Last year he was diagnosed with cancer.
That is the freedom of every German. “
He later defended the statement: He addressed the people who had articulated their contempt for our state. In the video of the scene that was uploaded that evening, however, this prehistory is not apparent. It was spread with the exaggerated message that the CDU politician recommends leaving the country to anyone who is critical of refugee policy.
Blogs suddenly picked up the case again
What was little known so far: The scene that made waves at the time and led to temporary police protection for Lübcke has been redistributed this year. t-online.de was able to find two blogs that took up the incident in February 2019 completely incoherently and without direct reference to the date. They each triggered new outrage and anger among users.
Reactions to the Steinbach posting to Walter Lübcke: The picture below on the left was reported to the police on Tuesday. User comment: “Denunciation has reached new heights on the Internet”. It’s just a meme. (Source: Screenshot / Montage: Benjamin Springstrow)
One of the two blogs has now completely disappeared from the network after the death of Walter Lübcke. Only secure articles can be found in internet archives. The anonymous operator, allegedly the long-time HR manager of medium-sized companies, stated in a Facebook post that he had several hundred thousand visitors. He described himself as a “Nazi”, as “not interested in immigration”.
His post about Lübcke was published on February 6th and shared more than 3,500 times. A blog from the spectrum of Reich citizens that had been known for years immediately picked up the post, also without any indication that the alleged news was old. Walter Lübcke was again a target of hatred. Michael Conrad, his former spokesman, could not say whether Lübcke registered this and how much it burdened him.
Erika Steinbach helped to reach
Range got the new old message through Erika Steinbach. She posted the article on February 18 with the caption in the picture “CDU politicians: ‘Asylum critics’ can leave this country at any time”. Steinbach wrote to her 80,000 Twitter followers: “First the asylum critics should leave the CDU before they give up their home!”
She also sent the post to her more than 40,000 Facebook subscribers. A hint can be read from the posting that it was not a new message: “Nothing has really improved (…)”, she wrote.
Steinbach must have known that she was spreading old information. The former member of the CDU Hessen had already posted a link to the incident involving her former Hessian party friend on Twitter and Facebook in May 2017. Your comment: “At some point you will be speechless!”
She used the same phrase again on June 4th, two days after her death became known: One is speechless when people cheer about the death of a person. “The hatred of extremists of all kinds is unbearable,” said the politician.what is community service essay However, she deleted this tweet.
Steinbach called reporting “insolence”
t-online.de wanted to know from her why she contributed to the hatred of Lübcke through her contributions. However, there was no response to two inquiries on Twitter and via the AfD-affiliated Desiderius Erasmus Foundation, which she heads, until June 5, t-online.de published this text.
The next day, on June 6th, she tweeted the reporting as “insolence” and claimed that she had not received a request. What she had erased at first, she now wrote again: She detested cheers and malice over the death of a person.
She took the deleted tweet from the network because she “no longer had time to delete the nasty comments directed against Lübcke”. Deleting comments on Twitter is not possible at all. She also stated on Twitter that she would not use a quote if she knew it was wrong.
On Facebook, where it is possible to delete and hide posts, there were still calls for threats and murder. Facebook itself deleted comments on June 16 because they violated community standards.
Steinbach’s fact checker is not surprised
For Tania Röttger, fact checker at “Correctiv.org”, Steinbach’s approach is no surprise: “She is known for sharing once again contradicted quotes from politicians,” she told t-online.de. “It is a popular way of sharing successful posts again, regardless of whether they are current.”
Alexander Sängerlaub, project manager “Disinformation in the digital public” at the New Responsibility Foundation and author of a study on the source and dissemination of fake news, is also familiar with the phenomenon: “Before the 2017 federal election, we noticed three waves in which a fictitious Each article was disseminated. ” It was about the false report “Refugees get their driving license for free”. It landed in the top 3 hoaxes of the year.
Fact checker Röttger also observes the phenomenon in other areas: it is more common in medical topics among advocates of alternative medicine. “An extremely successful text on cancer is shared over and over again by the same page. The information is incorrect that patients treated with chemotherapy die faster, but it is always busy.”
District President killed: What we know about the death of Walter Lübcke – and what is not “Simply disgusting”: Federal President condemns reactions to Walter Lübcke’s death Study: This was the most influential “fake news” in the Bundestag election campaign
And the Center for Political Beauty also spread a tweet with malice about the AfD very successfully in March, although the case was two years ago and it was not made clear. In addition, some of the major media are also redistributing some old texts. Some portals re-post old, high-click media from the tabloid area without making this clear. t-online.de publishes some articles from the advice area again. However, this is long-lasting content; the information is checked beforehand to ensure that it is correct and up-to-date.
And such cases are for information only. The recycling of outrageous texts about the CDU regional president, on the other hand, “is something completely different,” said fact checker Röttger. “It looks like part of a campaign against a person.”
Update, June 17th: The text has been updated after the arrest of an urgent suspect and statements by the federal prosecutor’s office on the possible right-wing extremist background.
