 the next speaker is Anna. You can come over here. Anna is going to tell us about the NS hour, that's the NSA parliamentary committee that started in March 2014. And since then it was supposed to look into the activities of the German secret services. And you will look into this whole thing and you will look into the future as well. Among other things, you are participating in a podcast, you're writing about this for the website, netspoliti.org. And I would ask you to give a hand of applause to Anna. Okay. Well, okay. Can you hear me? Great. So I'm Anna or A dot B dot. And for the next minute you will hear some things about the NSA parliamentary committee. And part of it will be about my own impressions. I usually sit in there and I'm writing a live blog about this since I was on holidays. And because of that I was also asking, I have somehow, I have a very limited view so I asked what people are, what you guys are interested in. So there were a lot of answers to that. Many, many questions. For example, what's the atmosphere like? That was asked a lot. How much do these people actually want to clear up things? How did it work with the stateless satellites? How is this related to the Illuminati? So let's start with a question, what this parliamentary committee is actually supposed to do? Because that's what we need to know to see and understand what the problems are. Well, so this parliamentary committee was instituted in March 2014 after the first snow revelations. So it took a while for the government, it took a while for this committee to be instituted and to decide what it was actually supposed to do. And initially the general focus was on the activities of the Five Eyes in Germany. That's an organization or basically an institution where these five big secret services work together. And the question was what are these Five Eyes doing in Germany? Are there any things they're doing that are illegal? And how were German institutions involved in that and how much did they know about that? And to what extent did they maybe profit from that by drawing on this illegally obtained knowledge and some institutes we're talking about is the German signal service. And some things they were talking about, well, they are spying on EU institutions, how does that work, stuff like that. Another question is how much is Germany involved in this secret war? And the secret war is basically what the Americans are doing with their drones. And so the question was, was there information that came from Germany that was used for illegal murders? They were also talking to people who were seeking asylum and how was this knowledge used? So these people were interviewed in Germany. And because there needs to be some kind of result, what do we have to change in order for this spying by other secret services in Germany to stop? And how do we maybe control our own secret services? So the parliamentary consists of eight members and eight substitutes. There's always one from the opposition, from the Greens, two from the Social Democrats and three from the Christian Democratic Union. And on the picture you can see there's like a back row. And there you see people who are from the foreign servers, from the different ministries, from the secret servers. And they're kind of paying attention. Somehow they get sometimes they get a bit nervous and they're kind of watching all of this. So this parliamentary committee meets every Thursday. And when there are weeks where the Bundestag, the parliament meets, and sometimes there are extra meetings. And the crazy thing is that it actually lasts until midnight sometimes. At midnight they actually have to stop because the stenographers have to stop working as opposed to us. Well, and we're sitting there, we write live blogs, we have 41 of those by now. The reason we're doing this is that the public can come to these meetings but there are no official protocols that you can access. So you either go, which is a bit difficult if you have, for example, a nine to five job, especially if you don't live in Berlin, or you can't go. And the only thing you could then read is what is being reported in the press. So we wanted to give people the opportunity to inform themselves. So we thought it was really important to have these live blogs. So by now we've written something like more than three million characters. I counter that at some point. And what we think is really an honor for us is that apparently the secret, the German secret service is actually reading these blogs as well. Well, apparently some people don't really like that we're doing this, but we think that everyone should have the right to know what's happening there. People who are actually putting much more work into this and who are actually dealing with this 24-7 are basically the members of the parliament, especially people who are working for them, who sometimes do amazing work in the background. And I actually asked one of the secretariat and they say they now have 2,319 folders. There are more than one million pieces of paper. And that's that they wrote about or that they compiled for certain questions where they said are we interested in this and then they compiled background information. And one of these 2,319 folders, 520 folders are rated top secret or secret. There's something that's top secret, there's something that's less secret. And that's a huge problem of this parliamentary committee because of course it makes the work much more difficult as well because somehow they have to deal with these secret folders. Suddenly people who work for members of the parliament need to get a background check. Some of these folders they can only read in certain places. Well, it probably looks a bit like you have a folder that's not secret and then suddenly it says oh, this part we were taken out and then you go to a specific place, you can look into it, but you can't take any notes, you can't take any photos and can just hope that you don't forget anything about it. So this is actually making the work that the people in the committee are doing much more difficult as well. Another problem, even if you