German intelligence service report on AfD faces claims of political interference
A week ago,
Germany
's domestic intelligence service (BfV) presented the outgoing federal government with a 1,108-page report classifying
Alternative for Germany
(AfD) as a 'guaranteed far-right' political party.
Not any more: a week on, after the AfD filed an injunction, the BfV has set aside this classification temporarily until a court ruling, shifting attention away from damaging claims against the party to claims of political interference in the BfV report, how it was compiled and issued.
On May 2nd, after nearly four years of work, the report was accepted – but not published – as one of the last official acts of outgoing federal interior minister Nancy Faeser.
In an accompanying press statement – since deleted from its website – the BfV said the AfD and its politics were 'incompatible' with Germany's 'free democratic order', in particular because of its 'ongoing' agitation against refugees and migrants.
READ MORE
The intelligence agency declined to release the report, claiming that doing so would reveal key elements of its investigation.
That in turn has prompted the AfD, joint first in national opinion polls with 25 per cent support, to launch legal action against what it views as a smear campaign by political rivals.
[
Derek Scally: Far-right AfD looks to broaden its base
Opens in new window
]
Despite the BfV pause, leaked extracts suggest the report is largely an extensive compilation of public remarks by about 300 party officials – either at rallies or in online posts.
Given this, an unnamed BfV official told the Süddeutsche Zeitung daily that many in the agency doubted the report would stand up in court.
On Friday the Bild tabloid presented five key accusations, drawing on extracts from the report's seven chapters: claims that the AfD discriminates against non-white people; rejects non-ethnic German citizens; represents Islamophobic positions; undermines the legitimacy of the state; and plays down Nazi-era crimes.
The report quotes AfD MP Maximilian Krah from January 2024 saying that 'whoever takes Afghans and Africans into the government makes the government culturally more African and Afghan'.
Other politicians complain about 'passport Germans', discuss the 'genetic make-up of living things' and urge voters, in a social media post: 'Don't let us GERMANS be robbed of our PRIDE and HONOUR'.
The BfV rates such political remarks as indicative of a party that views a population as an 'ethnic-cultural collective, exclusionary of people with a migration background. This violates the [constitutional] principle of human dignity.'
On Islam, the BfV report cites party officials' claims of a Muslim takeover plan to 'undermine and enslave us' as proof of a 'sweeping degradation and criminalisation of the entire Muslim faith community'.
Other quotes cited by Bild draw parallels between the Nazi dictatorship and modern Germany, claiming 'the Berlin republic is moving in the direction of totalitarianism'.
In its summary the intelligence agency says it 'doesn't expect' moderate forces in the party can halt the AfD's slide towards an 'unconstitutional organisation'.
High legal hurdles must be cleared before a party can be classified as extremist, allowing intelligence services step up surveillance of party members and communications – and deploy, or recruit, informers within party ranks.
Germany's new federal interior minister Alexander Dobrindt has admitted he has yet to read the report but said it was likely to contain sensitive information from intelligence activities.
Despite this he promised 'not to put it in a cupboard' and publish as much of the report as possible.
It is no longer certain that this will happen. On Friday AfD leader Alice Weidel said she was confident their legal action would be successful, ensuring the BfV report would never see the light of day.