Sources used: Own research Steinbach tweet from February 2019 Steinbach posting from February 2019 Disappeared blog post in the Internet archive Steinbach tweet from May 2017 Steinbach posting from May 2017hna.de: “Walter Lübcke in an interview: ‘I stick with my statement'” corrective. org: “No – cancer patients do not die faster with chemotherapy than without treatment” Documentation on the tweet of the Center for Political Beauty more sources show less sources
The CDU chairman in Thuringia, Mike Mohring, who is suffering from cancer, is doing better. He was impressed by the solidarity from all political camps, said the politician.
The Thuringian CDU boss Mike Mohring sees himself on the right track again after his cancer. “I’m fine. I have the chemotherapy behind me, the blood values are so good that I don’t have to go for a check-up,” the 47-year-old told the “Tagesspiegel”. “And my beard is starting to grow again – that is such an important point at which I notice the progress specifically for myself and experience normality again.”
Mohring leads the CDU as the top candidate in the Thuringian state election at the end of October. Last year he was diagnosed with cancer. He made it public in a Facebook video in January, and in recent months he has appeared with a hat. There was a tremendous amount of empathy and concern, said Mohring now to the “Tagesspiegel”. Thousands of people wrote to him, reported their own medical history or sent caps.
Moving video: CDU politician Mike Mohring speaks about cancerDespite criticism: Seehofer defends controls at the Austrian border Green boss self-critically: Long not interested in problems in the East
“Others who have had cancer themselves told me how my appearances with the hat gave them courage – and that in turn strengthened me.” Once again, he was particularly impressed by the encouragement from all political camps. He is “very, very grateful” for this human solidarity.
Sources used: dpa news agency
Bayer lost the first US glyphosate appeal. In the dispute over the Roundup weed killer, the group can still book a profit. The amount of compensation was drastically reduced.
In the appeal proceedings for the verdict in the first US trial of allegedly carcinogenic weed killers with the active ingredient glyphosate, the penalty for the Bayer Group has been drastically reduced. The responsible court in San Francisco lowered the damages and punitive damages that the company has to pay cancer victim Dewayne Johnson on Monday from originally $ 289 million to $ 20.5 million, the equivalent of around 17.9 million euros. However, the guilty verdict was not overturned as requested by Bayer.
Bayer welcomed the appeal court’s decision in a statement as a “step in the right direction”. However, it is still of the opinion that the judgment is not in accordance with the evidence presented at the trial and the applicable law. The company will review its appeals and consider re-appeal and taking the case to the Supreme Court of California. Bayer continues to stand by the fact that the weed killer is a safe product.
Cancer from weed killers?
Plaintiff Johnson, who was diagnosed with lymph gland cancer in 2014, had blamed the weed killer Roundup of US seed manufacturer Monsanto, which Bayer acquired in 2018, for its fatal suffering and accused the company of hiding the dangers. A jury therefore sentenced Bayer in August 2018 to damages in the hundreds of millions. The sum was then quickly reduced to $ 78 million, but Bayer still appealed.
Leading index recovers: Dax skips 13,000 points Possible cancer risks: Bayer agrees on a comparison in the glyphosate process After the corona outbreak: Tönnies gives in – and wants to abolish work contracts
The group has challenged all of the three previous glyphosate judgments in the USA. Now the first decision of a higher authority has been made, but it no longer has the greatest importance. Because the group recently agreed on a comprehensive settlement with most of the many US plaintiffs. The billion-dollar compromise is supposed to solve the majority of the legal problems that the Leverkusen-based company had with the $ 63 billion takeover of Monsanto almost in one fell swoop.
Sources used: dpa news agency
Bayer could soon be rid of its concerns about thousands of lawsuits in the US over possible cancer risks of the herbicide glyphosate, according to a report. But it will be expensive for the company.
According to a report, a settlement of tens of thousands of US lawsuits relating to cancer risks from weed killers with glyphosate is in sight for the agrochemical and pharmaceutical company Bayer. As the “Handelsblatt” reported, the settlement with the plaintiffs in a settlement for a total of eight to ten billion US dollars (7.1 to 8.9 billion euros) is ready to be signed.
You only have to go through the Dax Group’s supervisory board, the newspaper writes on Tuesday, citing circles of negotiating partners and the company. A company spokesman did not want to comment on the article when asked.
Since August 2018, Bayer has had to accept three defeats in glyphosate lawsuits with claims worth millions for compensation for the cancer plaintiffs. The company appealed in each case. Over the past few months, Bayer management has repeatedly emphasized that it is ready to find an out-of-court solution if it is financially appropriate and the end of the glyphosate disputes.
Aktiengesellschaft: What is it actually?
Financially, Bayer is ready for a comparison. The sale of the veterinary medicine alone should bring Bayer 7.6 billion dollars – the majority of it in cash, a smaller portion in shares of the buyer Elanco. In 2018, Bayer incurred immense legal risks in connection with glyphosate with the purchase of US seed giant Monsanto, which cost more than $ 60 billion, and has recently faced more than 50,000 lawsuits.
Group does not have to point out possible cancer risks
A federal judge in Sacramento ruled on Monday (local time) that the Leverkusen-based company in the US state of California does not have to point out possible cancer risks of the glyphosate-containing round-up. Bayer and other companies involved in the lawsuit would not have to comply with a corresponding state requirement.
The background to the request from California was that the WHO cancer research agency IARC had classified the weed killer in 2015 – in contrast to other authorities – as “probably carcinogenic” for humans. Bayer contradicts this and emphasizes that the products are harmless if used as directed