Peter Boehringer, March 21, 2024, Debt Brake

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/160, pp. 20611-20612. 

Frau President. 

For the umpteenth time the Linke wants to abolish the debt brake, this time disguised as a “reform”. Meant, however, is the cold abolition; Herr Görke was certainly at least honest. Since 2020, we clearly have a great coalition of all old parties for a boundless making of debt. In addition, we know that the tax money will not be sufficient for the government even in 2025. And the SPD’s speaker has confirmed that a great left-green debt coalition thoroughly sympathizes with this “reform”, or with the abolition idea. 

What does the Linke now concretely propose? In the future, a “transition phase” of precisely one year shall increase the possible excess indebtedness, which diametrically contradicts what the Federal Constitutional Court permitted just last November: Very clearly, a setting aside of the debt brake only for the year of a catastrophe itself. Any time exceeding a year was explicitly forbidden by the Federal Constitutional Court. That does not interest the leftist writers of the motion. 

In the motion’s second demand, the single hard guideline of Article 115, namely the structural deficit limit of 0.35 percent of GDP, shall be annulled. That however would be no “reform” of the debt brake, but a material alteration of the Basic Law’s wording, which may not proceed with a simple motion but only with a law to amend the Constitution with a two-thirds majority. The motion is thus also badly written. 

With the third demand, the besides already highly mathematical finding procedure for the debt brake’s business cycle component shall be still further complicated. Who for once takes a rudimentary look at the formulation [Formelwelt], and the arbitrary scope of valuation which will be used for this calculation, knows that a self-indebted government chronically short of money can thereby vastly exceed the permitted limit of indebtedness – even today. The aim of the Linke, to receive still “greater fiscal scope”, as it is in the motion, is thus absurd, since this scope today already is enormous. 

Clearly, the terms in Article 115 of the Basic Law are very spongy. There are therein named arbitrary expectations without clear deduction criteria, free of parameters as a result of unclear entities, certain cyclical norms, gaps in production, estimates of potential and cyclical settlement procedures, all without binding definitions. And the number in the end will determined by technocratic procedures and legal decrees. 

Dear Linke, you should here just simply love the already existing planned economy, instead of wanting to reform it. Precisely that of course already is your vulgarized Keynesian theoretical model of a world. Simply enjoy it as long as you are still permitted to sit here and play with a national economy. 

Many thanks. 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): Nothing missed there!

 

[trans: tem]

 

Stephan Brandner, February 22, 2024, Corrupt Government

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/154, pp. 19757-19758. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

Herr Fechner, that was way past the themes on which you have spoken here. Yet you have made a gift to us of the seven minutes – a very good thing! The people outside there nevertheless need to know: It is all the same what you fill out in your order of business, you in any case do not restrain yourself when it is at the expense of the AfD. Therefore: Considerable hypocrisy, I need say to you! 

Johannes Fechner (SPD): Why then do you continually lose? Why do you continually lose before the Constitutional Court? 

As to the matter itself, – you have regrettably missed the theme; to the back of the class, Herr Fechner! – it is about old parties, crony business, nepotism, family gangs. We have already been acquainted in this legislative period with the Graichen clan in a Green ministry. Suddenly, a scandal in the FDP Transportation Ministry: There, a section leader for hydrogen has provided his relations and acquaintances with millions; 

            Tina Rudolph (SPD): Greetings to Azerbaijian!

hence, a quick stop of hydrogen projects at the Transportation Ministry. 

All of this is however no exception, ladies and gentlemen. We have the Porsche-mails, of which Herr Wissing apparently also has not heard. We have Herr Lindner and the BB Bank. All of which is very dubious. We have the Kahrs connections through which colleague Kahrs has supplied his Sozikumpel in Hamburg. We do not exactly know what’s with the Benko clan and the Federal government. We have Löbel, Tandler, Sauter, Nüsslein, CDU and CSU captains 

            Ruppert Stüwe (SPD): Yet you are the delegation with the most criminals!

all up to the collar in a corruption and donations swamp. 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): So, now on the code of conduct! On the theme!

And you present yourself here in all seriousness and act as if you want to change anything for the better! 

Ladies and gentlemen out there, you must know, regardless whether mask deals, Habeck clans, Benko, Gabriel, Lindner, Tandler, Löbel, or how they all are called, thus regardless whether SPD, FDP, Greens, CDU or CSU, 

            Tina Rudolph (SPD): Nicely excluding your own corruption scandals!

all of you – and this I say ever again from here – have looted the state, without limit. You know no boundaries so as to fill your pockets at the expense of the taxpayers out there. Your daily allowances should be enough. You have not been appointed for lobbying. Despite this, you do not trouble yourselves with what is going through the people’s minds out there, ladies and gentlemen. 