On Twitter/X she wrote: 'We are fighting with all legal means.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
9 hours ago
- Irish Times
Trump-Musk feud shows president knows how to hit a narcissist where it hurts
Sometimes you're better off letting the children fight. That was president Donald Trump 's callous wisdom on looking the other way as the Russians and Ukrainians continue to kill each other. But it might better be applied to Trump's social media spat with Elon Musk . It's hard to think of two puer aeterni who are more deserving of a verbal walloping. Their venomous digital smackdown fulgurated on their duelling social media companies, flashing across the Washington sky. In March, Trump showed off Teslas in the White House driveway and bought a more-than-$80,000 red Model S. Now, he says he's going to sell it. READ MORE Thursday was the most titillating day here since the sci-fi classic The Day the Earth Stood Still, when a spaceship landed an alien to warn human leaders to stop squabbling like children, or the aliens would destroy Earth. On Friday, Trump tried to convey serenity. 'I'm not thinking about Elon Musk,' Trump said aboard Air Force One. 'I wish him well.' But Trump then jumped on the phone to knock Musk, telling ABC's Jonathan Karl that Musk has 'lost his mind' and CNN's Dana Bash that 'the poor guy's got a problem.' Trump had to know that would be seen as a reference to the intense drug use by Musk chronicled by the New York Times. As Raheem Kassam, one of the owners of Butterworth's, the new Trumpworld boîte on Capitol Hill, assured Politico, 'Maga will not sell out to ketamine.' [ Keith Duggan: Trump-Musk bromance descends into a jaw-dropping feud that is funny, dismal and nauseating Opens in new window ] The Washington Post reported on Friday: 'Across the government, the Trump administration is scrambling to rehire many federal employees dismissed under Doge's staff-slashing initiatives after wiping out entire offices, in some cases imperilling key services such as weather forecasting and the drug approval process.' On Truth Social on Thursday, Trump threatened to take away government contracts that have handsomely enriched Musk even though, as Leon Panetta pointed out on CNN, 'some of those contracts, particularly on SpaceX, are very important to our national security.' Musk tried to tie Trump to Jeffrey Epstein, offering no evidence. He shared a post on Epstein that said Trump should be impeached. Trump reposted a message from Epstein's last lawyer, saying the smear was 'definitively' not true. Musk deleted the post on Saturday. Musk did, however, expose Trump and Republican lawmakers as hypocrites, using his online bullhorn to shame them about their broken promises to reduce the debt. The big domestic Bill is a dog's breakfast of Republican proposals that could add more than $3 trillion to the debt to make the rich richer, while cutting healthcare coverage for the poor. Republicans are the ones who always claim they're fiscally responsible, even while they keep exploding the debt. Musk reposted Trump's old tweets on the social platform X, such as this one from 2012: 'No member of Congress should be eligible for re-election if our country's budget is not balanced – deficits not allowed!' Musk sneered: 'Where is the man who wrote these words? Was he replaced by a body double!?' As the weekend began, Trump seemed to be winning the fight, as Musk grew quieter and Fox News commentators had pleaded with their parents to get back together. Trump has exposed Musk's naive streak – something I saw in 2017 when I reported that another tech lord had to explain to Musk that he couldn't get away from artificial intelligence by going to Mars; it would just follow him there. Just because Musk hung in the Oval and Mar-a-Lago and debated moving into the Lincoln Bedroom, it didn't mean he understood politics or power – or Trump. Trump didn't care about the potential conflict of interest in having the SpaceX chief pick the head of Nasa. But he did care that Musk's candidate had donated to top Democrats – and about the aborted plan for Musk to attend a briefing about military strategy against China at the Pentagon, and about Musk's barbed public trashing of Trump's 'beautiful' tariffs and 'beautiful' Bill. When I studied Mary Shelley's Frankenstein in graduate school, I was struck by how much the 1818 novel by a teenage girl reminded me of the bros in Silicon Valley. The brilliant scientists with their edgy experiments, too high on their own supply to consider the ramifications of AI. What if your creation grows stronger than you and comes back to haunt you? Musk posted that Trump was ungrateful because the nearly $300 million he spent on Republicans is what made Trump president. Musk created the monster! But Trump created a monster, too. He gave Musk free rein and enormous power over a world he knew nothing about and people for whom he had no empathy. And in the end, of course, Musk's demon mode came out and Trump's monster turned on him. 'Elon was 'wearing thin,'' Trump acidly posted, knowing how to hit a narcissist where it hurts. 'I asked him to leave, I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!' For all his macho swagger, Trump sure loves a catfight. – This article originally appeared in The New York Times .
