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]

Dirk Spaniel, December 1, 2023, Auto Industry and Combustion Engine

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/142, pp. 18008-18009. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

I also rejoice over this debate. It is always important to remind the Federal Transportation Minister of his public promises and of his presentation that he is the saviour of the combustion engine. I however believe – and here I clearly share your opinion – that this will not happen. This Transportation Minister will enter into the history of the Federal Republic of Germany as the one who not only has taken from the automobile driver the affordable auto, but also the existence foundation from the German auto industry. 

Let us begin with the auto industry. The German auto industry – it cannot be said otherwise – is at the abyss. This leads to citations from Volkswagen, a large German concern, which acknowledges itself to no longer be competitive in the supplier industry, and to a raising of eyebrows in the populace. Yet it is in fact a public confession of the failure that your policy of subvention of electro-mobility obviously does not matter to the manufacturers. The production of vehicles in Germany has receded in this year from five million to 3.5 million vehicles. That is a failure of this government. You have not managed to bring about the transformation. 

It is however not only a failure of this government, it is also a slap against the auto driver himself. We have the problem in this country that the people buy no electro-autos because they are plainly impractical as a first vehicle and are not useful. That means, electro-mobility occurs where there are two or three vehicles in the parking lot, or simply in the small car sector as a third vehicle. That is the reality; all of the experts say it to you. 

It is an affront to demand at an auto summit of the auto industry that one should now please manufacture small cars and cheap electro-vehicles. Are we here in socialism? Nein, we are not; we have overcome that, even if you again want to go back to it. It’s bad that you participate in that. It is really bad. 

What then is the result when we in Germany promote cheap electro-mobility? What will that then cause? It will bring about, exactly so as in regards the solar industry, that we will promote Chinese and other foreign concerns with German tax money. German taxpayers, German employees, support with these subventions the abolition of their own workplaces. That is your policy. We are against that; we do not participate in that. 

Now I come just briefly to your motion. Your motion basically means the same thing as we brought in here to the Bundestag five years ago. Five years ago, we pushed for that there be a credit on the fleet limit values. The Transportation Minister was then Herr Scheuer from your delegation. He however did not commit himself in Europe that it happen. That unfortunately needs be said. Today, you join in, five years too late. The principal problem with your motion is: It comes five years too late. And because you thus come too late, what you here demand will thus no longer be feasible on the timeline where it may take effect. 

We have now in Europe a situation in which industry requires planning security. We know that electro-mobility is a chimera, at least in general. That, we all know; at least the reasonable side of the plenum knows that. The fact is that we now require a solution. The solution however cannot be to now again start up the synthetic fuels as you demand it. Nein, the solution must be to set aside this senseless ban on the combustion engine on the European level, or at least postpone it for ten years. Otherwise, we have a disaster for our industry and for the people in this country. All else is an irresponsible policy. And I expect from you of the government that you finally accept this and that you go this way at the European level. 

Many thanks.

 

[trans: tem]

Joachim Wundrak, July 6, 2023, NATO

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/115, pp. 14195-14196. 

Her President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

The CDU delegation 

            Johann David Wadephul (CDU/CSU): CDU/CSU!

thus wants the upcoming NATO summit to lead to success. A laudable intention, if it would then serve the interests of Germany and the German citizens. 

The Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany in Article 24, paragraph 2, specifies that the Bund may arrange for the guaranty of peace in a system of mutual, collective security and can willingly agree to restrictions of its sovereign rights. A look at the AfD’s program of principles shows that we also regard Germany’s membership in NATO as a central element of our security strategy. 

We nevertheless understand NATO as a purely defensive alliance in regards the alliance territories according to the NATO treaty and basically reject interventions outside these territories. The recent experiences with foreign missions should here be a strong warning for us. Alliance solidarity alone cannot replace vital national interest for a mission of armed forces outside the treaty territories. We therefore also reject the globalization of NATO in the direction of the Indo-Pacific, especially the meddling in Chinese affairs regarding Taiwan. 

            Wolfgang Hellmich (SPD): Where does it meddle there? 

The Federal government should instead strengthen its diplomatic efforts for a peaceful solution of the Taiwan question. 

