By Plenary Sessions: Mart Helme

The speaking style is highly confrontational, ironic, and emotionally charged, employing strong negative labeling ("aggressors, villains"). Appeals are made to historical precedent (the 1993 transcripts), and many rhetorical questions are posed to cast doubt on the opposing side's motives and logic. The speaker also uses veiled references to foreign influence ("a telegram arrived from Langley") and warns the opposition against treading "on thin ice."

The speaker’s style is extremely confrontational and aggressive, using direct personal insults ("to the arrogant jerk," "bankruptcy maestro") and threats ("I’d honestly just punch them in the nose"). Dramatic hypothetical scenarios (e.g., voting Putin in as prime minister) are employed as an emotional appeal to underscore the danger. The speech is low-formality and focuses on accusing opponents of putting on "propaganda shows" while simultaneously demanding answers.

The speaker’s style is extremely combative, accusatory, and emotional, employing strong metaphors and personal attacks against coalition members ("a swarm of rats," "dear little children who have shorn yourselves green in the head here"). Emphasis is placed on the contrast between the government’s optimistic narrative and the "prosaic" reality, appealing directly to the common person’s perception of the deteriorating quality of life. The speech is at times ironic and cautionary, promising accountability for legal violations.

The tone is combative, critical, and insistent, accusing the respondent of spreading disinformation and stirring up trouble. It employs strong emotional language (e.g., "all this nonsense," "the economy is shot," "muzzling society") and repeatedly demands answers to extremely serious logistical and security questions. The style is straightforward, emphasizing the necessity of common sense.

The style is confrontational and sharply critical, employing emotional accusations such as "coalition slave drivers" and "spiteful counterarguments." The arguments are supported by both historical examples (Tsarist Russia) and philosophical authorities (Albert Schweitzer), lending the rhetoric an ethical and intellectual foundation. The speaker urges opponents to "come out of the fantasy world," which points to a personal and intense tone.

The speaker adopts a predominantly aggressive and confrontational style, particularly targeting Kristen Michal, whom they accuse of misleading the public and engaging in blackmail. The rhetoric includes strong accusations ("you are the Putinists") and personal attacks (such as lacking functional literacy, or calling him a "chameleon"). While most of the addresses are emotionally charged, the discussion regarding manor schools is handled in a more informative and concerned manner, referencing their cultural and historical heritage.

The rhetorical style is extremely combative, emotional, and accusatory. Strong personal attacks ("cheap shots," "slander") and unconventional language ("brown-nosing") are employed, often questioning the opponents' state of mind. The emphasis is placed on emotional appeal and labeling opponents as propagandists who are merely scoring points rather than engaging in diplomacy.

The style is serious and questioning, using personal experience (as interior minister) to support the argument and contrast it with the current situation. The speaker employs dramatic language ("a major roundup," "catastrophe") while stressing a logical argument (the unnecessary cost to the medical system).