have the folders, well, sometimes you see who is being greeted and that somebody said well, greetings, but you often don't see much else. And then we also have another problem that a lot of documents are missing. We had one meeting in October 2014 that was interrupted right away when they found out that one of the people who were supposed to testify had documents that the committee themselves didn't have. So it's really difficult to find all these documents to compile them in one place to give them to the people who are actually supposed to do this work. And often information is being kept back and people hope that this is not coming out. So also we don't know what is missing because we don't have an overview of the documents that we're supposed to have. Another problem of the Parliamentary Committee is this is a citation from a former president of the Federal Intelligence Service of Germany who said the US are the elephant, we are the pony. What they mean is that we're dependent on the US and apparently, according to the opinion of our secret services, we're dependent on the information they give us, dependent on the technology they can give us, on stuff that the Federal Secret Service doesn't have. So basically they say, well, we can't change anything about this, we just have to give them information because otherwise they don't want to play with us anymore and they won't give us any more that we actually need. That's basically what they're, also what they're the attitude that we have towards the Brits, where basically the Brits just tell us, well, if there are more documents that come to the public and to light, then we'll just won't give you any information anymore. We don't really believe that, but, well, that's an attitude that's preventing people from clearing this up. Another problem that we have is that obviously this committee is under intense scrutiny from external secret services where we had several nurses that there were weird things happening on mobile phones that members, for example, to the 15, something weird was going on. There was the famous Marcus R. who was spying for the USA and also told them information about this inquiry committee. Well, we have to ask ourselves to what extent is this, was this committee being put under pressure and to what extent are the witnesses being pressured and how does it work if even the people members of the, if the people making the inquiries are not sure if they're being surveilled themselves. A further problem we have is not just Mr. Wolf from the presidential committee, but also the general attitude towards affirmations by the witnesses. Continuously they say, well, you can't say this openly. For example, when it's open to talk about methods or details, for example, their view of what is a detail is not always our view of the detail, what is a detail. The problem is with this non-public statement, they don't always name just things that are, shouldn't be, but they also include things that are just not very convenient or comfortable. Well, we believe that just because it's embarrassing, it should still be brought to the public and just because it's not open, or we don't have a possibility as the public to learn about these sessions that are being called non-public, we don't know what really is being said under exclusion of the public. It's secret, there's no protocols, we don't have any information and therefore it's very difficult to realize if it's really being done properly. A further problem is, apart from non-public is not part of the investigation, which this committee should investigate anything since 2001. Everything that's before is very difficult and the exclusion of anything that isn't part of the investigation is often the hands of Mr. Wolf, who is part of the government. And this federal secret agency overview is always behind him and who always very nervously speaks into the microphone when he thinks something isn't part of the investigation. But there have been witnesses who, in an incredible sense of arrogance, who said, no, well, this isn't part of the investigation. They came to an absurd scene when a witness was asked, well, this branch where you're working, were the U.S. Americans there? Well, he said, well, that's not part of the inquiry. And that's before the inquiry. So he was asked, well, you can say that. It says in the Wikipedia. Just because it's like that, I don't have to say that in front of this committee. These are scenes that we can witness which are very frustrating. A further problem is, especially witnesses from the Secret Service have a very limited freedom to say things. Even the president of Schindler was interrupted by Mr. Wolf when he was asked if the Mr. Wolf said, well, to this, you're not allowed to speak to this. This is really absurd sometimes. A further problem that we have is a lawyer, Mr. Eisenberg, who represents the Secret Service, who isn't always ranting and talking, but he's also causing problems because he represents many witnesses. And we have to assume that he influences and puts witnesses under pressure with things that they really shouldn't know. For example, we often had cases where the witnesses somehow all used the same example, or the witnesses had knowledge that they really shouldn't have, and often you can agree between witnesses what they should say and shouldn't say. Another problem is amnesia. Somehow amnesia is very frequent, especially in areas where you ask what the hell of people are doing. They don't know on what legal basis they've been doing things where we can assume, well, maybe they really didn't know. Well, it's a big problem anyway. But the problem is the Berlin hour, that is the division of talking time. And since the conservatives have four people, they have a lot of time to talk, about 45%, that's 27 minutes. In contrast, the Greens and the left party only each have eight minutes. Well, you can think, you can imagine how that works. They're not very long. And often from the conservatives, they're very meaningless questions. But to really corner a witness, there's very little time. Due to the limited time that the committee