            Frauke Heiligenstadt (SPD): That is unparliamentary!

Apropos lobby contacts: Is Frau Agnes Strack-Rheinmetall here? 

            Ingo Bodtke (FDP): That is an impudence!

She likely continues to lobby. 

You cannot and do not want to halt the lobbying because all of you profit therefrom. Thus the lobby register law is nothing but a dead bird. 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): “Dead bird”! There you have long reflected!

It contains no legislative, no executive footprint, as we want, so can be verified: Where has someone somehow exercised an influence on legislation? That, all of you do not want. Representatives of interests can decline the statements on their financing. Lobbyists need not reveal for which projects and statutory purposes they are working. There are so many exceptions that the exceptions are the rule, ladies and gentlemen. 

Today, it is only about minimal alterations. You thereby want to trim that you simply slept through the original legislative process. 

            Anke Henning (SPD): How can one talk so much rubbish?

You have headlong brought into this parliament a few hours before the final vote motions to amend which you yourselves do not understand. We therefore here today need to speak in plenary session on redactive alterations. 

Johannes Fechner (SPD): That is just idiocy! Dumb thing! We do nothing in the lobby register! Nothing is changed in the lobby register!

We could have spared ourselves all of this. Had you done reasonable legislative work, as we will do it when we shortly are in the government, we would have been able to completely spare ourselves this debate point. 

Johannes Fechner (SPD): You certainly have not read it, Herr Brandner! You do not grasp the simplest points! 

Tina Rudolph (SPD): We can spare ourselves this entire democracy if you are in the government!

You have once again exposed yourselves. It is good that this could again be expressed here; I know not how long that still goes. 

Many thanks. 

            Johannes Fechner (SPD): Ja, tschüs! 

 

[trans: tem]

Bernd Baumann, January 18, 2024, Remigration and the AfD

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/147, pp. 18686-18687. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

Never before has a government driven our country up against the wall like this one – which today is again not here. The citizens suffer under exploding prices for energy and foodstuffs, as well as under a housing emergency, a heating law, kaputten bridges and roads, decaying schools. Industry flees out of the country, and millions of asylum seekers of foreign culture flow in unhindered. What a disaster! What a frightful balance, ladies and gentlemen! 

Germany shakes under the outcry of despairing farmers, truckers, tradesmen, restaurant owners. The emergency is great. The trust is gone; all surveys shows this. For example, Saxony: There, the SPD has shrunk to seven percent, 

            Stephan Brander (AfD): Still too much!

perhaps does not come again into the parliament, FDP and Greens also not. 

            Sven Lehmann (Greens): Do not celebrate too early!

And the AfD? It is well at 35 percent. We are presently five times as strong as the Chancellor’s party. So goes democracy, ladies and gentlemen! The voters punish you! The voters punish you with a primal force unique in the history of the Federal Republic. Panic spreads. One can virtually smell your fear! 

            Stephan Brander (AfD): Ja! It stinks! From the old parties’ fear! 

And what do you do about it? The higher the AfD’s polling numbers, the more maliciously you defame our party. That can again be certainly seen in this debate. You shrink from simply nothing. The level sinks to the unheard of. 

            Maya Wallenstein (SPD): It’s funny that you say that! 

            Stephan Brander (AfD): Strack-Rheinmetall!

Nothing better occurs to the FDP’s lead candidate for the European election. She designated the AfD as a dirty heap of filth, 

            Rasha Nasr (SPD): She’s right, there!

and the AfD’s over 10 million voters as dirty blow-flies – I cite: “The greater the heap of filth,” – thus the FDP lead candidate – “the more so flies sit thereon”. Pfui Teufel! 

            Stephan Brander (AfD): Nauseating!

When the voters withdraw the power from you, then they are insulted as “blow-flies”. That is your understanding of democracy. 

            Alice Weidel (AfD): An affront to the voters! 

Yet, for this arrogance, the voters will punish you at the ballot box! 

At the same time, you fundamentally falsify our political demands. An example: We demand, as ever, the return or remigration of all migrants who according to law and statute have no claim to protection. 

            Konstantin Kuhle (FDP): You learned that in Potsdam, or? 

It has to do with around 300,000 finally rejected asylum applicants and the foreigners who only temporarily have benefit of protection as civil war refugees. 

            Stephan Brander (AfD): Quite right! 

In Syria, the war is over! 

            Rasha Nasr (SPD): The war is not over! 

Thus, 600,000 Syrians need to return. Even Denmark, governed by Social Democrats, sends the Syrians home. That is the remigration which we demand. This remigration is not against law and constitution. It is the enforcement of law and constitution! We are the defenders of the state of law, and you are its opponents! 

