. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

This government goes to an end as brainless and undignified as it has acted for three long years.

Even in leaving, you show neither insight nor responsibility. You indulge in self-pity, self-righteousness and mutual denigration. 

Humility would thereby be only appropriate; since what your government has done to this country and its citizens is unprecedented. This Ampel like no other previous government has destroyed prosperity and damaged our country. Your frantic policy of the green transformation drives Germany into de-industrialization, productive business out of the country and the Mittelstand to ruin. 

Hundreds of thousands of workplaces are already lost as a consequence of your policy. The number of insolvencies in October has reached a 70 years record. The bankruptcy rate is around two-thirds higher than just five years ago. Your e-auto planned economy ruins the German automobile industry and cuts a corridor of devastation through Mittelstand and service industries. 

You flood the country with illegal migrants while you likewise drive native and immigrant labor forces into emigration. You derange the social system and destroy the domestic security. Imported Judenhasser romp in the streets. 25 sexual assaults per day by immigrants are noted in one current statistic of the BKA. The financial consequences you press upon the citizens with record taxes and social duties, 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Then what does the AfD do on the other hand? 

even though the total state income scrapes the one trillion mark, yet will erode because you have made business kaputt and put employees into the street.

You divide the country with the malignant spirit of the spying, the hotlines, with censorship measures, and grotesque Gessler cap laws like the self-determination law which makes the denial of biological facts a penalty-enforced duty. 

            Beatrix von Storch (AfD): Markus!

You, the tumbling champions [Umfallerhelden] of the FDP, have not only cooperated with all of this for three long years, but what’s more made it possible. The FDP has shared in every nonsense, like the heating law, building energy law, the ban on combustion engines and the disconnection of capable nuclear power plants, gender without end, toking for all and the change of sex once a year. This stain, Herr Lindner, will stay with you forever. Your attempt at the last minute to leave the sinking ship comes too late. The voters and your party will ban you from the Bundestag. 

For the Union. You want no political change for Germany, otherwise you would not hide behind your firewall, and quite openly speculate that this mismanaged SPD and the Greens may make you Chancellor, Herr Merz. What you have to offer in reasonable demands, you’ve meanwhile copied from us. Yet you want to implement simply nothing of that, but merely deceive your voters. You admit it quite openly: You are afraid of putting any motion for a migration policy; since you could pass it with our votes, and that, you do not want, Herr Merz. 

            Friedrich Merz (CDU/CSU): Nay!

With that, all should be said of the CDU, yet this for long has still not been: For even in this existential crisis, CDU politicians have nothing better to do than drive forward an anti-democratic banning procedure against us, the second largest power in Germany. And your party friend Haldenwang is the handyman for that, and abuses the domestic secret service, the so-called Constitution Defense, to criminalize citizens critical of the government, and the opposition in Germany, and for that shall be paid with a Bundestag mandate. These are the most wicked DDR methods of which you make use. 

Important immediate measures against Germany’s further decline – the withdrawal of the combustion engine ban, the re-entry into the nuclear power, the tightening of the right of asylum and the turning back at the border – we would have long since concluded, with or without the Chancellor’s confidence vote. 

But the Union does not want that. You have cowardly taken back all your motions and agreed to simply eliminate from the daily order central initiatives for a correction of this ruinous Ampel policy. You place the firewall above Germany. What an embodiment of democratic Unkultur! What a pitiful low point in parliamentary government! 

So spare yourself your talk of responsibility and respect, Herr Merz! With you, it’s quite alone about you, about your power, about partisan tactics, and primarily your vanity. 

            Friedrich Merz (CDU/CSU): This the righteous says!

With you as a Scholz replacement, Germany will not make headway. You can implement nothing of what you promise. You are no alternative for this government and for this Chancellor. You hardly can be, since the CDU is exactly so responsible as the Ampel for the existential crisis in which our country finds itself. 