We support the endeavor for a fair burden-sharing in NATO 

            Ulrich Lechte (FDP): Against freedom and democracy obviously!

and thereby also the so-called two percent goal. The strengthening of the European pillar of NATO is in the German interest so as to strengthen the weight and say of Europeans and also that of Germany vis-à-vis the dominant leading power, the U.S.A. Nevertheless, these additional fiscal means need in fact to be invested in armament and the Bundeswehr’s sustainable capability. It unfortunately is a fact that in the last 15 months the already reduced mission readiness of the German armed forces, as a result of donations to the Ukraine, has still further worsened. This is unacceptable.   

We welcome the membership of Finland and also soon that of Sweden in NATO because this will increase Germany’s security. On that account, we reject the acceptance of the Ukraine into NATO because that would mean not more security but less security. 

We also welcome that the NATO-Russia basic document of 1997 will not be seen as obsolete, despite the Russian aggression. In can in the long-term form a nexus for a new security structure which needs to be based on the principle of common security in Europe. Yet foremost must be sought practical ways for a rapid ending of the Russian war of aggression against the Ukraine. For that are to be used, in my opinion, NATO’s communication channels to Russia, as they were maintained for the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War. 

We are critical in regards the announced long-term stationing of a German brigade of approximately 4,000 soldiers in Lithuania; colleague Wadephul has more precisely expressed that. This decision was certainly knit together quicktime with a hot needle. The question presents itself, At whose pressure was this done? From our viewpoint, the existing rotation solution for deterrence is fully sufficient. 

On the whole, we reject the motion put forward by the Union on account of the offensive character of the overall approach for NATO, although we thoroughly share in some of the points in regards the strengthening of the Bundeswehr. NATO needs to again concentrate itself on the its core duty according to the NATO  treaty: On the defense of the alliance territories. 

I thank you for your attention. 

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

Tino Chrupalla, December 14, 2022, Diplomacy and Emigration

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/75, pp. 8872-8874.

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. Dear countrymen.

Herr Merz, you have replied to the Herr Chancellor’s speech that you are amazed because parts were lacking. What I with all my previous speakers have not heard in regards your speech is that you have scarcely a word for our own country, that you have scarcely a word for the worries and needs of the German people. That actually expresses all.

The past EU-ASEAN summit meetings have of course already shown us one thing: The states do not want to decide between two trading partners. They meanwhile therein have some advantage over us and Europe. They of course consider the cooperation to be led by interests, instead of being separated by sanctions.

China, ladies and gentlemen, belongs to Asia: Geographically, culturally and economically. There are generally also differences there. Which nevertheless can be considered in common, without instrumentalizing the entire publicity in one direction or the other. Thus can each keep face and thus will misunderstanding be avoided. These in the last months have been perceived quite often enough as confrontations. Precisely that, dear colleagues, is to be avoided. We need cooperation eye-to-eye. No one wants to first occupy himself with the ideological approaches of his counterparts. For a peaceful world, a respectful acquaintance is the first step.  

Certainly the present situation in Germany shows that we as a country without raw materials and with high inflation cannot generally allow ourselves to issue fixed economic sanctions in the name of a so-called – we have, ja, heard it again today – feminist foreign policy. This instrument harms Germany even so effectively as its citizens. And exactly that must have an end.

Already for long we no longer speak just of Russia. By means of reporting on domestic policy confrontations, the Federal government sends out signals to unfavored countries. This at the least provides for astonishment to the point of incomprehension there; since for decades – this also needs for once to be said – one communicated reasonably, diplomatic standards were maintained and economic exchange was fostered. Those were the guidelines of German foreign policy in the last decades.

At the latest with this Ampel government, ideological teaching hours vis-à-vis other nations and cultures are meanwhile on the daily order. One just decides between good and bad, between black and white. So I ask you: Can you, ladies and gentlemen, actually imagine that this vote will meanwhile be taken as hostile?

Timon Gremmels (SPD): Therefore we obtain LNG from Qatar, or what? This is just rubbish!

I ask you: To whose use is that? Do you think that helps the local people in the countries?

Yes, the conducted conflicts are in parts also violent, which we as the Alternative für Deutschland also do not defend. Yet is one a better, more trustworthy partner when one wants to actually cause from without a perhaps violent regime change? Of course not. You position yourselves – and thereby Germany – permanently and completely apart. That contributes to peace neither in the region nor the world, yet it exploits the German citizens. With your policy you separate the world into two halves, unilaterally shoot down Germany and thus drive further forward the de-industrialization.