has, it's very difficult. Right. Well, now you've heard a bit about the problems. Well, now let's hear what has it cleared up? What has it discovered? For example, we discovered that the D6 in Frankfurt has, for the secret service, is filters off, siphons off the transfer, since 2008. From there, it's transferred to Pulach. And then it was sent to Bad Eibling. And from there, there are, there are, there's data that the NSA somehow gets, and the BND, in exchange of BND, the secret service gets some equipment. This was ordered via G10 order. So, in order to cover the traffic of, transfer of traffic from Germany, Germans inside and outside, in order to do this is, what we simply did, we said, well, we just simply get everything from the, from that node. Well, there'll be traffic from both people from, there'll be both traffic from Germans, and also other traffic that we would like to come divide with, with the NSA. The whole thing, was forbid by, was being kept secret, but not even the G10 commission was informed in the way that it should have been. And the committee was, was told a witness, by a witness, well, they drove us to Frankfurt. There were a lot of, lots of shiny lights and lots of cables. And they told us, well, this, this, this and this. But since the commission is small and has little support, what, what, what the hell are they supposed to realize? And, and the people in the G10 commission were, were, got very angry about this. The former president of the commission who later on came out and said, well, they've, they basically tricked us. And the former secret, president said, well, I have no idea if they were informed or not. Well, as, as always we, we meet a big wall of ignorance or silence. Well, the other thing that gave us food for thought is, even the telecom was, was skeptical and said, well, we're not really sure if that's, if that's say, if that's legal or not. Well, there was some kind of dinner between the former secret service president, Hanning and the head of telecom Hanning. Hanning didn't fond, remember very fondly or the big secret service president said, oh, it was all fine. And then there was a letter from the government that said, who told the telecom, oh, it's all fine. Just keep doing it. It's all fine. Well, then since 2014, 255 cables or lines from various countries was redirected. And for that, the telecom received 6,000 euros a month in exchange. And there was a, they just rented a room in that same building just to directly grab the optical fiber. Well, how, let's think about how the secret service thought about it. There was a great quote, in my opinion, from a former, former member who was asked, it was a trick. I mean, is there, is there, is this order, is there the order to grab the external traffic legal and you can take everything and said, it's not no trick. That's the use of legal means with desired side effects. And these desired legal side effects seems to be somewhat, seems to be somewhat of a theme. So the next thing we discovered was that the, the capturing of satellite data and the filtering with the, with the famous NSA selectors with which the data for the data from Germany was selected for the NSA, which wasn't always completely legal. For example, EU politicians, for example, Germans, for example, companies like Eurocopter. Even though since 2005 we knew they were surveilling the EU company, we didn't, they didn't think of using that as a reason to check this more thoroughly. They only did that after the commission was formed in 2014. It was told that there were 40,000 selectors which were against EU or German interests, obviously. The, the select the total number of selectors is much greater. We don't know exactly, but the Zürich estimated about 10 million or we don't know how many of these are the ones in 10 million which are not legal because we don't, we're not allowed to see it. The ones that the secret agent wanted to, in order to prevent it, they created a filter called DAFIS, which is the filter for the data collection system and to filter those people who are covered by basic law. They had a three layer filtering system. The first level was filtering prefixes, people with the German prefixes or German domains. The fact that people from Germany use org addresses or etc. What they didn't care about. The second level was to filter out, filter out companies like Siemens.com which they certainly knew were part of Germany even if they have some of the domains outside of Germany. And the third layer was things that were German from context for example if people were talking about a German company abroad they knew they would took out. We also know that the layers 2 and 3 weren't really effective until 2003 and also obviously that the system can only filter that which it knows and if it's not being maintained it actually doesn't filter anything. And obviously only on the filter active. A further problem is that the NSA was providing so-called equations. Many witnesses said that they couldn't really read these so-called equations. There are some weird cryptic formulas but they couldn't really understand them. The practice in the Secret Service was to just use the ones they didn't understand then. We have this famous sentence Chancellor since from the beginning when they were still hoping that this whole thing wouldn't be discovered that not just EU companies like Eurocopter but friendly embassies and French Exterior Ministry etc etc being under surveillance but also the NSA not just NSA but also the Secret Service because BND has their Secret Service Bill and some of these Selectors were taken open by the NSA so they were all right. We'll use the ones that the Secret Service has already put in place. We'll ask ourselves how does this kind of check for the Selectors work? Well I've tried to create a diagram out of these protocols to figure out what the hell went wrong and here you can see it. Well then I decided I will I'm not going to explain in detail I'm just going to say what the problem was so the first problem was in 2005-2006 where there was a problem we noticed there was Eurocopter they didn't