Speeches

Mr. President, you have to see what good people we are all here: It seems that Europe has decided to save the planet alone. It must be that the CO2 China or India is kinder and pollutes less, because they continue to burn coal as if there were no tomorrow, while here we close industries, raise costs and above half of this Parliament cheerfully applauds Greta Thunberg. I thought that here we had been voted to be MEPs - except for the Commission, where no one voted for them - but no, it turns out that here half of Parliament has a complex of being presidents of the United Nations. This is the Commission's talk of just transition. Right for who? We have a suffocating electric bill. China already controls 60-90% of most critical materials in batteries, panels and technology. If Beijing wants to, tomorrow all this farce of the green transition is over. If Beijing gave the order tomorrow, this is going - forgive me for saying it - to hell. Integration is putting panels and turbines and that's it? Nobody mentions new electricity grids, storage, backup to avoid blackouts like the ones we are suffering in Spain. And when we talk here about defending nuclear energy, the illuminated one on duty jumps talking about Chernobyl, when the only knowledge they have of the matter is to have seen that miniseries on Netflix that we have all seen. Leave some sectarianism here and let's agree on cheap energy for once.

Thank you very much for your question. I regret that, as a Member of Portugal, you have told me?, you have not been concerned to understand that, if someone does not divide between left and right, it is usually we who consider both parts of the same moral hemiplegia that hijacks this continent. Your own group is saying here, dear colleague, that parents are unable to monitor - you have used the term ‘monitoring’ - children 24 hours a day. What does that mean? What do you want the European Commission to do to keep an eye on our children 24/7 where parents don't arrive? Or as the Spanish left said: As children are not of the parents but of the State, what more does it give! You are authoritarian, you are hypocrites. And, really, we assure you that, if we have to fight to the end to defend internet freedom, we're going to do it.

Madam President, I have listened to all my colleagues and of course we all agree on protecting children. The question is whose? From the internet or some of those in this room? They bring here a mass surveillance document on - and I quote - European digital maturity, mandatory verification, automatic detection, age checks by law. I'm going to tell you frankly: Just because you don't know how to educate your children doesn't mean you have to keep an eye on ours. Let's see if they internalize it. They talk about addictive designs, but how can they talk here (especially the left) about addiction if they live on having half a continent hooked on subsidies and propaganda? But "you have to see how addictive the internet is." Do you know how easy it would be to skip absolutely every legal initiative here with a virtual private network? Technology is infinitely above what this House can do right now by legislating here. We can pass with HTTPS any database, regardless of the legislation here. And I think a lot of pseudo-legislators don't understand that. If we really want to protect the young people and children of this continent, we have to persecute pedophiles, punish impersonations, teach digital literacy, not treat the internet as if it were a kindergarten at the service of the bureaucrat on duty.

Mr. President, how nice the speeches of my colleagues about the damage, the speeches that excited Spielberg, attacking each other, that if climate change, and so on. No one has fallen into the fact that, for example, the Commission has spoken here of two hundred and thirty dead. The official data, in quotation marks, of the Government are two hundred and sixteen. Another body was found last night. Anyway. We don't even have an official list of Dana dead. But what does it matter? All in all, the dead don't vote. Isn't it? And then the European Commission here congratulating itself that it has taken only five months to bring aid to the victims. Five months, do you know what they are for all the victims of our fellow Valencians? Are people aware of what five months is? I don't think so, at all. But what does it matter when we have a Carlos Mazón who, indeed - notice, I totally agree with Irene Montero - should be in prison and we have a Popular Party focused solely on the electoral part of the term? I really only feel sorry and sorry that the only thing we can get out of this Parliament are speeches made with ChatGPT about more than two hundred dead, because even a machine needs to feign emotions. The dead don't care. But anyway, what does it matter?