As good as all the wrong decisions which are responsible for the downfall of Germany and our economy go back to the governing years of a Union Kanzlerin by the name of Angela Merkel; the best Kanzlerin which the Greens have ever had. The energy transition and the subvention nonsense about the so-called renewable energies, the hasty withdrawal from the nuclear power, the CO₂ duty, the planned economy war against the German automobile industry, the fight of the worldwide leading engine technology and an electro-auto planned economy, the euro rescue policy and the inflation arising therefrom: All of it Union. 

And the citizens have not forgotten how you of the Union divided the country just three years ago with defamations against the unvaccinated. 

            Enrico Komning (AfD): Right!

“No more unvaccinated in the office” from Friedrich Merz, “Lockdown for the unvaccinated” and “Vaccination as a moral obligation” from Markus Söder, and “The pandemic of the unvaccinated” and “Exclude the unvaccinated from public life” from Jens Spahn. All of it was supported and ushered in by you. 

Not to be forgotten: Opening of the German borders for unruly, illegal migration by means of the 2015 welcome putsch: The mother of all trespasses in our country. The rule of injustice in the migration policy which was driven to the heights by the Ampel government, was erected under a Union Kanzerlin, and not only that. The Union delegation supported most of the motions of the Ampel government. After 16 years of Merkel and three years of Merz, the CDU is no more the  counter-weight to the left-green ship of fools, but its willing collaborator. I can say to you: The people have enough of that. 

A Federal government with participation of the AFD in the first 100 days would thus implement the future plan for Germany. And it reads as follows – with the sub-heading that the CDU will prevent all of this: We want technology openness, to repeal the ban of combustion engines as well as of oil and gas heating, to lower income, consumption and business taxes, to abolish the CO₂ duty, to massively reduce energy taxes, to eliminate without exception the solidarity surtax, 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): How then all of it?

to get underway fundamental tax reform and tax simplification, to abolish the bureaucracy monster “supply chain law”, to eliminate subvention and promotion programs for climate protection and the EEG assessment, to bring in the end of the energy transition and the withdrawal from the EU energy policy, to again take functioning nuclear power plants into the network and to invest in future-capable, new generation reactors. 

We demand longer run times for coal power plants. Why? Because Germany has the most modern coal power plants worldwide. 

To completely close the borders, to turn back everyone entering illegally or without papers, and a clear announcement to the entire world that the German borders are finally shut. To convert provision of asylum applicants from money to benefits in kind, to eliminate social benefits for those without a right of residency and to organize returns in grand style, which simply maintains and implements the asylum law. Asylum is residence for a time and ends when the refuge basis is eliminated, local provision of refugees – they thereby do not initially come to Germany – immediately end turbo-naturalizations and the automatic claim to the German passport. And follow the model of the Netherlands and Hungary: Withdrawal from the EU asylum system. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Wow! That then remains for them, Frau Weidel?

The better, last: This is the AFD’s future program for this country so as to bring this country forward. Since you need to listen for once. It goes exactly so. 

And what we will do: Convert the Bürgergeld to an activating basic security, to confine it to state citizens and EU citizens legally present, and, for that, to take care that hundreds of thousands of employees capable of work again come into the labor market. 

We have already worked up many of the laws necessary for this. – Yes, because you rejected them. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): They were all rejected!

It is a question of political will – which you do not have – of again giving hope to the Germans and to setting free the power for a comeback from the crisis. 

            Irene Mihalic (Greens): All those are competences which you do not have!

The Germans want normality, 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): No! The Germans are ashamed of you!

and they have a right to it. They want work. They want security. They want prosperity. They want to live by the fruits of their labor, to be able to start families and construct a livelihood. 

            Joe Weingarten (SPD): They want no AfD!

They want security in the streets, and they want a good education for their children. 

They demand a reliable and reasonable politics which creates the prerequisites for this and which does not meddle in the private life and in their freedom of opinion. The people in this country want primarily one thing: 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): No right-wing extremists in power!

They want freedom! They want bürgerliche freedom! This will be possible only with us in government responsibility. 

I am grateful. 

            Katharyn Dröge (Greens): You yourself need laugh over the madness! 

 

[trans: tem]

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]