Irish Times
15 hours ago
- Irish Times
‘The country is going to the dogs': How agitators exploited the Carlow shooting
The shooting in Carlow last Sunday was shocking, but what followed online was depressingly familiar. As soon as word emerged of an incident at the Fairgreen Shopping Centre, far-right agitators surfaced online, like moths to a flame, spouting confident falsehoods before any facts were known. How could they know the details so quickly? They couldn't, but that didn't deter them. Offline, figures from the same ideological milieu travelled to the town to use the backdrop of the shooting as an opportunity to rant about immigration, the Government or the media – again, a well-established playbook that by now is both predictable and exhausting. And all details that had little to nothing to do with the incident itself. Just one hour after the incident in Carlow, Derek Blighe, formerly the president of the minor far-right Ireland First political party, posting on X, claimed – without evidence, because there was none – that 'apparently 7 people including a child have been shot'. This post has been viewed just shy of 400,000 times on the platform, but at the time of writing includes no note by X stating that it is false. Philip Dwyer, once associated with Ireland First, travelled to Carlow and livestreamed himself shouting at members of the fire brigade outside the shopping centre for not furnishing him with details about the supposed number of casualties. He then returned to a familiar topic. 'The country is going to the dogs. Everyday there's something going on … crime, mental health … migrant crime. I'm looking around me here in Carlow … good God. The diversity … the non-Irish people,' he said. READ MORE Back online, British far-right agitator Tommy Robinson posted on X that there were 'multiple reports of a suspected terror attack in Carlow, Ireland … gunman shot dead by Gardaí'. Another viral post, viewed over 200,000 times on X. Journalists, gardaí and emergency responders at the scene were berated for not releasing details about the incident fast enough. And when they did release details, they were admonished when those details didn't match the narrative circulating on social media. Carlow has quickly become another case study in how false and misleading information pollutes our online information environment, and why our democratic institutions must better equip themselves to counter this challenge. By now, we have a good grasp of the facts. Shortly after 6.15pm last Sunday, a man entered the Fairgreen Shopping Centre and fired a number of shots into the air. In the ensuing panic, a young girl suffered a minor leg injury when fleeing the scene. Outside the shopping centre, the man used his firearm again and died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound. No one else was shot and gardaí did not discharge their firearms. Evan Fitzgerald, from Kiltegan, Co Wicklow, walked through the Fairgreen Shopping Centre in Carlow firing a shotgun into the air The gunman was later named as Evan Fitzgerald, from Kiltegan, Co Wicklow, a 22-year-old who appeared in court last month on charges related to offences associated with purchasing firearms on the dark web last year. This was established through media reporting and garda statements, four of which were released by Monday lunchtime. In the second of those statements , gardaí confirmed the ethnicity and nationality – white Irish – of the man who died at the scene. In their fourth statement, they shared detailed information about the incident. Media reports described him as 'vulnerable'. [ Man dead after shots fired in Carlow shopping centre, Army bomb disposal team called to scene Opens in new window ] The practice of gardaí sharing such specific information regarding a suspect and an unfolding situation is unprecedented. It signals the force's attempts to combat the spread of harmful misinformation before it has potentially deadly consequences. We don't have to look too far back to recall how online misinformation and hate can fuel offline violence in the space of a few hours. Rioting broke out across the UK last summer after the Southport stabbing when anti-migrant and anti-Muslim narratives helped instigate violence, while closer to home, we all remember the Dublin riots of November 2023. More recently, police in Merseyside acted similarly in the aftermath of the car ramming incident at the Liverpool FC parade . Blighe, Dwyer and Robinson have a track record of portraying their respective countries as places of lawlessness, neglected by authorities and riven by (typically migrant) crime. They opportunistically jump on any purported incident they believe – usually incorrectly – reinforces this sentiment and, in the words of Steve Bannon, accordingly 'flood the zone with shit' online. It is, at its heart, part of a wider nativist, populist strategy employed internationally by the far right to appeal to the public for political support, monetised subscriptions and broader cultural influence. While evidence was still being gathered, none of these figures could have been aware of what had transpired. Yet they – and many others – worked swiftly to fill an information vacuum that develops after such incidents while gardaí, local services and the media work to establish the