use that as an excuse to check if there were other things well because we know we're all trustworthy friends so we don't there's no reason to doubt anyone so in 2013 we started checking from two directions so the one side told the other you check this and at the same time there was another check in a different place so the person who was in charge of the filtering system who was in charge of putting things in the filter wasn't told until 2015 so somehow there was a problem with the communication channels and several people told us to confirm this view we didn't tell anyone else for example we didn't think it was important we didn't know how important it was so no one was meant to know etc etc these kind of excuses so for the government even apparently only was informed officially in 2015 that there was a problem so the people who were in charge the watchdogs failed because they apparently weren't told about it then you can sort of you can think about well it would be interesting to look at this list but the government said no you're not allowed to see it because the USA told us told us they don't like it then the USA said well we didn't say that I don't know what kind of problem you have then it became a bit unbelievable and there were some creative ideas for why solutions for why you couldn't see it oh well it's because of copyright now because the USA has a copyright on it yep indeed instead we had a a guy in charge of the selectors who was supposed to look at the selectors and was supposed to tell the investigation committee we had a little problem with that and this NSA special detective Graulich was sent by the government who said in interviews that he'd be loyal towards his employer and yeah this employer who tried to hinder any discoveries and that's not really a compromise and the opposition sued against it and the declaration of Graulich was pretty limited and he just he just had to make a little overview and he did it in Berlin and BND employees helped him in the beginning of November he put down his review he made a selection and wrote three little things one for the committee one for the chancellery and that's an inherent problem because there's a fall of information where the committee has info the chancellery has not the info the chancellery has and the more infos he has he doesn't give us some corporations get to know if they have been surveilled illegally it's a farce and we can't really know what went wrong and we don't he finds the and that the NSA is a bit evil and tricked the BND which is a bit bullshit which one had to somehow trusted their American friends so much one didn't take a look and Mr. Graulich had an interesting look on for example privacy or privacy laws causes all went automatically through a machine nobody looked at it and there's no problem with the laws because we didn't then he wrote off from the BND and little errors like took wrong abbreviations that are not used normally where he didn't use the normal abbreviation VGL but used VGL GL which is exactly the lingo of the BND and took the look at law from the BND and said this is my look at law and further problem is that we don't really know what technical expertise he has he has pretty nice article about but he on the other hand he couldn't to things and chat and to numbers and defend it himself that we ask to heart and we went to heart on him for his technical errors and knows but this just what's written there that means just to sum up this Mr. Garlisch is not really a technical expert he's definitely a law person a legally trained person maybe not even a bad person but basically the Federal Intelligence Service the BND explained to him what happened and of course that the view we got from him was theirs so I think it's really interesting there are a lot of other interesting understandings of the law that the Federal Intelligence Service has for example when it comes to data retention in that Eibling that is definitely in Germany but because that's a broad it doesn't really count and so the German law is not applicable there so the question is well how do you come to this understanding well you come to an interesting understand like that if you're trying to evade certain laws and basically what they say well what's happening in Germany so German laws don't apply there were several people who testified that that is definitely not a majority opinion which they take over anyway because someone has to fit and somehow the law has to fit what's happening in but Eibling and then even in the BND you have people who are responsible for privacy and data protection and there was Mrs. F who also said she doesn't share this opinion and she has massive concerns but in the end she doesn't have anything to say despite her not having one superior which is the president of the intelligence service so basically she told him that he's a bit concerned and she's a bit concerned about this and she don't think what's happening is okay and the president just says well we don't really care and we just do it anyway and that's also what the president told in this house and that's why we hired her we were very thankful for her having her own opinion but we decided it differently anyways then we also have virtual foreign countries or virtual foreign ground virtual foreign ground always happens when you take some data in Frankfurt and this data this data is not German because it's in Frankfurt but it's coming from abroad so it's basically foreign and well if we can't really sort out the German traffic that's going through Frankfurt well that's a shame but we are trying at least then we have the theory of people who have important positions the idea is that if there is a German person abroad who's working for an foreign company then this person is not really protected by the German basic law because for them we can just simply spy on this person of course this looks different if this person is abroad and is calling their family back in Germany because then this person is only acting as a German person and not as a person in an important position we can all think about how realistic it is to kind