Madam President, in order to be able to defend - and I agree with the majority of colleagues who have spoken here today - fundamental rights in Equatorial Guinea, we must also have the capacity to defend fundamental rights in Europe. Therefore, I change my speech because something very serious has happened to me, and I am going to tell you as is, dear colleagues and European colleagues. Yesterday, I transferred EUR 106 000 to my bank, the Spanish bank Arquia, with all the necessary legal documentation, to donate, as I usually do, 100% of my salary as a MEP. In the letter that I have just received, I read "We must end the commercial relationship with you because of political ideology", not because of a judicial process or a debt, but only because I criticize the Spanish banking system, and this Spanish bank does not like the ideas of a MEP with more than 800 000 votes from the Spanish people. If there are no fundamental rights and, for a strictly political matter, all of us here can suffer a blockade of an account (and I quote) "for political reasons", what defence do we have to express ourselves freely in - it is supposed, in short - the building of the popular sovereignty of the European people?

Madam President, I already tend to avoid coming to these kinds of debates about Ukraine because I find it very uncomfortable to listen to the opinions of so many puppets. Can we speak with some sincerity for once? Can we say aloud by looking at each other that the dead in Ukraine give us exactly the same thing? Just as we care absolutely nothing about the 5,000 Christians killed in Africa, in a country of the many who are at war. In the end, what we have to talk about is that here we are puppets of powers beyond Europe. We are puppets and we dress in a suit and tie and sit in these 720 seats as if we were painting something. No, no, that's the truth. In the end, "Von der Lucifer," to whom does he kneel? To the United States. U.S. military bases in Europe? Thirty-eight, hundreds of nuclear warheads in Europe. We are literally slaves to American interests; which is not that I criticize it, I say only and exclusively that we speak sincerely, because since we have been chosen by so many Europeans, unless, for once, we say things clearly, right?

Mr President, first and foremost, I ask that MEPs be respected here by avoiding calling ourselves Nazis among us. How absurd in a plenary that has absolutely nothing to do with it. Please respect each other. I, as a Spaniard, can say that we suffer absolutely all the problems that you have verbalized here: We suffer the people of northern Europe who want to come in for surgery to lose weight, we suffer those who want to put teeth in our health system and we find it magnificent, as long as they pay for it. The problem here is basically that the European Commission is now giving its opinion on whether it is right or wrong and for what reasons Europeans are doing tourism. Here the real problem is how economic transactions are made so that we Spaniards can charge the excessive expense we have of this type of tourism, so that, in short, they can return the money to us fifteen days ahead, not a year, as happens on some occasions. And, above all, the concept of reciprocity. How is it possible that I, as a Spaniard, if I get bad, in certain countries have to be paying for a service that we then offer for free to depending on which people? Among them, by the way, those of the problem that this House always addresses, which is mass immigration, especially illegal immigration. So, if we had a little reciprocity in European health systems, in dealing with countries outside the European Union - and also, by the way, a little common sense with the taxes we levy on donations made to people who are hospitalised in third countries, such as the famous Valencian in Bangkok, who has had to pay more than three hundred thousand euros in taxes - we would all do much better.

Madam President, well, first of all, bravo! I admire the theatrical capacity of those of you who come here to lecture us on human rights in the world. But then, when I ask some of you in committee, you have no idea of most wars outside the European Union today. But, well, let's talk about human rights. But let's do it about Europe. What has the European Commission said about the illegal use of sonic weapons against civilians in Serbia - what we learn from social media like so many other things? What have they said about sabotaging Georgescu's legitimate candidacy in Romania or banning the country's most voted candidate from running in the French elections, simply because, in the end, they don't like Le Pen's management of funds? Today, in this very plenary session, the parliamentary immunity of the German MP Petr Bystron was taken away for daring to publish a simple satirical meme, for a satirical meme! All the political rights of a MEP! Is this the freedom we defend in the European Union? I myself – I give you an example – want to disqualify myself for peacefully mobilising more than 20 000 Spaniards in the Madrid protests against Pedro Sánchez last year. Gentlemen, this Europe that talks so much about human rights is not that it is dying, it is that it is dead. You are only the vultures who eat the pieces of what is left of this Europe.