You meanwhile continue the long since agreed upon course of the Merkel government. That Germany as a business venue is already for years ever less attractive is shown by the rising number of firms which have already emigrated or plan to do so. These numbers are alarming and needed meanwhile also to be a matter for the Ministry for the Economy. Thus could be read in the FAZ of November 30 of this year that, according to a survey of the Federal Statistics Office of 600 Mittelstand businesses, 20 percent already have concrete plans to leave Germany and that is not the beginning: From 2018 to 2020, 1.6 percent of German firms already went that way – thus, long before the events of the year 2022. 

Timon Gremmels (SPD): Following the entrance of the AfD, the businesses left the country!

           Götz Frömming (AfD): That was obviously the reason!

Very considerable for the business sectors are those which with priority were shipped out, among which were goods production and its sales; yet also research and development. The last know-how, the last raw material – research and development – thus meanwhile emigrates.

Do you really understand the signals? I do not know. First were production processes shipped out of Germany, and the policy said: We are becoming a service society; that was the announcement here.

            Christian Petry (SPD): Nonsense!

Yet that too meanwhile belongs to the past. And service providers will be shipped out more and more. So I ask you: Why at all should a business still settle in Germany? This question can you no longer at all answer. The causes of course are clear – though you scarcely mention them: High social duties, the tax burden which is too high, bureaucracy and of course not least the high energy prices which directly contribute to that soon this economic sector no longer exists and that Germany will no more be in the circumstance of an economic nation.

We indeed daily see examples here in Berlin. Manual work operations like bakeries close and the restaurant trade can no longer make an offer because the workforce is lacking – and in a major city of the Bund.

            Daniela De Ridder (SPD): A reason for migration!

Go to your constituency, in so far as you at all have one, and look for once at the local situation. Can you still at all actually reconcile your voters to this downfall? If the emigration which, ja, will no longer be put in context is for once considered, it is seen: Since 2014, almost 250,000 Germans each year leave this country. That was up to the year 2020, 2 million German contributors

            Daniela De Ridder (SPD): Still a reason for migration!

who have left this country. And you ever again speak of immigration. The reasons for that you should for once ascertain; since it is a scandal.

You may believe me that the citizens day by day see and experience the consequences of your destructive policy; since this policy also leads our country into the energy policy deadend. With your decision to ban from Germany baseload-capable energy carriers like coal, gas, yet also nuclear power, you withhold from citizens and businesses a continuous energy supply. And no, you can plainly not influence the present dark doldrums as well as a reasonable energy mix which we of the AfD have ever again demanded. You of the Federal government more and more become the drivers of the inflation.

            Timon Gremmels (SPD): Atomic power is no energy mix!

You are the principal cause of inflation in Germany.

Therefore: Make the energy policy turnabout! Finally make policy for Germany and for the citizens! You have the duty, even in difficult times, to work for realistic political solutions. Stop; instead of wanting to ever again enforce your ideologies with new, threatening scenarios. We, the opposition, will ever again obligate you to make policy for the welfare of the German people. We, the opposition of this sovereign house, have the duty to critically accompany your government policy. That is the core of our democratic parliamentary order, and not to flatter you on the government bench with warm words. You yourselves do that well enough every day.

Many thanks for your attention.

 

[trans: tem]

 

Jürgen Braun, November 30, 2022, Germany, China and Covid

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/72, pp. 8387-8388.

Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen.

Fully healthy citizens under threat of draconian penalties are intimidated. To the applause of the state media, water cannon are employed against peaceful demonstrations. House searches of demonstration participants are undertaken, handies seized. There is censorship of the internet and restrictions of the freedom of opinion. The human rights situation is so disastrous that the UNO intervenes. – That is not only the present situation in the People’s Republic of China, that was also up to last year part of the situation in Germany.

The Federal governments have conducted themselves just as the Communist Party of China heretofore does.

            Alexander Lambsdorff (FDP): Completely wrong!

            Gyde Jensen (FDP): Complete nonsense!

Jürgen Trittin (Greens): I would have wished it for you, but we unfortunately have not done it!

Yet here to us also applies: A visit from relatives in another Federal State: Verboten! Alone on a park bench reading a book: Verboten! Skating with the family in the fresh air: Verboten! Denunciations: Demanded!

