Gottfried Curio, June 13, 2024, The Politics of Deportation

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/175, pp. 22574-22575. 

Right honorable President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

After an asylum applicant, rejected for ten years, wanted to murder a critic of Islam and thereby killed an intervening police officer, those responsible follow one after another in the casting of smokescreens. For the longest time, the Afghan was not removed from the country by the parties of the Merkel Groko. Guilty of his illegal lingering were Union and SPD, then also Greens and FDP. 

The Chancellor, who since his grandiose announcement of deportations in grand style, which never came, is especially practiced in long distance smokescreens, again got underway such a  deception maneuver just before the EU elections: The most serious criminals and those posing a danger were to be deported to Afghanistan. Naturally just hot air, not having consulted with the Green coalition partners who want to give up no illegal migrants. 

The result: Sweden and Turkey do deportations, the Ampel does not want to. And not only that in regards the erstwhile offender of Mannheim simply nothing would be brought – no, the inconsequence was already pre-programmed. Since then if a person can be deported to Afghanistan, then naturally this can and must be done with all rejected asylum applicants. Yet to express this was too daring even for Scholz, the sham bomb disposal expert. Apparently, it will saved for the week before the Bundestag election, ladies and gentlemen. 

If one indeed wants to deceive, then needs be more skillfully intonated what the Union brings us. Which says in a motion, in any case in the latest motion, that they presented just a return of the culpable to Afghanistan. Only, what is to be done? Elections are already at hand. It therefore quite suddenly occurs to you, after endlessly many murders, rapes and knife attacks: Perhaps something real must be demanded. – And since the AfD, after an entire series of state falsehood propaganda, grows and grows and grows, 

            Irene Mihalic (Greens): Na, ja! Since January, rather shrinking, shrinking,                             shrinking!

what does the Union say? Quite clear: We need to copy still more from the AfD! 

Ladies and gentlemen, quite suddenly the Union notices: Even those from Syria who have been rejected nevertheless need to be deported. That is done neither with red nor green but only with the AfD. 

Quite suddenly they notice: Border controls, which deserve the name – in a word: including refusals – would perhaps even be a good thing. Quite suddenly they notice: The citizenship law is not allowed to be further watered down. All of this is done neither with red nor green, only with the AfD. 

Julian Pahlke (Greens), turned to the CDU/CSU: Na, where remains the Union’s distancing to that? No one reports!

Therefore is fully clear the result in regards the theme of deportations: The SPD wants to fake it, the Greens want to entirely prevent it. Only the AfD will actually enforce it. Thus what does a Union want, which explicitly does not want to form a coalition with those demanding an enforcement but prefers the parties of fakers and preventers? Does this Union want to enforce or fake or prevent? I think the answer is clear and the citizens also know this! Only the original stands for actually enforced deportations. Only with the AfD will the security situation again become tolerable for our citizens. Only with the AfD finally comes the so urgently required migration change. 

 

[trans: tem]

Frank Rinck, June 6, 2024, Farming

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/172, pp. 22279-22280. 

Herr President. Valued colleagues. Dear fellow citizens. 

Today it is once again about further complicating the German fertilizer law for our farmers, and introducing yet more bureaucracy – 

            Sylvia Lehmann (SPD): Nein!

but one thing after the other. To begin with, it must be stated – and this we may not forget – that the problems deliberated here were first generally produced by the old parties. A faulty and very questionable nitrate monitoring network provided that just these nitrate values, upon which we here proceed, have come to an end in Brussels. 

            Karl Bär (Greens): That’s not in the monitoring! 

Unfortunately, this is made a theme only by us, and unfortunately none of you appear to see a need for a correction. 

Ladies and gentlemen, everything which was passed here in the last years in regards agriculture policy generally needs to be on the test stand. And do not worry: Once we of the AfD govern, we will correct all of your failures. That is a promise upon which the farmers in the future can rely. 