Mr. President, well, anyway, expropriating people just for being Russian... I don't like redheads, we can expropriate them too. What a circus! Really, how eager I am to enlist and go to die in Ukraine! What a thrill! How eager I am to give more power to these bureaucrats of the European Commission who have never been directly elected by anyone, but who decide for everyone's lives! Because if we lack something in this European Union - with its runaway inflation, with its industry in free fall - it is more centralization, more control, more blind obedience and more billions of euros for armaments. Because here the blood of Ukrainians doesn't matter at all; It is important to make the arms companies millionaires. And I really want to understand how it is possible that von der Leyen said two years ago that Russia only had World War II weapons. But now it turns out that we need to freeze the funds of all Russians so that we can defend ourselves against a Russia that has four times fewer tanks than the Europeans. Anyway, what an irony! With a tyrant - a tyrant! - like Putin, unable to conquer more than 20% of Ukraine... But above all, I really mean it, rather than dying, how I want to put an end to this warlike circus called the European Union! Because if there is anything more dangerous than this war, it is to leave the European Union in the hands of bureaucrats, tyrants and murderers, like all of you.

Mr President, we are now talking about mental health in young people with an empty Chamber. How can you tell that the dead don't vote! But how the fuck are young Europeans not going to be crazy, depressed or suicidal? As some colleagues have said, suicide is the second leading cause of death in young Europeans, of whom 60% are depressed, 11 million in psychological treatment. How can they not be like this if they have dreams of garbage because we enslave them fiscally to keep the hordes of parasites that live on them! How can they not be like this if with those miserable salaries they can not even rent in the provincial capitals of Europe a decent room and end up sharing accommodation with strangers, in neighborhoods where they are stabbed before reaching the subway stop or insulted by foreign packs for the simple fact of being homosexual! And now some tie hypocrites wonder why they kill themselves, why they kill themselves. The odd thing is not that they do, the odd thing is that they do not "suicide" many of the political leaders for having turned their lives into a damn hell: No job prospects, no security, no home, no family, no children. Mental health is not, as some say, a silent crisis, as the European Commission incessantly repeats: It's a cry of desperation. So be careful, because when you are not afraid of losing your life, you will begin to wonder why you do not take it from those responsible for your life.

Madam President, come on, but today we are talking about record crime in Sweden, that progressive Disneyland that the European Commission and the government itself have turned into a powder keg of almost 150 terrorist attacks in just 10 years. Before this country exported depressive furniture and pop and now it exports terrorist bombs and drug traffickers, some to my country, to Spain. What things! Although in reality they did not lie to anyone, they sold us the story of integration, coexistence and prosperity, and they have fulfilled it: integration of crime, coexistence with fear and prosperity for the mafias and for some politicians who take advantage of that. But, well, there is no problem, because in Sweden - they announced recently - they have found the magic solution, which is to pay up to thirty thousand euros to immigrants to leave their country. That is, first they brought them to Europe with checks and aid, then they granted them whole neighborhoods and now they are paid to leave. Sweden, more than a country, looks like a travel agency for criminals. What's the next step? Hand out plane tickets for the return trip to Kabul? An all-inclusive in Somalia with money from the Europeans? And meanwhile the European Union continues with its master plan, which is to import more problems, prohibit talking about them and subsidize the NGOs that feed them. This is not the Europe that the Spaniards promised us and we do not want to be part of it.

Dear Irene, thank you for your intervention. In Spain, more than one hundred thousand infants are aborted a year, and it is necessary to take into account no longer the moral part, which the VOX partner has defined perfectly, but, above all, the economic part: we have an absolutely broken pension system and we need a certain level of maternity to be able to finance this system. Having said that, apart from asking you how you think, then, that we can prevent the pension system in Spain from breaking down if we do not have some support for motherhood and everything on which we base the policies is, basically, in abortion, do you consider that we kill more women the people who defend life or those who legislate to free those who murder and rape them?

Mr President, does this Parliament really not understand what is being sought here today, by imposing the Single European Sky? It's not about encouraging competition, it's not about improving any decentralisation or saving us 10% more CO2. That's the big farce: What power in Europe is more centralised than the European Commission itself? Which entity has centralised more power than the Commission? None. And do these initiatives for the so-called environment really continue to be believed? What the Commission seeks with this is that even our skies depend on a new European entity under the iron control of Von der Leyen with the excuse of the CO2. The Single European Sky is nothing more than an instrument to expand EU supervision and regulation by imposing even more environmental objectives, even more burdens and even more tariffs against users on this continent. Mrs von der Leyen shows absolute contempt for the sovereignty of countries, and so does this House. And here, a proud Spaniard replies that contempt is obviously mutual. There's just one essential difference: The one who parasites and enslaves our country is her, while we only yearn for freedom. If we want to worry about the European sky, let us defend ourselves against the intrusions and military threats by sky, sea and air with which Morocco and all the false NGOs of southern Europe are attacking our country. This was not the Europe we were promised. This is a messianic Europe in which we do not recognise ourselves.