facts. It is no coincidence that the three operate 'blue tick' accounts on X. The platform offers financial rewards for creating viral, sensationalist content, with few repercussions when that content later turns out to be wrong. These posts are then weaponised by far-right figures for their own ideological agendas, and sometimes used to exploit tragic cases such as this one. [ Carlow shooting: Taoiseach criticises spreading of misinformation and 'blatant lies' online Opens in new window ] There is an ongoing conflict between old and new media systems here. The slower, methodical practices of police and media in reporting on such incidents is rarely a match for the rapid sharing of content online that includes serious and potentially harmful claims with no factual basis. All of this signals how fundamentally broken our online information ecosystem has become. This is best encapsulated in the tiring trope that is typically found in online spaces after reports of an incident like the Carlow shooting emerge: repeated cries that the gardaí or mainstream media are deliberately not releasing information about an incident. Delay is interpreted as deceit and fact checking becomes censorship. This week, Taoiseach Micheál Martin said this kind of misinformation can result in a lot of 'public disquiet' and needs to be addressed. 'There is a family in mourning right now. The level of misinformation on Sunday was quite shocking, and we can't just ignore that and say: 'Well, we don't have to do anything about that.'' This wasn't a question of freedom of speech, he said. 'I wouldn't overstate the impact on clamping down on blatant lies online as a sort of incursion or an undermining of freedom of speech.' The Carlow shooting has quickly become another reminder that unless we address these imbalances – between old and new media, the power of social media and the need to stop misinformation – trust in our core democratic principles and institutions will continue to erode. Ciarán O'Connor is a researcher and journalist who focuses on extremism and technology
Irish Times
2 days ago
- Irish Times
‘Nobody on the right or left is gonna buy a Tesla' - the Trump spat threat to Musk's business empire
What began as Elon Musk's embrace of right-wing populism has become a defining – and potentially harmful – chapter in his business career. By endorsing Donald Trump's MAGA movement and far-right parties in Europe, Musk alienated a big portion of his original customer base, eroding Tesla's brand , sales and market share around the globe. Then came this week's rupture: a personal and public break-up with Trump that prompted threats of retaliation from a man with control over the world's most powerful government. By simultaneously burning bridges with both his customers and now the political movement he funded and amplified for months, Musk now faces a rare convergence of threats: collapsing brand loyalty, shaky revenues, and mounting legal and regulatory risk. Tesla's sales are already stumbling under the weight of partisan baggage. SpaceX, long seen as a strategic national asset, is facing new scrutiny as political winds shift. And the green shoots at X – Musk's $44 billion 'free speech' experiment – that were fuelled by Musk's proximity to the White House and the ad dollars that followed, may soon disappear. READ MORE 'Elon isn't functioning to the benefit of his shareholders,' said Ross Gerber, the chief executive officer of Tesla shareholder Gerber Kawasaki, which has been reducing its Tesla holdings over the last few years. Speaking on Bloomberg Television on Thursday while the meltdown was still going on, Gerber said Musk's behaviour is leading to the 'dismantling of the Musk empire in real time.' With enemies on both flanks, Musk finds himself at the centre of a storm fuelled by consumer revolt and political hostility. [ Donald Trump 'not interested' in talking to Elon Musk Opens in new window ] [ Trump-Musk bromance descends into a jaw-dropping feud Opens in new window ] 'Nobody on the right is gonna buy a Tesla, nobody on the left is gonna buy a Tesla. Elon is a man without a country,' said Steve Bannon, an outside adviser to Trump who has long been critical of Musk, in an interview. Bannon says he is 'in continual conversations at the most senior levels' of the Trump administration to push them to revoke Musk's security clearance and use the Defense Production Act to seize SpaceX and Starlink on grounds they are vital to US national security. Even if Trump does not take such extreme measures, there is no shortage of retaliatory options for the White House. The president could try to wield the power of agencies like the US Securities and Exchange Commission, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Federal Aviation Administration to inflict real harm – or even just incessant regulatory morass – on to all of Musk's businesses and the source of his wealth. In just one day, the Musk-Trump spat shaved $34 billion from his personal net worth, the second-largest loss ever in the history of the Bloomberg Billionaires Index of the 500 wealthiest people on the planet. The only bigger wealth hit: his own wipeout in November 2021. Tesla lost $153 billion of market value on Thursday, with shares reversing course on Friday after Musk began to simmer down. Musk has faced deep stretches of pain before. There are flanks of sceptics who have, over the years, called for his impending demise only to be proven wrong by the world's richest man and his cult following of fans and funders willing to throw ever-growing sums of money at his ambitions. [ Elon Musk has damaged himself and shows no signs of stopping Opens in new window ] Most famously, Tesla flirted with bankruptcy only to reverse course and become the biggest electric vehicle seller in the world. Musk's $44 billion purchase of X was widely panned as the company's debt languished on banks' books, only to see those fortunes reversed after Trump's election. 