Basically, it can be said that the good,  professional practices of our farmers and their economic interests do not allow that more fertilizer comes into the field than the crops require. It all of course costs money and resources. And, ladies and gentlemen, no farmer squanders his money or resources; they want to work economically. If you would for once pass some time with real professionals – and I mean practicing farmers – 

            Sylvia Lehmann (SPD): We do that!

and not with whichever demagogue from your associations, you would know that. Yet what have you here today to decide? It’s about the introduction of a nationwide monitoring of active ingredients for fertilizer supply.  

Till Steffen (Greens): Don’t fall asleep up there! Man, man man!

Besides in our view, we could in fact say, in so far as it would be connected, that demonstrably clean water agricultural operations in red areas would finally be freed of senseless fertilizer duties. Under-fertilization is besides an exhaustion of the soil, and that is actually also a form of expropriation of the affected farmers. Nevertheless, of that there is in your draft law no word to be found. Your motion indeed sets this as a goal; yet it’s spongy there, that then this should be first clarified with the EU. 

Ladies and gentlemen, that is unacceptable. If the active ingredients monitoring does not here include distinct goals, then it is to be rejected; especially since, for the first in line operations, the monitoring means new bureaucracy burdens and documentation obligations. 

With that, we come then to the next point, the planned expansion of the material flow balance in §11 of the fertilizer law; you now call it “nutrient balancing”. Ladies and gentlemen, the material flow balance shall in the future be obligatory for all arable farms and bio-has facilities. Why is that actually? That is neither asserted in EU law, nor is it purposeful when at the same time shall come the active ingredients monitoring. 

The experts at the hearing – this, the colleague Staubinger already said – have distinctly indicated that this is not sensible and brings with it no recognizable uses at all. The material flow balance is therefore, and in view of your robust promises of deconstruction of bureaucracy at the farmers’ protests, to be eliminated in its entirety. 

Now on that we have plainly heard that this besides costs all otherwise than much money. Ladies and gentlemen, it is certainly not as if your draft law costs no money: A quarter of a million euros will each be assessed in the BLE [Federal Institute for Agriculture and Food] – for that, three new positions will created; thus then come three new green ideologues who will make it still more difficult for the farmers – and a half million euros for the Julius Kühn Institute. 

Karl Bär (Greens): These people shall certify EU fertilizer products with CE labels. Yet that is fully unrealistic!

I can well imagine what happens with this money: Still more green ideologues will then be employed. 

Ladies and gentlemen, you of the Ampel remain true to yourselves with your destruction of our German agriculture. The draft law put forward is just one additional vexation for the German agriculture. And we therefore reject it. 

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Nicole Höchst, June 20, 2024, Boys in Schools

AfD Kompakt, June 20, 2024. 

Boys appear in nearly all statistics worse than girls. And the number of boys without a graduation certificate is clearly higher than that for girls. Thus in the year 2020, 62 percent of students without a high school completion certificate were boys. 

A specific and expanded support of boys in the schools is required, and it is not allowed to be placed in the narrative of the eternally oppressed little females. We of the AfD Bundestag delegation have already many times referred to this in our initiatives; for example, the inquiry “Possible Disadvantage of Boys in the German Education System” (Drucksache 20/7105). And from the answer of the Federal government to this minor inquiry, it was evident that, up to that point in time, there was no research on the school problems of boys. 

We of the AfD Bundestag delegation therefore demand that there needs to be research adapted to the school problems of boys, since in the named PISA study, especially in written expression, girls clearly achieved better results than boys. 

From the occupational education reports and from the PISA results, we know who these boys are. The left-green course settings compel the situation and disadvantage boys, especially boys with a migration background. This school policy steals the future of the boys in our country. 

The AfD Bundestag delegation demands an end to this policy and the beginning of research into the school problems of boys – and right now! 

 

[trans: tem]

René Springer, June 12, 2024, Social Benefits Abuse

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/174, pp. 22520-22521. 

Frau President. Right honorable colleagues. Dear guests. 