You work here against us with the most malicious means. It has again been heard here today:  Politicians from the FDP and Union falsify our demands, particularly in regards the theme of remigration. And in the ARD’s “Tagesschau” was heard this week that under the term “remigration” the AfD understands the forced expulsion to the point of mass deportation of millions of people – 

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): That is so!

thus your speeches, thus the ARD and ZDF. What an insidious campaign of politicians and journalists of the run-down left-green class! Yet, the citizens see through you! They no longer believe your nonsense! We experience the end of an epoch. We experience now here the end of the left-green dominance in Germany, ladies and gentlemen. 

Against this decline, Habeck, Kühnert & Co. defend themselves with all means. Thus even small, private debate clubs will be inflated into secret meetings dangerous to public safety; just as recently in Potsdam, a roundtable of businessmen, freelancers, who routinely meet for an exchange of ideas. This roundtable invited guests from the Politik, four from the CDU,

Stephan Brander (AfD): Hear, hear!

four from the AfD and two from the WerteUnion. What any speaker said or did not say cannot be associated with the CDU or the AfD. How desperate need one be to invent out of this a campaign against the AfD, as you here today are attempting? 

Ladies and gentlemen, the times in which such political illusionists had all the power are over. The wind turns. For Germany, something new comes. For Germany comes the AfD – whether you want it or not. 

            Rasha Nasr (SPD): Never again! 

 

[trans: tem]

 

           

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mariana Harder-Kühnel, November 16, 2023, Islamization

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/137, pp. 17298-17299. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

Certainly in the last days has it become clear: The alleged conspiracy theory of an increasing Islamization of Germany is in fact a terrifying reality. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Such nonsense! 

The pictures of pro-Hamas demonstrations on German streets allow no other explanation: A situation over which you are now overheated, yet a situation which you have brought about. 

These demonstrations are only the current high point of a creeping Islamization of Germany which is expressed in many facets: So-called honor killings, forced marriages, yet which is also manifested in the symbolic occupation in day-cares and elementary schools by means of wearing the children’s head scarf, and in polygamy which unfortunately becomes ever more prevalent. All of this is the result of our own weakness, of a woke culture, which hates all that is one’s own and our cultural identity as well as our tradition. And this self-hate makes one susceptible: To welcome culture and to mass migration, 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Apparently you really need to hate yourself.

to children’s head scarves and to polygamy. It becomes high time to esteem one’s own, instead of sacrificing it to the foreigners. Otherwise, Germany becomes a caliphate. And we want no caliphate. We want a Germany that remains German, dear friends. 

Let us thus begin with the little ones. Let us ban the head scarf for children under 14 years in schools and day-cares. Since this head scarf for little girls is nothing other than a continual bodily and psychic disciplining. Free running, playing, swimming, etc., with it is scarcely possible. The writer Fatma Bläser, who as a child was herself forced to wear a head scarf, sees therein an “endangerment of children’s well-being”. The head scarf may become for young girls a “second skin” by which they are robbed of their freedom and childhood. It suppresses the children of today and makes them the suppressed women of tomorrow – and that may no longer be. 

And no, the children’s head scarf has nothing to do with religious freedom, since there is in Islam no religious precept for children to wear it. Until a few years ago, it was fully unusual in Islamic countries. 

The state of law is not allowed to tolerate it when little girls are thereby abused for transporting Islamist messages into our kindergartens and schools. For it is nothing other than political child abuse, what is happening here. This political child abuse needs to be forbidden; since it leads to parallel societies, it leads to the dis-integration of young girls and to the suppression of women. Such power demonstrations of political Islam have nothing to lose in Germany. 

These days, this becomes more clear than ever. The French and Austrians have long since recognized this and forbidden the head scarf in schools – in France besides, with the votes of the socialists. Let us thus defend young girls from the head scarf, and let us defend Germany from parallel societies! 

Polygamous marriages are also an expression of these parallel societies and they lead to a parallel justice. Where that leads to is shown in the many so-called honor killings. A stop to them must  be ordered. To them must be opposed law and order, and in fact our law and our order. Here, the statistical registration of polygamous marriages in Germany is required. Here, a general ban on religious early marriage is required. Here, polygamous marriages concluded in foreign countries need to be annulled. Here are required rigorous penalties for violations against the ban on bigamous marriage. 

Children’s head scarves and polygamy do not go in our country. Germany may no longer decay into a multicultural test laboratory; since it is not compatible with these imported conflicts. There must finally again 

            Vice-president Yvonne Magwas: Please come to a conclusion.

be recollected its culture and tradition. Germany must finally again be German. 

Many thanks.

  

[trans: tem]

Jörn König, November 17, 2023, Cum-Ex Tax Fraud and Olaf Scholz

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/138, pp. 17617-17618. 

Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable colleagues. Dear citizens. 