I absolutely agree with your statement. I am grateful that the subject of mental health is something that unites us all and I wanted to ask you a question, because we are very concerned about the relationship of mental health, the problem of suicide, etc., that you say, with the regularization that the European Parliament is trying to carry out in terms of drug use. Some, such as marijuana, are clearly proven to lead to the problems you mention. I would like to ask you whether your European family, and you in particular, can tell us a little more about how we reconcile the rules on the legalisation of certain drugs that are being discussed in committee with this very pressing problem.

Madam President, my name is Alvise and I want to ask for permission to be able to create a new religion called Alvinism in which I am allowed to murder 5 000 Christians a year; in which I am allowed to organize an Olympics where they mock and mock Christianity, as we saw in France; where I can burn 27 churches, as happened in France last year – more than a dozen churches have already burned in France – and where I am allowed, for example, to treat homosexuals as if they were sick, to treat women as if they were animals with fewer rights than a dog or, for example, to be able to cover an eight-year-old girl with a black cloth because maybe I am sexually aroused. You would say that I am crazy and that we should not have the slightest tolerance with people who defend this. Why should we tolerate people who violate the Treaty of Lisbon and the fundamental rights of the European Union? We must say yes to religious freedom, yes to freedom of belief, yes to freedom of thought, yes to freedom of expression, but not at the expense of the fundamental rights of all Europeans.

Madam President, Mrs Serra, I do not know from what guindo she has fallen, because no one here has defended shooting immigrants. If you consider that all immigrants approaching European borders have to enter, then why do we want borders, miss? For that, we make a conga and let everyone go online dancing to the European Union. It's absurd. Is the Eastern European border important? Yes, and the southern border is also important. As a Spaniard, I am very concerned about the situation my country is suffering with regard to Morocco: extortion of massive cayucos to the Canary Islands and southern Spain; the massive mineral theft already planned by Morocco on Mount Tropic; the Parliament of Morocco saying that Ceuta, Melilla and the Canary Islands are Moroccan territory; reports leaked by intelligence services that say an invasion of the Canary Islands by Morocco is planned before 2030, and the production of more than 40,000 tons of hashish per year. Morocco is a serious problem for the southern border of the European Parliament, and Frontex is not a criminal organisation, as is said here. Frontex is absolutely necessary. Let us hope that the European Union will help us defend the southern border, which is just as important as the Union's eastern border.

In general, we agree with your intervention. There is a serious housing problem, especially in Spain. Thank you for your intervention, but of course I agree with the previous speaker: Where are the housing responsibilities in the European Union? In the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in the TFEU, where do you think housing is reflected in the European Union?

(start of the intervention out of microphone) ... in the end the demagoguery is from both sides. Both sell weapons on both fronts. I was going to address the High Representative, Mr Borrell, who has just entered. I am happy to see you, but it is true that the Spanish army has 669 soldiers deployed in Lebanon in the operation that, as you well know, is called Libre Hidalgo of the UN, when right now the UN is not carrying out any mission with these Spanish soldiers in Lebanon. And I'm very concerned because there are 669 military lives that are being unnecessarily put at risk between crossfire and collateral damage. Mr Borrell, I would like you to answer this question to me: Why don't we withdraw those troops, return them home and prevent a single Spanish life from taking an unnecessary risk, basically because since 2006 we have already lost more than sixteen Spanish soldiers in this conflict? If you could please explain to us why we cannot return them home, I would very much appreciate it.