Before us lies a motion of my delegation [Drucksache 20/11745] with which we pursue the goal of opposing abuse of social benefits. We demand immediate measures against commuter migration. What is commuter migration? Nothing other than social tourism. That means that foreigners come here to Germany, apply for Bürgergeld and other social benefits, then return home, and there do with the money as always; all of this at the cost of the German taxpayers. 

If the Social Ministry is asked, then one gets either the answer: “There is no problem”, or: “It is a matter of quite few single cases”. We however do not believe in single cases; for one, because we no longer at all believe this Federal government, and for another, because massive evidence says otherwise. 

Since 2016, there are media reports of Syrians, who have a protection status here in Germany, drawing social benefits and yet then driving home on vacation. Recently, the Münchener Merkur reported on a Algerian of 56 years who lived in Bavaria, drew social benefits – namely, Bürgergeld – then had gone to Algeria and forgot to report to a job center. He received 13,900 euros. The Welt recently reported on a married couple from Nigeria, who lived for years in Nigeria and received Bürgergeld, and in fact 33,000 euros. The Focus recently reported on a Ukrainian family who came to Germany seeking protection, then however returned home and there received 40,000 euros in Bürgergeld. 

            Markus Kurth (Greens): Then inquire at the job centers there!

Every day, 50 flex busses drive from Berlin to Kiev. One needs be crazy to believe that not a single one of the 723,000 Ukrainians receiving Bürgergeld sits therein. 

With this government, and with you here in hall, there is no motivation to oppose social tourism. You lead this country like a banana republic, that is the problem. 

            Marian Schieder (SPD): We want to oppose corruption of members!

An AfD-led government would effectively prevent the social tourism. How would we do that? By increasing the degree of contact at the job centers and indeed by a personal audition every four weeks. We would introduce an identity test by means of a finger-printing procedure, and it is an absurdity that there has not been that up to today. I get letters from job center workers who report from Berlin-Kreuzberg. There, fully veiled women stand before them and say they are whoever, and the workers must believe that because it is not allowed to require the veil to be lifted. How shall it be possible to ascertain the identity? 

We demand in regards suspicion of absence to conduct a test search at home. We demand that the operators of long-distance bus lines be required to pass on passenger lists to the Federal police with which the job center can undertake inquiries there; the same applies besides for air travel to German airports. 

We demand in regards suspicion of unpermitted absence that the immediate stop of payments follows. We demand that in regards the confirmation of an unpermitted absence that not only the payment will be stopped, but all previously made payments be paid back, inclusive of costs of shelter. And should those in need of protection travel in a war area, from which they have ostensibly fled, then that means reimboursement of the social benefits; then that means also the withdrawal of the protection status and a ban on entry. Such people who exploit our social system have nothing to lose here. 

Honestly said, I was shocked at the committee sitting today. There, I had addressed the theme, the social politicians among us will recall. 

            Jens Teutrine (FDP): You did not! You did not speak!

All peek with big eyes and ask how can it be that, in EU comparison, so few Ukrainians are working here, yet so many Ukrainians are on Bürgergeld. I had asked whether not perhaps this is connected with the flex busses to Kiev. The Frau State Secretary’s answer – there she sits; she will be able to well remember – was accordingly: It is nevertheless self-evident that Ukrainians go home so as to look after things. And you also said: The SGB II [Social Code] also foresees a vacation. I thus can only say one thing to you: You do not oppose the social tourism, as we demand; you promote the social tourism. You are the problem in our country. 

I can only say one thing: Who comes to Germany and here draws social benefits, then goes on vacation, goes to a supposed war area, 

            Markus Kurth (Greens): “A supposed war area”? O Gott!

he has no claim to social benefits, he has no claim to protection, he does not belong in Germany, he belongs in his home and there he can remain. 

Many thanks for your attention. 

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

 

Björn Höcke, June 6, 2024, Thüringen Election

AfD Kompakt, June 6, 2024. 