Olaf Scholz, our patron saint of every purposed lapse of memory, is indeed the chancellor with the tightest scandal entanglement in the history of the Federal Republic. We recall: There was once a firm, Wirecard, in Finance Minister Scholz’s area of responsibility – a gigantic scandal due to a lack of financial oversight. At the BaFin [Federal Finance Office], the chief and vice-chief needed to go. Its state secretary however remains untouched. In the good, old times of the Bonn Republic on the other hand, ministers resigned on account of shopping tokens. 

Gabriele Katzmarek (SPD): Yet nothing new occurs to you! The speech you have already made here a couple of times!

Yet one scandal alone is not sufficient for Olaf Scholz. He still has, ja, Cum-Ex and lately a breach of the constitution in reserve. 

            Matthais Hauer (CDU/CSU): And G 20!

With Cum-Ex, taxes could be saved, and this doubled and multiplied. On the whole arose a damage of almost 36 billion euros for the German people. That was in fact illegal, yet it functioned for years. 

As Cum-Ex finally went up in smoke, what did Olaf Scholz as First Bürgermeister do? Instead of rendering a report, he met with one of those responsible for the illegal deals, Herr Olearius of the Warburg Bank, and he has evidently lied about that. Following this meeting, Hamburg’s finance administration then decided in November 2016, in the face of the legal situation, not to demand 46 million euros in taxes back from the Warburg Bank. 

Chronologically, it went further. One year later, a Finance Minster, namely of the Union, Wolfgang Schäuble, took care that the city of Hamburg not again renounce the 46 million euros. 

Frauke Heiligenstadt (SPD): That’s all old hat! There’s nothing there. On the contrary!

The leader of Hamburg’s tax office at that time was sent into early retirement, after Olaf Scholz became Finance Minister in Berlin. 

            Michael Schrodi (SPD): The AfD’s lies are long since overhauled! 

            Matthais Hauer (CDU/CSU): The SPD becomes quite nervous! 

            Götz Frömming (AfD): The truth hurts!

At the end of 2020, the bank finally paid back to the fiscal authority the demanded millions from the Cum-Ex business, plus interest. The Hamburg SPD is deeply entangled. Alone in 2017, at least four donations of the Warburg Bank or subsidiaries to the Hamburg SPD. Later, 215,000 euros in cash were found in a safe deposit of SPD comrade Johannes Kahrs. Nothing has to do with nothing. 

            Beatrix von Storch (AfD): That’s the facts!

Since October 2020, an investigative committee finally pursues the Cum-Ex affair, first in Hamburg, then in Berlin. The state attorneys investigate many persons on account of suspicion of favoritism. In that regard in April 2021, the investigators noticed that there were e-mails which include for consideration effacements of data. There is the suspicion that in Olaf Scholz’s calendar from his time as Hamburg Bürgermeister information is lacking or was even effaced. 

The former member of the Bundestag Fabio De Masi could even later in August 2023 demonstrate that. 

In April 2023 the Union in the Bundestag, thus here, moved for a parliamentary investigating committee. A vote in plenary session was prevented by quite shabby procedural tricks. 

            Frauke Heiligenstadt (SPD): Ja?

Since probably the required 25 percent was quite surely present. 

Gabriele Katzmarek (SPD): The only ones who here always seek to                         trick are you! Only, it doesn’t work out for you!

In July 2023, the lead state attorney in Cologne, Joachim Roth, placed himself in quasi retirement so as to forestall a dismissal. Were the investigations somehow too good? Four months later, in November 2023, this man is suddenly dead. 

            Jens Zimmermann (SPD): Ey, Leute!

In any case, in November 2023, laptops learn to run. Steffan Jänke, the SPD’s chief investigator, was submitted to the security testing of Hamburg’s Constitution Defense. He was nevertheless made chief investigator by the Hamburg SPD. This man takes into possession evidence laptops and presumably makes evidence on the side; notably from a safe. 

Frauke Heiligenstadt (SPD): He does not take into his possession! He is straightforward and impressively qualified!

To say it in the exactly suitable words of Olaf Scholz of a year ago in this place – he himself will have already again forgotten these words: Who believes that Olaf Scholz has nothing to do with all of this, he also believes in talking white rabbits. Welcome to Alice in Wonderland! Welcome to the Wonderland of the SPD where reality stands on its head! 

Herr Scholz, what will your legacy be? You lead a coalition of breach of the constitution, you demonstrably lie, you are involved in illegal machinations, and you have lost the trust of the citizens. Resign! Lord God, what needs to happen so that you finally take responsibility? 

            Norbert Kleinwächter (AfD): Herr Scholz is set in concrete in his                                         Chancellor’s chair! 

 

[trans: tem]

Peter Boehringer, November 28, 2023, Budget Crisis

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/139, pp. 17659-17660. 

