By Plenary Sessions: Riina Solman

The rhetorical style is formal and sharply interrogative, presenting the minister with numerous detailed and demanding questions. The tone is critical and demands a precise explanation regarding procedures and the roles of experts ("Who is who and what is what?"). A logical appeal is employed, focusing on facts, research findings, and financial risks.

The rhetorical style is formal (addressing the Vice-Chairman and the rapporteur) but includes a strong emotional appeal, using the story of a child going to school who encountered wolves. The tone is interrogative and demanding, stressing the need for rapid results and a sense of security, and seeking clarification regarding the political inconsistency.

The rhetorical style is passionate, direct, and confrontational, employing strong emotional appeals and historical narratives. The speaker outright accuses opponents of blatant lying, gullibility, and naivety, while simultaneously underscoring their personal right to speak about the fate of the nation. Strong expressions are used ("bloody aggressor," "absurd"), and an appeal is made to the conscience and constitutional duty of the Riigikogu members.

The rhetorical style is formal, yet serious and moral in tone, employing strong emotional appeals that focus on the safety and mental health of the Jewish community. The speaker relies on documented facts (inquiries, journalistic articles) and presents their arguments logically, while emphasizing ethical obligation, criticizing, for instance, the "weighing of corpses" as unethical.

The style is urgent and combative, particularly when addressing security threats, employing a strong cautionary tone. Direct attacks are launched against opponents, accusing them of naivety and unethical behavior ("shady dealings"). The discourse itself is rather logical, focusing on security arguments and concrete examples.

The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and concerned, employing strong emotional appeals ("pays oneself poor") and rhetorical questions. Injustice is emphasized (the profits of entrepreneurs versus the problems society must bear) and appeals are made to the taxpayer and future generations. The tone is formal, addressing the respected Vice-Chairman of the Riigikogu and the esteemed Prime Minister.

The style is critical, direct, and formal, posing pointed questions to the Foreign Minister and refuting his claims. Logical argumentation is utilized, drawing upon community feedback and research to illustrate the lack of seriousness in the opponent's stance. The speaker labels any contrary assertion as irresponsible, lending the overall tone an urgent and concerned character.