The balance of the Ramelow government comes out catastrophic. The ongoing negative trend in Germany is reinforced by Ramelow’s failures in central political areas: Ever more businesses report their economic position in the Thüringen location as bad, restrain investments or reduce workplaces. Teachers are lacking in Thüringen schools, students more frequently fail minimal demands in reading and math. The domestic security erodes, and foreign criminality is at a new highpoint, be it in inner cities or regional trains. Therefore, political change with the AfD, instead of „Weiter so” with Ramelow! 

 

[trans: tem]

Alice Weidel, June 6, 2024, Immigration, Economy and War

German Bundestag, June 6, 2024, Plenarprotokoll 20/172, pp. 22137-22139. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable Herr Chancellor. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

The foregoing speeches completely by-pass the core of the problem. The Mannheim knifeman ought not to be here. The bloodbath on the Mannheim market place brings to public awareness the decline of security in public areas and the murderous consequences of an irresponsible migration policy. 

The German state can no longer fulfill its obligation to protect the citizens and their rights. First, an Islamist attacker killed a young, on-duty, German police officer. A young father of a family could yet live, Herr Stürzenberger might not lie seriously wounded in hospital, if the authorities had fulfilled their duties and immediately deported the Afghan knifeman to his home after his illegal entry. 

The Mannheim police murderer, who came to Germany over ten years ago as an ostensibly unaccompanied minor and despite rejected asylum demands remained in the country all the years at cost to the taxpayers, is a prime example of the migration policy failures of this government and the CDU/CSU-led preceding government. It is a product of the politically willed loss of control over our borders. It is the product of the millions of tolerated abuses of the asylum system for illegal immigration into our country. It is the result of a fully out of control, pretend  asylum. And it is no single instance. He is one of many assailants and violent criminals who have come to our country as supposed refugees. 

The result is in the criminal statistics: Forty percent of suspects are foreign citizens – three times more than their portion of the entire population. In regards the exploding crimes of violence, the portion of foreigners is four times higher. Asylum seekers from the countries of origin of Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq and Turkey, are over-proportionately charged with a high criminality;  that is a fact. Since 2021, the number of knife attacks has increased by a third. There were almost 15,000 knife attacks last year, almost 40 per day. And in that regard, much of the knife crime  included in the State statistics, falls under the table. In the past year alone was registered the horror number of 761 gang rapes. That is more than two of these horrific crimes every day in our country, 111 in the City of Berlin alone. 

Half of the suspects are foreign citizens. How many suspects with a German passport have a migration background is still not recorded. Double and multiple citizenship counts in the criminal statistics as German. 

            Sara Nanni (Greens): Yes, they also are German. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): They are German!

That shows that even the horror numbers of the police criminal statistics are still considerably distorted. 

From the collapse of the domestic security can there be only one reasonable consequence, and that is a fundamental migration change, and indeed immediately. In clear text: Law and statute need to be consistently applied. The borders must be closed. Illegal entry must be prevented. Those without residency rights, primarily criminals and Islamist fanatics, must be deported, and certainly also to Afghanistan. 

Yet you do not think of ending your fatal policy. You do the opposite and naturalize in quick processes precisely these Afghans, Syrians, Iraqis and Turks. While citizens and colleagues still mourn the murdered police officer, and already you again speak of facilitating the immigration from Islamic countries and let in still more migrants from Afghanistan, you put off the victims, the traumatized relatives and terrorized citizens with empty phrases. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): You are instrumentalizing the victims! 

– That the interruptions come straight out of your delegation, from the Greens, does not surprise me.

You relativize the threat and, with unbearable trivialization, place religious fanatics on a level with drunken howlers, as your party chairman Ricarda Lang has done. You abuse the resources of the security authorities so as to proceed against oppositionists instead of addressing the greatest and most urgent danger for our domestic security: The imported Islamist extremism and its extreme left assailants. That is not only irresponsible, but cynical. Your hypocrisy is deadly. Your ideology of open borders and the unrestricted, uncontrolled mass immigration is based on illusion and lies which cost human lives. 