Frau President. 

We experience historic weeks. Years of law-breaking and false decisions culminate in a budget crisis behind which is hid a crisis of government and also one of reason. The Chancellor’s conclusions from a compelling decision of the Constitutional Court are deviant and illogical. The government cannot in 2023 retroactively assert the continuation of an uncontrollable emergency situation which in 2022 itself had declared to be ended. That doesn’t go.   

It might have been strained as to whether this time it would be based on an energy emergency, or a foreign war, or a newly inflamed Corona rage, or the immediately impending over-heating of the Earth, – we have heard even that from Herr Kindler – or like a storm flood of the previous week in Schleswig-Holstein, it needed to be held out as an emergency basis for 2024. Yesterday evening came the solution: The war of February 2022 and even the Ahrtal flood of 2021 are the culprits for the emergency of 2023. All of this you discover directly after the decision and quite suddenly in November 2023, retroactive to January. At which embarrassing level should we here still be deceived? 

To expect a vote in favor of this reasoning in the Bundestag will similarly be the next breach of the constitution. Neither in 2023 nor 2024 arises an emergency situation in the sense of Article 115 of the Basic Law. One breach of the constitution is not healed by another, Herr Chancellor. And your demonstrative exit from the hall at this sentence in my speech therein alters nothing at all. 

You decided on, – you still adhere to it – in one of your first acts in office as Chancellor together with the new Finance Minister Lindner, the absurd 2021 supplementary budget in January 2022 and therein also the quite clearly unconstitutional accounting system. The special funds’ illegal credits of many billions should be the cash box for the implementation of the red-green goals altering society. The entire policy of the CO₂ hysteria energy guidelines, the mass immigration, the woke transformation of society, the hostility to industry, the Corona lockdowns costing billions, and gifts of weapons to foreign countries, would not have been thinkable without this money. 

Unfortunately, the Constitutional Court has withdrawn from you the financial operations basis just now, dozens of billions too late. For four years already, Germany is governed by financial emergency. There is a whiff of Weimar; from 1930, there was emergency government, mostly supported by emergency decrees. Since 2020, by the Groko and by the Ampel were generally declared “emergency situations”. In this way is the debt brake shredded, the Basic Law circumvented – the people need to know this! 

The Greens chief Ricarda Lang even demands the permanent suspension of the constitutional debt brake. Herr Mützenich has also plainly more than implied it. It is desired to declare a permanent emergency. “We will also need to discuss the suspension for next year, that is a debate which now…is next”, said Frau Lang. The Ampel stands before political, moral and financial bankruptcy. 

The country can be governed according to the constitution only with a fundamental change of course. The self-named democratic middle – the oh so democratic middle! – has with at least three budgets governed beyond the constitution. And the SPD delegation chief here in this place has a few minutes ago designated the Basic Law as a monstrance, as an embarrassing relic! Shame on you, Herr Mützenich! Where is the Constitution Defense when it is needed? Where is it? These are attacks on the free democratic basic order, here from this podium! 

One cannot be permanently pressured by a crisis. The decades-long, lies-of-a-lifetime policy of all the old parties cannot be compensated by debts and tax money. I here in this place in the Bundestag said exactly so at the proclamation of the first emergency situation in March 2020. It still does not go. 

Herr Scholz, from the beginning, your uncovered, deliberately illegal checks have even worsened the German misery. Had this money not been expended, Germany today would be not only financially but generally better, because then a mass of social-political nonsense would not have been able to be financed. And all of you have participated since the Kohl’schen checkbook times! 

The AfD is ready to clear away this debris, yet only when you put away the false decisions and make free the way for a new beginning, for finally a once more rational-, national-led  government. Then, despite the horrendous damages resulting from eight years of borders given up and billions of interest-bearing indebtedness which will burden the budget until 2070, 

            Vice-president Yvonne Magwas: Please come to a conclusion.

exists the opportunity for a rescue of Germany. – My last sentence. – Yet initially required is your exit as a purifying catharsis which, yes as in classical tragedy, is the prerequisite for a healing. 

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Martin Hess, November 9, 2023, Islamism in Germany

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/134, pp. 16873-16874. 

Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

Political Islam in Germany posits the power question – and the Ampel coalition gives the wrong answer. That violent and aggressive Islamist groups in the last weeks move through our streets is a disgrace for our state of law and again proves that this Ampel coalition needs to be terminated as quickly as possible in the interest of our security. 

Yet also the CDU, which,  ja, governs in some of the Federal states, reveals, in a way shameful for our state of law, its incompetence in regards the fight against violent and anti-semitic Islamists. Its Minister-president in Nordrein-Westfalen, Herr Wust, pretentiously announced Islamist marches will no longer be permitted in the future, and not four weeks later Islamist enemies of the state in Essen and Düsseldorf have shown what is contained in the words of a CDU Minister-president; namely, simply nothing. They freely moved about, utterly unrestricted and thus is confirmed: The CDU is demonstrably not in the position to provide security in Germany. 