of like separate these things because basically how you separate because you have to look at what's being said so you're already spying on these people that way you could also say that he's commissioner at the European Union he's also in important position we can also spy on him we can spy on development aid workers on the German Red Cross everyone you can kind of find abroad another interesting understanding of the law that apparently a lot of people seem to share is that there is no mass surveillance this is actually a direct citation from a parliament member of parliament of the conservative party if you have a hundred cookies and you only eat one is that mass is that a mass well basically the same we have so much data every day so many messages and only 1% of these messages are actually looked at so that's not really mass surveillance and mass retention and that's also where we need to be aware of this absurdity where people tell us there is no mass surveillance it's all targeted then they tell us well we're saving telephone numbers we're saving metadata this is not related to people especially if it's abroad we don't even have the data we can't look up who these numbers belong to this is also something that Mr. Gallich who was supposed to look into these things for the government took over and basically we're going back to what Mr. Pofala member of the German Chancellor early in the affairs side who said well we declared this affair to be over another interesting part that the committee is looking at is the secret war and another question in this question about the secret war is Rammstein this is a US air force base in Germany which plays a central role in this secret war and there they look at definitions again and again in details because the US Americans often say well there's nothing being steered from Rammstein and these drones are not being controlled from Rammstein what they overlooked specifically is that Rammstein may not be a place where these things are being controlled but it's a relay station where so these signals are being are going by Rammstein and are being sent basically to the regions where the drones are then flying but basically they say well we're not controlling anything there we're just conveying the signals that it wouldn't work without Rammstein it's not something they would talk about we don't know any of any other bases that could take the role of there's one being built in Italy but so far it all goes via Germany we know one guy who was a drone pilot who also said that data and information from Germany telephone numbers geo coordinates these things were being given to the United States and based on this information drone strikes were actually being done and people were killed based on this information and where is this stuff coming from we don't know all of this we know that some of this is actually coming from the interviews with asylum seekers in Germany a while ago we actually got a catalog of we actually published a catalog of criteria for asylum seekers so they would know which asylum seekers the federal intelligence servers is actually interested in but the comic sense MS font is original but this is not the original document we basically but so far I've never I've never seen a catalog like this about criteria regarding people that's more disgusting that's disrespecting people even more and then it's also written in comic sense so this institution that we're talking about is actually a part of the German transfer that's hidden within the German transfer but that's actually part of the federal intelligence service not only the German secret service that actually interviewed these asylum seekers but there were also people from the US secret services who by themselves interviewed these asylum seekers the woman who was responsible for this institution said well we didn't have any other way we didn't have enough people so sometimes they just put interns in the corner next to the US secret service members so this institution for interviewing asylum seekers was then disbanded but we know that it's probably still there and it maybe just has a different name but likely still operates and interviews asylum seekers without telling these asylum seekers that are actually talking to a member of the secret service right now and there's so many other topics and I'm sure it's going to continue this parliamentary committee is going to go on until the end of this legislative period and also aside from the parliamentary committee there were a lot of things that were happening for example a few years ago the first trial is the opposition suing the government in front of the German constitutional court where they're trying to make the government show them the NSA selector is because the argument is that the United States don't have the right to prevent the government from giving information to the opposition because there's no harm to the good of Germany and there's also no harm of this because this is being given to members of parliament especially members of the committee because if you consider these the most security risk then nothing can happen in this committee anyway on top of that because you think something might be embarrassing it's not a reason for keeping things secret and especially if you want to clear these things up and if you want to answer these questions and especially the way this was being done and handled by the government is not how you can find out how this actually worked but the opposition was not the only group who was angry there was also the G10 commission which was supposed to create 10 orders couldn't see these selectors what this NSA committee could now see were the BND selectors but they still haven't seen the NSA selectors all of these trials are going to take some time if you sue someone it takes a bit possibly years but we are still lucky and until then there are going to be some more interesting people who will testify for example Angela Merkel who were expecting in the committee at some point also among other people the minister of the interior and someone I'm really looking forward to I think he's