Your migration policy does not defend those politically persecuted, but criminals and asylum cheaters. You play with the lives and health of the citizens. You take from them their right to freedom and security in the public space. And with reprisals, tricks and defamation, you threaten those who remonstrate and name the abuses by name. That is also shown by the devious knife attack on our common council candidate Heinrich Koch in Mannheim. 

You leave in the lurch police officers who, with suppressed rage over your irresponsibility, must take the heat and, before all, are ready with their lives to stand up for the defense of law and freedom, like the murdered Rouven Laur. Yet you rob the citizens not only of their domestic security, you also take from them the economic and financial security and hard-earned prosperity. Inflation, rising charges and energy prices politically driven to the heights by a green transformation force the working population into a spiral of cold expropriation. And Habeck, the De-Industrialization Minister, drives the productive industry out of the country. Businesses weekly report massive elimination of positions, and displacement of production to foreign countries or insolvencies. The attraction of Germany as a business venue rapidly declines. The exodus of the flagship BASF is only one of countless alarm signals. The number of business closures in the past year has climbed to a gigantic 176,000 and strikes the productive core of our economy. 

You expend untold billions on the illusion of being able in a few decades to influence the climate; yet for the securing against real dangers in the here and now there is no money. German tax money goes to all the world, the flood and catastrophe protection in our own country is neglected and skimped to ruin; that belongs to the truth. And then you run in rubber boots to photo ops and promise state aid to those affected by the flood catastrophe. In Ahrtal, they are still waiting, after more than two years, for your state aid. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Where then is your protection concept?

While you destroy the economic foundation of our prosperity and allow the domestic security to erode, you sleepwalk to the edge of a Third World War. The war in the Ukraine goes into its third year. A military victory of the Ukraine is illusionary. The Ukraine cannot win this war; that belongs to the truth. The search for a diplomatic solution is in this situation the order of the hour. There must be a diplomatic solution, and not the endless prolongation of death as a result of your weapons deliveries. 

            Sara Nanni (Greens): The AfD recommends capitulation!

Retired General Harald Kujat, the Bundeswehr’s former Inspector-general and chairman of the NATO military committee, expressed the fear that the Ukraine War could become the ur-catastophe of the 21^st Century. 

Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (FDP): The Alternative für Deutschland is the ur-catastrophe! 

            Markus Frohnmaier (AfD): Frau Zimmermann, when then do you volunteer?

And I am of this opinion. The irresponsible escalation rhetoric of the agitators in this government coalition and from the ranks of the Union has contributed an essential part to this danger, and daily the amnesiac situation is intensified. 

            President Bärbel Bas: Please come to a conclusion, Frau Weidel.

Yet we know that at the end of any war is the peace. Thus why prolong the bloodshed and suffering which increase the immense danger of a major war? Commit yourselves instead finally for peace negotiations, and bring the parties to the table, 

            President Bärbel Bas: Frau Weidel, come to a conclusion.

so as to end the dying and before all to avoid the danger of a Third World War. 

I am grateful. 

            Dorothee Bär: That was for TikTok!

 

[trans: tem]

Matthias Moosdorf, June 3, 2024, Ukraine Escalation

AfD Kompakt, June 3, 2024. 

It  began with the delivery of steel helmets and today we see where we stand. The future  prospects of the Ukraine and its people are today worse than ever before. The delivery of Western weapons has not prevented the death of hundreds of thousands of young people – just the opposite. The West’s refusal to correct the impossibility of its policy drives Europe ever deeper into the war. Already demanded is the activation of 900,000 German reservists, ever more and wider ranging weapons shall turn the tide. What a pig-headed policy, directed against our interests! It manifests a fateful pauper’s oath. 

In the view of the AfD delegation, the solution lies exclusively in the prioritization of diplomacy. An armistice, a peace settlement under a grant of mutual security guarantees, the revival of the OSCE [Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe] – there is not alternative. Europe’s security is not to be won militarily. The sooner we all understand that, the quicker the bloodletting will end. 

 

[trans: tem]

Martin Sichert, May 16, 2024, WHO Pandemic Treaty

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/169, pp. 21744-21745. 