Mr President, are you really criticising social media and talking about hoaxes, disinformation and media pluralism here in this Parliament? Some of you, as I'm hearing on the left side, with moral authority. Have not scientific studies been censored here in this very Chamber on the side effects of the vaccines with which the husband of the President of the European Commission became a millionaire, and for what he was, incidentally, recently accused of corruption? Scientific studies - not by TikTok, which some have laughed about, but with sample, with design, with peer review, data transparency and replicability - pure science censored in this House and censored in Europe purely for political and economic reasons, while there are thousands of people affected, for example, in my country, with thrombi and cancers that are absolutely ignored. And this can be said here because, in every other social network, if you say it they censor you or, even worse - and it is a topic that we should start dealing with - they demonetize you. Demonetisation is another form of censorship contrary not only to the fundamental rights of the European Union, but also to e-commerce rights. And yet not a single Member of Parliament ever criticises him here. Were legal media not censored here in Europe solely because of their country of origin? Or how do we talk about countries, such as Spain or France, where massive duopolies such as those of Atresmedia and Mediaset or Bouygues and the Vivendi group are allowed? We have obtained almost one million votes in Spain and we have not yet been interviewed by any television channel because there is no freedom of expression in my country. Perhaps these expressions that I verbalize here can only be found on social networks and in no other medium.

Mr. President, our thoughts are with the suffering of all the women who at some point in their lives have had to endure this violence that we denounce here today. But I listened to my country partner, Irene Montero, talk about the systematic problem of violence against women, when she passed as Minister a law that so far has benefited 1 205 sex criminals, paedophiles and rapists among them and has allowed the release in my country of 121 sex criminals, the vast majority of whom - as you will understand - against women. That is why I would like to ask Mrs Irene Montero, since the Blue Card has not been possible, whether her policy of reducing battered women is based on killing them yourself with her policies by freeing those criminals or whether it is rather to regularise millions of Africans so that they can end them themselves. Let's see if you can explain it to us.

Madam President, we must see what we have to hear in this Parliament. We have been able to hear MEP Riba i Giner say that Venezuela only matters to the far right. Madam MEP, you are from the Group of the Greens, are you not? Don't you find it odd that you care more about cauliflowers or animals than the lives of millions of people? We have twenty-four dead in Venezuela, we have more than two thousand wounded, we have more than seven million exiles, and we are here discussing certain resolutions of the European Parliament that seem very good to me, we are going to support them because the Venezuelan people are a brother people, but it will happen as with Belarus, it will happen as with Cuba, it will happen as with North Korea or so many other dictatorships in which wet papers no longer matter, because a dictator tyrant who is made to protect his own Constitution by corrupt military officials and traitors is not thrown only with papers. And it is true that it is a sovereign people, we do not discuss that, but for something we have something called human rights: If we care only about the rights of Europeans, let us call them that. Long live Venezuela! Next September 28 we will be with the Venezuelan people in the streets of the world.

Mr. President, I ask myself a question: What would happen to this system of surveillance and censorship if disinformation came in the future from the European Commission itself, as is already the case today with supposedly official big media? Where have the founder of Telegram been arrested for protecting the independence of his own business, of his own social network? It was not in Russia, ladies and gentlemen, it was in France. Who has threatened Mr. Elon Musk, owner of X? It wasn't Putin, it wasn't China's president, it was the European Commission. The DSA aims to decide what is real and what is a hoax; It is not about fighting disinformation and hate, it is just about giving the European Commission the power to put pressure on journalists to censor profiles and censor social media without a court ruling. De facto, and it is hard to say, this is a "Digital Soviet Union" contrary to the European founding values that we so much want to respect here. We need, it is true, to give Europeans instruments to discern the fallacies of what hoaxes are, we need reality, which is interpretative, to adapt to legislation, but, ladies and gentlemen, with collaborative verification notes, yes, voluntary, not that a European bureaucrat can eliminate your profile or digital business because he considers, subjectively, that you are lying. Or do we talk about the taboo of what happened here, with official and censored scientific reports, under the...

Mr President, the Pew Research Center, the Institute for Jewish Policy Research, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the ADL, the Foundation for Political Innovation (Fondapol), all microdata from most reputable studies from the European Union and the Member States indicate that there is a direct and clear correlation between the importation of Muslim immigration and the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe. We have seen how this house has today become the center of hate crimes against the Jew and against Israel. Deputy Demirel calling all those who defended the existence of Israel fascists. MP Mendes said she condemned the violence only from Solingen to Gaza. Are the dead killed in Tel Aviv worth less? And while we are here trying to talk about hate crimes without opening the debate - which I think is quite a priority, which is how hate crimes are justified with freedom of expression - we forget that we are in maximum shares of the hatred against the Jew that we have to eradicate.