You now rightly complain of censorship in China. Yet what have you until recently demanded? In the state television a daily cover-up with irrelevant numbers which had only one purpose: The spreading of fear – as by Televisor from Orwell’s 1984.

            Zoe Mayer (Greens): You spread fear!

At the same time, crtitics of this situation were defamed and fought,

            Gyde Jensen (FDP): To the matter, Herr Braun!

freedom-loving marchers were denigrated as “aluminum hats” and “right-wing extremists” and banned from restaurants, swimming pools and fitness studios – under threat of contempt of court and pension cuts.

An SPD Oberbürgermeister in Stuttgart was actually permitted to employ firearms against marchers. Police violence in Germany: Never so massive as in the 30 years since the end of the SED regime, so massive that the UNO reporter for torture intervened; police violence like we rightly complain of in China also here with us.

            Zoe Mayer (Greens): Yet you lack any measure!

And nearly all of you have cooperated. Herr Trittin, you have demanded the vaccination obligation for all. Now you can speak much of freedom in China; Herr Lauterbach is, ja, appropriately not here. What is now turned against the brave Chinese was for years practiced here.

            Jürgen Trittin (Greens): Nay, nay!

            Nils Schmid (SPD): That is just unbelievable!

The totalitarian zero-Covid petition was signed by leading mainstream figures – zero-Covid:

Alexander Lambsdorff (FDP): This is offensive, what you are putting out here! That is simply just offensive! Nauseating, Herr Braun. Nauseating!

Climate-hopper Luisa Neubauer, the state-financed George Restle; even the from Stasi man climbed up to Berlin state secretary Andrei Holm was with those of the Partie.

            Alexander Lambsdorff (FDP): Even beneath your dignity, what you are                                    doing here!

Listen, Herr Lambsdorff.

            Alexander Lambsdorff (FDP): I am listening!

You do not want to hear the truth; I know that. It’s clear to me.

            Alexander Lambsdorff (FDP): Oh, yes! From you comes not a word of truth!

And Christian Droste in the professional journal The Lancet called for confinement of the citizens without conditions.

Vice-president Petra Pau: Herr member Braun, I request speaking on the theme of the current hour.

And the Health Minister Lauterbach first!

            Gyde Jensen (FDP): Good man!

That is Chinese zero-Covid ideology in pure form.

Now the political-media complex wants to make forgotten all of this. In regards the brutally suppressed protests of this weekend in China, the German state media once again lies Kopf und Kragen. In the Tagesschau it said – I cite:

There are no large vaccination campaigns in the country of 1.4 billion inhabitants. Instead, the people in China live for almost three years in ever recurring lockdowns,  mass testing, restrictions of going-out and travel.

With that, the People’s Republic of China has a vaccination rate of 89 percent, one of the highest in the world.

Yet no such high vaccination rate lead to the giving way of the German government in the matter of zero-Covid. No, it was the stubborn citizens’ protests alone which we have to thank for that.

Leni Breymaier (SPD): Ach Gott! Ach Gott! Ach Gott! What actually remains of your “hot autumn”? Tomorrow is December. Then is the beginning of winter!

The Chinese strategy of intimidation and confinement which rightly here and today is unanimously condemned was a German reason of state and it would have remained a reason of state if the true civil society had not risen up: Across all Germany, peaceful protests spread so as to finally order a stop to this scandalous policy.

            Jürgen Coße (SPD): What nonsense you are telling!

In defense of the present government is to be said that it only continues what was already begun under the Merkel government. In the Interior Ministry’s experts’ council was appointed a man who is not only a declared fan of Mao Tse-tung but also received money from the Chinese Communist Party: The linguist Otto Kölbl was the author of the propaganda angst papers with the revealing title of “To Learn from Wuhan” – Wuhan, as is known, where the new Corona virus originated. I say to you what can be learned from Wuhan: How a virus can be genetically so manipulated that it becomes highly virulent and thereby a worldwide mass panic can be unleashed.

            Jürgen Coße (SPD): Man, man, man, man, man!

You still wanted to imitate the Chinese social model, yet the German Sonderweg, thank God, came to an end. If now the mask obligation falls, then we again finally have our freedom. And that I wish also for the brave people of China.

Leni Breymaier (SPD): You are so embarrassing! The most embarrassing Baden-Württemberger of the year!   

 

[trans: tem]