Valued Praesidium. Ladies and gentlemen.

 “Bill Gates decides what is healthy”. Thus the Southwest Radio in 2019 captioned the WHO [World Health Organization]. Eighty percent of the WHO’s means comes from donations. The biggest donor is Bill Gates who also acquires distinct influence on the decisions. 

Yet not only the influence of lobbyists is a problem. For China also, the WHO has a quite special affinity.

             Johannes Fechner (SPD): You’re in good company, there.

China deserves the world’s thanks and respect for its conduct in the Corona time, says the WHO general-secretary Tedros. China, which brought Corona into the world, which forbade people access to their own dwellings, which from the beginning systematically mis-used Corona 

            Tina Rudolph (SPD): From China, you get your money!

to re-educate its own people. China wants to be a model for the WHO – or also for you, as you here demonstrate in interruptions; but as a free democrat, I defend myself against Mao’s spiritual descendants deciding over German policy. 

With the pandemic treaty shall be created international, unified procedural means during, following and primarily between pandemics. Thus essentially always. Against this is Article 20 of the Basic Law: “All state power proceeds from the people.” Not China, not Bill Gates, not Tedros, are to decide on Germany’s policy, 

            Johannes Wagner (Greens): What are you really saying here? Such rubbish!

but solely and alone the German people. 

Essential components of the planned WHO agreement are control of information and surveillance. Similarly, two basic rights are opposed to this: Article 3: “No one may be disadvantaged on account…of his political views.” Article 5: : “Each has the right… to freely express his opinion…A censorship may not occur.” Who loves freedom of opinion, needs to vote against the pandemic treaty. 

What’s more, the WHO wants to establish international digital evidence in healthcare. That is a massive intrusion in the basic right of informational self-determination which we decisively reject. Briefly stated, in regards the pandemic treaty, it’s about that sovereignty will be surrendered, freedom of opinion curtailed, and the transparent citizen [gläserne Bürger] established. 

            Johannes Wagner (Greens): That’s not right.

That is a storm assault on the free, democratic basic order which every informed member needs to oppose. 

Where is the Bundestag’s commanding war-monger, the howitzer of the FDP, the self-named “Grandma Courage”? Where is Frau Strack-Zimmermann when it’s a matter of defending against a real attack on the free, democratic basic order? 

Johannes Wagner (Greens): “Where is Petr Bystron”, I ask you. Where is Herr Bystron? I thought he wanted to speak this morning! 

Here, it’s quite easy. Instead of positioning oneself against the pandemic treaty, the kids all over the country prefer to terrorize with their gruesome placards. 

You designate yourselves ever again as democratic parties. Today you can for once show how democratic you really are. Democracy is put together from the words “Demos”, the people, and “Kratos”, the rule. 

            Johannes Wagner (Greens): You are paid by China and Russia! 

Democracy is thus the rule of the people. Any conveyance of power to international organizations is hostile to democracy, because it disempowers one’s own people. 

            Dirk-Ulrich Mende (SPD): Such nonsense.

It is entirely enough that we here have politicians like Karl Lauterbach who in all seriousness planned to forbid access to business for those not vaccinated, and wanted to compel injections for people. In other countries, people with such criminal energies sit behind bars; for us, on the government bench. 

            Heike Baehrens (SPD): That is an atrocity.

The Federal government is burden enough for Germany. We also do not need a conveyance of political influence to a marionet in the grasp of lobbyists and autocratic regimes like the WHO.   

            Johannes Wagner (Greens): You are paid by autocrats!

We today make a vote by name so that each of you shows whether he is for the German people, for sovereignty, democracy, freedom and data protection, or is opposed. 

            Tina Rudolph (SPD): That is awful. 

You remember each year on July 20 one of the famous German Resistance fighters. Vote today in the sense of his last words: „Es lebe das heilige Deutschland!” 

            Dirk-Ulrich Mende (SPD): That you are not ashamed!

 

[trans: tem]