This is what can make you feel uneasy about the party, which censored Dr. Mike Yeadon's warning of imminent Genocide

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) has been gathering support for the stance which many representatives took during Covid. But there are others waiting behind the curtain.

Questions need asking. Also to the AfD party in Germany, that censored a warning by Dr. Michael Yeadon. Screenshot of SPIEGEL article on AfD leader Hoecke (see below)

Michael Yeadon’s warnings and the German AfD

Michael Yeadon has been an early and consistent voice of alarm. In a recent speech to a Symposium in Berlin, Yeadon called, basically, for mass civil disobedience as the way to stop a well-advanced attack on democracy and human dignity. The conference was organized by the AfD party, whose leadership decided to censor Dr. Yeadon’s talk, and not allow publication.

It may be a coincidence, but one of the leading politicians of the AfD, Bjoern Hoecke, in 2015 came under criticism for expressing views which many find racist, malthusian and xenophobic, based on a controversial interpretation of “population ecology”, alleging the existence of different “strategies of reproduction” between European and African countries. “If we continue to absorb Africa’s population surplus of 30 million people per year, nothing will change the reproductive behaviour of Africans”, Hoecke said. Following a harsh criticism even by the party executives at the time (who have since been ousted), Hoecke apologised for misunderstandings. He did not retract, nor explain his words, but came under more criticism two years later when he spoke about the Holocaust Memorial in Berlin: “We Germans are the only people in the world that have planted a monument of shame in the heart of its capital,” Hoecke was quoted.

In his 2015 lecture on “population ecology” Hoecke further spoke about how such “reproductive behavior” was characterized, and how Europe (or Germany) from a “phylogenetical standpoint” follows its own “K-strategy” of “Lebensraum-capacity optimization”. Hoecke used the term “Placeholder Type”. Instead, Africa, as per Hoecke, applies the ‘r-Strategy’ of maximum propagation. Consequently, in Africa the “Propagation Type” was predominant, according to Hoecke. Evolution simply had presented Africa and Europe with two different reproductive strategies, “as any biologist will understand easily.”

Europe’s plight was worsened, Hoecke lectured, by the “decadent Zeitgeist” holding Europe firmly in its grip. “In short: In the 21st century the life-affirming African “propagation-type” clashes with the self-denying European “placeholder-type”.

The History of Infiltration of Intelligence Agents into right wing parties in Germany

The issue of what to make of the AfD’s present leadership and political actions needs to be understood by the fact that Germany has something of a tradition to infiltrate (and direct) right wing extremist parties by members of the intelligence community.

In 2003, the German Constitutional Court rejected a motion by the Federal Government to ban the right wing “National Democratic Party” (NPD) which had been responsible for continued expressions of extreme political views including alleged Holocaust Denial and Anti-Semitism.

Three Supreme Court Judges found the 2003 lacking of merit because the Intelligence Services of the state had infiltrated the highest levels of the NPD:

“The observation of a political party by undercover agents of state authorities, who act as members of the federal executive committee or a state executive committee, immediately before and during the implementation of a party prohibition procedure is generally incompatible with the requirements of a constitutional procedure. (…)

In order for the Federal Constitutional Court to be able to fulfill its task of guaranteeing a constitutional procedure, the constitutional bodies entitled to file an application [to ban a party] must recognize and exercise the procedural responsibility assigned to them. Through careful preparation, they must (…) exclude the possibility of persons being presented with their statements as part of (…) unconstitutional party who maintain or have maintained intelligence service contacts with state authorities without making this clear and thus disclosing the resulting attribution problems. (…)

All members of the Senate are convinced that intelligence service contacts with members of the [Party’s] federal and state executive boards existed immediately before and even after receipt of the Federal Government's motion for a ban.”

In essence, the German government had been caught red handed in an attempted false flag operation, where “political elements threatening the constitutional order” had effectively been state agents. It is of note that also the AfD is under observation by the German Intelligence Service responsible for “protecting the constitution” (BfV).

Whilst this is not in itself proof of the censoring of Michael Yeadon by the AfD being deliberate, because Yeadon was strongly anti-totalitarian and pro human dignity, the need for the AfD to answer questions did not grow smaller.