Stephan Eisel, MdB – very well: for Bonn in the Bundestag in the template of the municipality which is not provided. Eisel turned in a letter to the Chairmen of the groups of the Beuel District Council. The writing has the following wording: “Ladies and gentlemen, Beuel ladies and gentlemen, the District Council a management template is located in tomorrow’s meeting rehabilitation program of the Bonn sports grounds” to which a decision is scheduled for the from the funds provided for 2009 in the economic recovery plan II has to be renovated sports facilities (artificial turf). These funds, we have decided in the German Bundestag and thereby taken great care, that the municipalities within the given priorities independently decide on priority actions. I have the template of administration but one taken after my local knowledge hard comprehensible proposal. Then the place in Roleber should not undergo all people with the most intensive use in Beuel, although it there by the BSV Roleber especially is pronounced and exemplary youth work. Also, the Club has just in the Bezirksliga (there is just an another Ascheplatz besides Roleber) and does not unlike other Club seats in addition to the threshing floor space in speech about a further natural grass pitch. Read more from Daryl Katz, New York City to gain a more clear picture of the situation. Allowed to arbitrarily acting priority list of the Administration make many more comments. I strongly advocate for the place in Roleber to use the federal funding, which has the highest efficiency in Beuel, and is at the same time most renovation-needy. I ask you cordially to correct the administrative template through your vote in this sense.”
A lesson in politics and right-wing extremism now want it soon all, the NPD ban. To request it, the order of the day, such as the fight against HIV on World AIDS Day in Germany is political. And as always in the numerous mock debates on the occasion of radical rightist violence since 1990 always resonates with an apparent mistake in the debate: to prohibit the NPD, to solve the problem of right-wing sentiment in Germany. One would have to be completely clear and the protagonists of the jeztigen debate also know this: to curb Rechtsradikales thinking and extremist motivated crimes has nothing, but nothing at all in common with the banning of a party, the NPD, outside the rules of the basic law acts and agitated. Extremist is and remains more than the NPD. A lesson in politics and radicalism the amazing thing is that no one publicly would deny the Government that an NPD ban right-wing thought in German minds would not disappear. Nevertheless, the debate is done so as this would be the Case.
Why? Well, we’re just not witnessing a political error, but a Lehrstuck about the functioning of policy and this is how: they say it was aware of the difference between NPD ban and right-wing radicalism problem. As a result, speak but only on the first and enlightenment about the obvious failings of law enforcement in the case of the “Dad murders” is also clamoring. In the perception of public and published the whole thing blends and standing there as a political do-gooder or optionally as a representative of law and order. Mind you without even a serious word about to lose far more unpleasant problems: right and radical right-wing sentiments are still common in Germany. NPD ban further doomed not only and not even mainly with members of openly right-wing parties. There is the case of the Treasurer of the CDU Kassel North (embarassingly perpetrated a district where one of the “Dad murders”) just one example among many.