really interesting figure in this because he was foreign minister and he was vice chancellor when this whole thing started basically after 2011 that is when cooperation between secret services in the U.S. and Germany really grew because at that point everyone was swearing a limitless solidarity everyone they kind of had to fulfill these promises and so at that point this cooperation actually really started I also think this Mr. Fisher is really interesting because at some point in an interview he said that we wouldn't be able without this cooperation in the area of security to survive it's essential for us so I think it's interesting to talk to someone who has this attitude about when how this whole thing started another person we're writing for is Edward Snowden we have all heard about this whole excitement about whether they should interview him whether he should come to Germany whether that would be safe for him and this whole thing developed into such a farce that Glenn Greenwell who's actually invited who said well if you this is such a ridiculous thing where you're only creating the illusion of actually bringing up results then I'm not going to come so he was invited but he declined so I think that's actually a really important thing to say it's a really important quote we need to be aware that this committee can actually end up being a mere theater a mere facade and that's something that's maybe less likely to happen thanks to the members of the committee but more from the government that is actually actively trying to prevent anything from coming out of this another question is should this committee actually have a bigger broader question should it have a bigger task so so far it just says it's got something to do with the five eyes which he's supposed to look into but the longer this whole thing takes the more they actually realize that it's not only the evil five eyes who are using us making us into means for their ends and are profiting from the deals with us but that actually our own federal intelligence service and the other secret service that we have in Germany actually using this for their own work and for getting information for themselves for example by looking at these BND the German Selections that was something that was very interesting or might be very interesting so there are arguments for that and some against it something I am skeptical about if you actually broaden the scope of the committee that the limited time that you already have in the committee if you add even more fields of interest of inquiry for this committee I'm not sure if you can actually get anywhere if you can actually interview everyone who should be interviewed especially considering that there's all this maneuvering where members of government are inviting people who don't really have anything to say they just sat at a desk and didn't really contribute and they're just being invited to kill time and then of course there's going to be even more paperwork the people who work for the members of parliament are limited, they don't have unlimited work they don't have unlimited time there's other stuff they have to do and another possibility would be instituting a different committee that is more looking at what happened inside the German secret service the German intelligence service interesting there is a minority quota where the opposition could decide by itself to institute this but again there's the problem of limited resources they're actually out there parliamentary committees already in the parliament the whole thing is really interesting and I'm very interested and excited to see how this is going to end up I think we shouldn't stick with the status quo that we have right now because it's not really enough something that has to come out of this committee are reforms at least that's what's becoming clear increasingly clear right now especially because the BND is not really controlled in any way we're a bit scared because other parliamentary committees that looked into it varies with the BND in the past we learned that every time something like this comes out then they just usually change the way they did this and it was made constitutional so basically what the BND was doing anyone was made legal that was really clear when for example the space theory came up that's when somebody said well then we just need to make sure that this is constitutional so basically we just write into the laws that we have that this is all legal and constitutional and this would basically lead into a situation where we just have exactly the same thing the same bullshit and we just legalized what the service can do with it once and it's basically out of control and if we stand in front of an apparatus like this we actually need to which whose task it is to work in secret whose task it is to cheat it's direct to peers who doesn't talk to the parliament how can an institution like this work within a democracy and isn't this something that we can't actually work with and so whoever paid attention knows that I'm almost done now there's one thing that I was still missing what do the Illuminati have to do with all of this so I researched this I didn't know anything about this and then I found this domain if you click on it you are directed to the website of the NSA and of course if you edit backwards then it says Illuminati I've also heard from people who actually thought about this and one of these people actually emailed the guy who owns this domain and asked who this is the guy who owns it is John Halley what do you want to put with this is there anything behind it and what's the plan for the new world order and the guy said he laughed his ass off and said well he couldn't keep himself from simply directing all traffic that came to this website and the Illuminati don't have that much to do with this after all so one last appeal go to the committee everything we do can't replace people and can't replace what's happening in the polar render committee it says I know of course not everyone lives in Berlin not everybody has time on a Thursday morning or a Thursday afternoon but if you have