And when all others fail in regards defense of our democracy and our citizens, no way leads past the AfD. Since we are the only ones with the unconditional will to fight with all rigor political Islam. There can be credible defense of our society and our democracy only with the AfD. Especially the failures of the Ampel government are primarily founded on a fully failed security policy focusing on rightist extremism. Yet every citizen in this country with his own eyes sees in the last weeks what is in fact the security problem in our country; namely, as a result of your destructive migration policy, an Islamism becoming ever stronger in our country, which becomes ever more radical, ever more brutal and shows its true disposition hostile to the state, in which, as happened in Essen, it demands the struggle of all Moslems against the rest of the world and the proclamation of a califate. 

In the face of this massive danger for us all, the AfD as always has a clear standpoint which today is more important than ever. There must now be an end to your appeasement of political Islam. We must make clear, once and for all, to these enemies of the state who is master in the house [wer Herr in Haus ist]. And if you are not in a position to do that, then make room for those who can! The AfD stands ready. 

We must now finally posit a clear sign of strength. We must prove that our state is strong [wehrhaft]. I say to you how Islamist deployments are to be dealt with, which want to demonstrate Islamist power in our state and thereby commit massive punishable offenses: These are to be immediately terminated, the participants arrested and deported without delay. This besides applies to all Islamist hate preachers and those posing a danger. Our country, our rules! And who does not adhere to that, he has nothing to seek here. Where deportations are not possible, there the justice has to issue hard verdicts. Probationary sentences here do not suffice. Such people need to be in custody. 

And your false naturalization policy needs to be immediately corrected. From Islamists who still possess additional citizenship besides ours, the German is to be withdrawn without if and but. And for that, care is to be taken that in the future not one, single Islamist more receives German citizenship. 

Of course we also need to effectively prevent that Islamists continue to stream in great number into our country. For that, effective border protection which sends back all illegal entrants at the border, as demanded by the AfD since 2015, must finally be implemented. 

If we do not now act, political Islam will ever further spread in our country. Political Islam does not belong to Germany. In the interest of our children, we cannot and may not permit that. Therefore also any cooperation and any state promotion of Islam associations which represent, promote or support this ideology is to be immediately stopped and foreign financing is to be thwarted. When the state courts and finances it own enemies, it naturally not only makes itself ridiculous, but it also endangers and damages our democracy. 

            Till Steffen (Greens): Of that, we speak tomorrow in regards                                                    foundation financing! 

And please do not continually come to me with that the demands of the AfD would not be legally realizable. I can no longer listen to this thesis. Politicians are here so to create the legal groundwork required for the solution of a problem. In that you continually refuse this, your duty, you act as gravediggers of our state of law. For exactly that reason, the security of Germany is no longer to be left to you. 

 

[trans: tem]

Peter Boehringer, November 16, 2023, Budget

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/137, pp. 17323-17324. 

Frau President. 

The Federal Constitutional Court has announced a decision not surprising to us. The first of all Ampel budget, that is of 2021-2022, was declared unconstitutional and, what is more, null. I refer to our resolution motion of that time, Drucksache 20/488, and the 60 billion euro additional debt put through by you in 2022 in a 2021 supplementary budget law. There, we foretold not only the decision, but almost exactly the three-part grounds of Karlsruhe, 

            Beatrix von Storch (AfD): Here, here!

not because we had had a crystal ball or excellent jurists, but because the legal situation was then already fully clear. We formulated in a motion then, word for word, the law “trespasses in direct, obvious ways against central, constitutionally anchored fundamentals of the budget law”. 

            Beatrix von Storch (AfD): Oh!

One thus actually can only declare with frank intent that the Ampel government, practically with its first act in office, simply and completely disregarded provisions of the Basic Law. 

The Ampel in 2022 wanted to unconditionally take up the 60 billion euros in a still possible 2021 supplementary credit, even though the year 2021 was already past and even though the expenditures based on a CO₂ ideology had not the least causal relation with Corona. 

It further is very positive that with the decision will now finally be brought to an end an accounting system of debts in special funds outside the debt brake, recognized by us as unconstitutional since its introduction. Herr Post, it is far beyond the 60 billion euros. 

The Finance Minister also now apparently acknowledges this. Yesterday evening, Herr Lindner said in the Budget Committee that the decision re-evaluates state practice. Well, actually not, Herr Lindner. It puts back on a legal footing the illegal state practice exercised by all of you of the old parties, inclusive of the CDU, since 2021. 