'Musk has a habit of teetering on the edge of destruction and pulling himself back just in the nick of time,' said Nancy Tengler, whose firm holds 3.5 per cent of its growth portfolio Tesla stock, in a Friday interview on Bloomberg Television. Tengler, chief executive and chief investment officer of Laffer Tengler Investments, said her firm has been adding Tesla shares in recent months but now has a 'full position.' 'He needs to dial down the rhetoric and the drama and get back to the business,' she says, as investors own Tesla stock for growth, not for 'the histrionics.' To pull off a rebound this time around, Musk is going to have to convince people to start buying his electric vehicles at a faster clip and reverse the painful sales slide in the US, Europe and around the world. He is also going to have to attract riders to his new robotaxi service in Austin as the company makes a gigantic bet on artificial intelligence, robotics and self-driving cars. Musk has lobbied lawmakers to help clear a path for driverless vehicles, something Trump initially endorsed. It is now unclear if the Trump-Musk fallout complicates the regulatory environment for autonomous vehicles and potentially slows the path forward for Tesla's robotaxi network. 'The disagreement will not help Tesla demand but could potentially (temporarily) alienate multiple sides of the political spectrum,' said Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas in a research note entitled 'Well That Escalated Quickly...' Jonas said emotions are 'running high' and that he is sticking to his long-term $410 price target on Tesla's share price but is bracing for near-term volatility and is 'prepared for the stock to give up more.' Other tests in the coming weeks may include a $5 billion debt offering of the billionaire's AI company, xAI Corp, as well as funding rounds for xAI and SpaceX. Musk recently closed a $650 million late-stage raise for his neurotechnology company Neuralink from big investors including Sequoia Capital, ARK Investment Management and Founders Fund. From a legal and regulatory perspective, there is even more at stake for Musk if the Trump administration turns on the billionaire and claws back contracts like the president threatened on Thursday. SpaceX, one of the world's most valuable start-ups with a market value of $350 billion, has received more than $22 billion in unclassified contracts from the Defense Department and Nasa since 2000, according to data from Bloomberg Government. It launches critical national security satellites for the Pentagon and the US is depending on the Musk-led company to develop a spacecraft to put American astronauts on the moon in as little as two years. Musk's vow to decommission its all-important Dragon spacecraft, which ferries cargo and people to the International Space Station for the US, sent shock waves throughout the industry. Following through with the threat, which Musk later walked back, would sever a vital part of the US space program. 'It is untenable to have a CEO of a prime defence and aerospace contractor threaten to shut down services the government has contracted with them to perform,' said Lori Garver, a former Nasa deputy administrator under former president Barack Obama. Garver says Nasa needs SpaceX, but that SpaceX's business model also depends, in part, on the US government. 'Elon has already walked back decommissioning Dragon, because they do require now, as a big part of their business plan, government contracts. But they provide a service for those contracts. So it's a symbiotic relationship,' Garver said. On a more day-to-day basis, government agencies could try to inflict pain on Musk's businesses by delaying everything from space launches to satellite service to robotaxi expansion. Investigations into publicly traded Tesla or the finances of his companies could include the SEC, as well as antitrust probes and Federal Trade Commission interest around social media moderation, data use or AI. So far, Musk and Trump may be trying to at least press pause on the public spectacle. White House officials say Trump plans to focus his attention on inflation and the economy rather than speak to Musk, and insinuated without evidence that the billionaire was agitating for a call with the president. (In a pair of posts on his social media platform Friday morning, Trump intensified his push for Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell to lower rates.) As for pulling Musk's government contracts, Trump has not yet pursued any steps to follow through with his threats, one of these people said. He is, however, thinking of getting rid of his Tesla. – Bloomberg