the time go at it look, experience the atmosphere at the demeanor of these people how they present themselves we have so many different characters some are so convinced of themselves and so sure of themselves and say well everything's okay they're people who suddenly become very very small and where you can see their bad conscience in their face and you should also watch what's happening in the macros I often don't see it because I'm typing but because for example when the chance to leave is becoming nervous and they're leaving then you know that something important is happening and when the guys in the back row are speaking then you know well this is not very exciting right now another thing that I think is really important is that important to signal that there's a lot of interest in the parliamentary committee from the public and that the public wants to know about this and I think the more interest there is the more they will realize that it's not something they can simply pull off without any actual results but that's actually something that reaches a lot of people in Germany so I was really really happy I saw a school class in this committee at some point where their politics teacher went there with them to tell them well this is something we need to know about and I think this is really a current history which is something you won't be able to see anywhere else popcorn sadly isn't allowed if you're a visitor and the best thing is that it's really easy to register you just send an email to it's on the slides you tell them which day you're going to want to come you tell them your name where you were born if you haven't done this yet and if you won't have the possibility to do this I have another recommendations I would I recommend the Podcast Technische Aufklärung it's a podcast in German which is always recorded after the meetings of the committee sometimes I'm there so there are other people who go to a lot of these meetings if you want to do this today and if you want to listen to one of these today we are going to do a live episode today at the Zendert Zentrum at 6.15 in the evening if you want some more entertainment and actually want to bring some popcorn you can come at 15 minutes past midnight to Hall 2 because there's going to be a reading of the latest and most absurd scenes from this committee and I hope that we will actually be able to talk about this a bit so none of these things are made up so all of these things are real we've witnessed all of them another thing do something, be active go to the streets to help the government that you're not satisfied with us you're not okay with us help people to leave secret services and if you know anyone here or if there's anyone here in the Secret Service who believe the Secret Service there's help if you're still kind of part of this and you want to relieve your conscience a bit there's a post service in Germany you can send us letters maybe that helps you and of course there aren't only post boxes there's also email addresses you can send all your documents there where you think that this is something there is something in these documents that shouldn't happen like that you can also contact me personally that's how this works and with that I'm done and I hope there's some time for questions please queue and then ask questions people who are leaving now please be quiet what microphone should we start with number three please have a short question also can the committee can the committee put people in people in prison if they don't want to say something well yes they are obliged to answer truthfully so they also actually have to say everything they can not what they want and the committee can technically also find people but no they can't put people in prison but so far no fines have been imposed even if sometimes I wouldn't have stayed so calm like members of the committee when you had people sitting there who were just like well what I'm saying is not part of the scope and just don't say anything and so also because we don't know what we don't know and what the whole truth is it's also extremely difficult to tell people you're not saying something alright we have a short queue question is a similar flavour what are these things that just came out about the problems what direct results can we expect how does the G10 commission say well why don't they just stand there and say we can't allow any more why isn't anyone being punished for saying the wrong things lying in the road or for other crimes as far as I know I don't think that's possible because we don't know if someone is lying we don't have the company picture yet and it's even more difficult to be coming even more difficult there even more testimonials and sometimes the things people say don't match up sometimes you also see like it seems like they're devising some responsible idea where they're saying well maybe this person is this person's fault and all the people who are more important then say well it's not really our fault it's this other person's fault and there was this testimonial about this one B&D person who said they're not going to be any disciplinary consequences so he's basically telling well say telling these people well even if you made mistakes and if you violated the rules at least from our side you don't have to fear anything that's why we want to know from a point of P in law what are there any any consequences I'm not legally trained so I can't give you a reliable answer there so I'm sorry number four please has anyone tried check what the legal fundaments are like in detail what the root sort of legal foundations are here for example like the international law there's one testimonial from this Mr. Kraldechüsse that based on public international law spying is allowed I think that's where you need to realize that this is about details choosing one word over another it's about choosing what to call something do we call this virtual foreign lands do we call this Germany and I think we need to realize that we don't really have illegal means to say that this is completely illegal this is a gray area that the B&D constructed