Read without reserve here the entire decision. The trick, used by all of you, of the multi-year formation of reserves for use at the pump after the official end of an emergency situation was in retrospect generally unconstitutional, thereby among others the 170 billion euros in credit-financed reserve supply for the WSF [Economic Stability Fund] in fiscal year 2022, and also besides the 26 billion euro formation of reserves in the EKF by the CDU-led government in a 2020 supplementary budget. 

            Beatrix von Storch (AfD): Oops!

Allow me to cite the strong words of a colleague directed then on July 2, 2020 to Finance Minister Scholz: 

“Today you present a second supplementary budget…it violates the Basic Law…the second supplementary budget encroaches upon essential constitutional principles like per annum…truth and clarity…I do not understand why one can make a career in the SPD in Germany only if one presents unconstitutional budgets…” 

He further said: 

I do not understand “why the CDU/CSU Bundestag delegation here becomes the assistants aide of a possible breach of the constitution. I hold that to be a gigantic failure, Herr Rehberg.” 

In parentheses: CDU. End citation. 

That was then exactly so represented by me and in the AfD motions. The citation however stems from today’s FDP delegation chief, Christian Dürr. It’s nice that you have found us! Unfortunately, the FDP in the Ampel immediately forgot its knowledge of that time, Herr Dürr. 

            Beatrix von Storch (AfD): Really quite embarrassing!

The 2024 budget put forward, due to the accounting practice used therein, will from the day of its issuance be constitutionally assailable. I thus ask you all: How long shall continue the abuse of such special funds with booked credits, not legal as measured by Article 115 of the Basic Law? How long do you want to drag this out? Already, it runs for years. 

In the climate and transformation fund, the decision – which is legally uncontested – mathematically and legally leads to that for your most important shadow budget the money will run out already in 2024. My delegation for certain, honestly said, does not find that so tragic, since it deals with almost only ideologically-based misappropriations. Following this decision, the currently presented Ampel budget cannot however now be passed as put forward. 

We demand, as already for long, the almost complete cancellation of all KTF [climate and transformation fund] titles, and we demand a new edition of the 2024 budget process under an accounting for the special funds credits and within the debt brake. 

In a government focused on Germany, no taxes for years would need be increased and – without failed euro rescue, Corona, energy and social ideologies – also no illegal debts be made. Finally make non-ideological policy conforming to the law for the national welfare of Germany! 

Hearty thanks. 

            Gabriele Katzmarek (SPD): Congratulations on your ideological speech!                                Mein Gott! 

 

[trans: tem]

Stephan Brandner, October 19, 2023, Migrant Trafficking

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/131, pp. 16391-16392. 

Herr President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

You, Herr President, have correctly read the theme of this point of the daily order. It is not called “private rescue at sea”, but is directed against traffickers [Schlepper] and smugglers [Schleuser]. Eduard Zimmerman – who one or another still know – created the television series “Aktenzeichen XY…ungelöst” and “mal ranVorsicht, Falle!” and there warned of swindlers, traffickers and confidence men. This we of the AfD also do in regards to you of the old parties 

            Ulrich Lechte (FDP): Nazi speech!

and indeed nearly every day and rightly so. Yet not only you yourselves are those, but you even still support traffickers and smugglers in the Mediterranean. As it is only about Germany, so it is only about you of the old parties. And is actually what must be immediately halted and stopped. 

            Clara Bünger (Linke): Lies! Lies!

A few days ago, on October 13, a ship by the name of Sea-Eye 4 departed so as to bring still more refugees to Germany. It is the first time that the taxpayer financially supports quite official smuggling activities and smuggling and human trafficking in the Mediterranean, embellished and camouflaged under the name of “private rescue at sea”. 

A dubious mesh of criminal associations in Germany, state and non-state organizations, churches, associations and so-called rescue ships shall in the coming four years receive eight million euros which the Federal government of Greens, Yellows and Reds has let loose. In the midst of this mesh is an association with the name of “United 4 Rescue” of which the founder and director is a Herr Thies Gundlach and who furthermore is by chance the life partner of the Green Vice-president of the German Bundestag, Göring-Eckhardt. Ladies and gentlemen, that stinks, that stinks bad, and is an additional prime example of how Green sleeze functions in Germany. Here, we think of Habeck and Graichen; we not only think thereof but therefrom draw parallels, an additional example of which is besides that the Greens and the other old parties have looted the state and distribute this loot among one another without restraint. That German tax money will be used to finance smugglers and human traffickers in the Mediterranean, and to thereby further incite this dangerous business in the millions, is to be justified by nothing but simply nothing.   

In that regard, for us of the AfD it is fully beyond question that people who are in an emergency at sea of course need to be saved; you do not believe it, but it is in fact so. 

