Straight up misinformation.
The nuclear phase out was already decided years ago after fukushima. This entire thing is just about a decision wether or not to extend the lifetime of the remaining 3 reactors in germany to counteract possible gas shortages due to russias attack on ukriane. And in fact their lifetime was extended for a few months to avoid energy shortages during the winter 22/23 which habeck decided against voices in his own party.
The supposed “manipulation” is that a section apparently got deleted between two drafts of a document which contained the conclusion that it would be feasible to continue operating those reactors for a few years. Just, if you actually read the damn documents, this section never actually existed in there. What version 1 actually does contain however is the conclusion that wether or not its feasible to keep those reactors running for a few more years could not be made without consulting the operators of those reactors. Whats also in there is that all reactors lack the necessary safety certification for continued operation and that necessary staff was not available. The only real difference between those documents is the added conclusion in version 2, which you would expect to find in such a document presented to a minister.
Straight up misinformation. The nuclear phase out was already decided years ago after fukushima. This entire thing is just about a decision wether or not to extend the lifetime of the remaining 3 reactors in germany to counteract possible gas shortages due to russias attack on ukriane. And in fact their lifetime was extended for a few months to avoid energy shortages during the winter 22/23 which habeck decided against voices in his own party. The supposed “manipulation” is that a section apparently got deleted between two drafts of a document which contained the conclusion that it would be feasible to continue operating those reactors for a few years. Just, if you actually read the damn documents, this section never actually existed in there. What version 1 actually does contain however is the conclusion that wether or not its feasible to keep those reactors running for a few more years could not be made without consulting the operators of those reactors. Whats also in there is that all reactors lack the necessary safety certification for continued operation and that necessary staff was not available. The only real difference between those documents is the added conclusion in version 2, which you would expect to find in such a document presented to a minister.
document version 1: https://assets.cicero.de/2024-04/2022-03-01_Atomaufsicht_Version1.pdf version 2: https://assets.cicero.de/2024-04/2022-03-03_Atomaufsicht_Version2.pdf both hosted by the magazine that “uncovered” that entire “scandal”, so yeah, their own sources dont support what they’re saying