for itself some of these things are definitely illegal for others it's much less clear and you have people who are experts some of these experts who then say I'm actually said that most of what the B&D says is illegal so in many cases it's actually clear but the question is that we need to decide what legal consequences it's going to have but as long as we have this big coalition social democrats and conservators it's not really going to happen that it's becoming clear that this is illegal yeah well I mean you could really dig a lot deeper there and look exactly on what basis on what basic law you mentioned earlier to what extent is it really valid really we should remember that the government also needs to follow this and that indeed the secret service also needs to follow this we also need to think about who these basic laws are valid for because it's completely bolstered and I assume that the basic laws is only there for people who are German and everyone else as well locked out and we need to get away from this attitude we need to get away from distinguishing between people based on them being Germans and not we can't simply destroy privacy of people but as long as the B&D has these interesting attitudes and understandings like people who are important positions don't have these basic rights that we actually grant all Germans then there you need the world to make clear statements decisions from courts but that's going to take a while Number two please you mentioned earlier that these people need to say the truth which is to say they are not under oath what is the situation there with with failures and what if someone says something untrue is someone someone have an eye on this check if there is any such a delimitation of these things again I don't know I didn't study at all sorry Number six please Daniel said refuse to come do you think it was a good idea or do you think it was a bad idea I thought it was a shame just personally from a personal point of view I think it's a loss at least for the public not knowing what you would have had to say about it you know saying that if you're just playing theater here if you're just pretending if you're just playing a charade then I'm not participating I think we need people who refuse to participate in this people in Germany can't really do that because they have to come they're legal obliged to go once they're invited but I think in the end this was a good decision the question is what the consequence are going to be of this if maybe they're actually going to interview we'll see Number five please long queue I like the lighting in the room well I have a lot of good sense of TV optics I wanted to ask I didn't I would like to ask if you can't even get the answer on who is the technician how can you make the promise I like to leave the intelligence what if someone says it comes to you and leaves I want to leave the secret service are they also left alone well those are two different our TV team is here they like to take questions these are the qualified people who you should ask thanks finally switching live on number two thanks for the amazing technology thank you very much for the amazing talk and the good work but I have a question as well the question is well we know how much, how often these interrogations of asylum seekers do we know if these asylum seekers the people who are being interviewed are they under pressure are they being do they think they had to do this do they think it was a normal part of the procedure if you're looking for asylum in Germany did they know who they were talking to I would like to know what do we actually know about this process quite a bit of information about this I think the exact number I don't know about it but I think there were about 300 interviews per year at least at the time where it was very rampant of course when there are more asylum seekers coming there small when there's less there's less they were kind of losing personnel because they were not being terribly efficient at parallel so at some point it got less regarding pressure that's a difficult question because everything that they're telling us and all those they're promising us where they're saying oh no they were told that it's voluntary that it's not going to have any influence on their claim to asylum but so this institution doesn't have anything to do with granting asylum so it doesn't have any power to give these things to asylum seekers we also know that there are cases where these asylum seekers were interesting for the BND and the BND intervened in these processes for their asylum process where they intervened and where they said this process is interesting for us and then they basically told the ministry that is responsible for this and told this ministry to stall the process for asylum and if this for the BND to say whether it's interesting or not and then they might say that there are extra reasons then for example once somebody finds out in their home country that they talked to the intelligence service then well then you can stay but what we don't know is how much did these asylum seekers who were being interviewed about the person who was interviewing them they presented themselves as not being part of the intelligence service they presented themselves as being part of security service but of course most people who are from outside Germany just as most people instead of Germany wouldn't know about this and also something you should wonder is don't these people talk about it it's probably going to be spread around people will know whose asylum claims were branded, whose weren't and of course they can say that it's not going to have any influence but how believable is that if somebody is in a situation where they're under a lot of pressure where they actually need this asylum where they can say well maybe it's all voluntary but it might not actually be unfortunately we are out of time and I thank you very much we'll hand your applause for you if you have further questions do you know what she looks like I don't think you have any against the people who talk to me, no I hear a couple more days good