            Dunja Kreiser (SPD): Nay, we really do not believe it.

A true rescue at sea however means a shipwreck and to save people found to be in an acute emergency at sea, and to bring them to the nearest safe harbor. 

            Julian Pahlke (Greens): Right. Ten points.

It does not mean to ship people hundreds of kilometers across the Mediterranean to a previously made meeting point where the fully overloaded so-called rescue boats, intentionally brought to an emergency at sea, will be overhauled by the rescue ships. That is an abuse of the rescue at sea. That has nothing at all to do with rescue at sea. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Your descriptions have nothing to do with it!

We can authenticate that there are radio conversations to meet off the coast of North Africa, and then the refugees will be transferred. 

            Clara Bünger (Linke): Lies! Lies! 

They will then make for Italy, for the most part illegally, and from there they are quite quickly in Germany and become a component of the asylum industry in the billions in Germany which in our view is in broad parts actually nothing other than organized criminality to the burden of the taxpayers who need to cope with hundreds of billions in costs by the migration into Germany, the society of which all of you of the old parties are destroying. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): That is inhuman, what you say here!

We of the Alternative für Deutschland strongly stand for: The criminal smuggling business needs to be dried out. German state attorneys need to engage with the activists, with the actions, with actors of these so-called NGOs in Germany and ascertain whether not, for example, assistance for human trafficking is a question of a punishable offense.   

Here, the German state attorneys need to have a go, need to be encouraged to look for once at the whole under the aspect of German criminal law.

Ladies and gentlemen, if you do not want to continue to make of the Mediterranean a mass grave for people, follow our motions [Drucksachen 20/8872, 8873]. We stop the migration across the Mediterranean, thereby save many lives, and also the German society. 

 

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Wolfgang Wiehle, September 21, 2023, Railways Administration

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/122, pp. 15143-15144. 

Right honorable Frau President. Valued colleagues. 

There are almost 200 ways how the Bund finances the Bahn. That was computed for us in the last months. I have understood that as a warning, that this complexity is a problem. A good Bahn reform should drastically simplify that. And now the government lays on the table before us a law which makes of these 200 ways probably 250 or 300. If you want to demonstrate that you cannot do Bahn reform, then you have thereby really succeeded. 

Yes, all of that will be later improved, you will say. Yet on a bad foundation you can build no good house and this fatal failure you clearly make again – colleague Donth just now used the same image. The analysis thus needs to agree. Decisive for an effective and transparent direction of the Bahn is the legal form of the Bahn undertakings. The new infrastructure company shall now again be a joint-stock company. That is a legacy from the time of the Bahn stock market plan, and that is the worst of all possibilities for control by the owners. 

Today the Federal railways construction law is on the daily order. By means of this law, the Bahn shall in the future receive money not only for the construction of the Bahn sections but also for their maintenance and repair. Yet that does not always apply, but only when there is an extra contract between Bund and Bahn. Otherwise, you apparently do not manage control of the Bahn. If you now make a new contract for each new measure, then we are soon at 300 ways of financing. 

The Audit Authority moreover sounds the alarm because the Transportation Ministry in another contract proposes hectic changes which could result in a disadvantage to the Bund. Here, it is about the performance and financing agreement which with an authentic Bahn reform will necessarily be, plain and simply, superfluous. 

A couple of new Bahn billions in the Transportation budget, then still a couple of billions from the shadow budget “climate and transformation fund”, additional billions as equity of the Deutschen Bahn: What you tie up here crowns the financial chaos. 

Because the money still does not suffice, you get it from the citizens, all the same whether the trains run or not. Yes, from the citizens; since we all must pay for the billions of your brutal increase of the trucking fee. Everything that we buy in the supermarket ultimately comes by truck. 

            Matthais Gastel (Greens): What?

One already reads in the media how thereby the prices of foodstuffs climb. The inflation will be still higher and the citizens still poorer. 

We require an authentic Bahn reform and that is something other than your bungled job. Who does it fundamentally, gives the Bahn and its subsidiaries a new legal form. Yet you need to enforce it against the great red union at the Bahn. The Bund as owner needs to take in hand the direction of the railway networks. The Politik is responsible for the infrastructure. Period. And for that, the Bund needs to clearly command the firms’ rail network, not by umpteen contracts, but by one, unequivocal structure. 

The Federal railways construction law now goes to committee. The AfD delegation clearly names the problem. Because the wrangling in the Ampel is not less than the chaos at the Bahn, hopes for an improvement are however limited. We will in no case vote for your adventurous cobbling [abenteuerlichen Flickschusterei] as it now stands in the draft law.

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

Kay Gottschalk, July 11, 2023, Cum-Ex

AfD Kompakt, July 11, 2023. 

The transparent and comprehensive investigation of the Wirecard scandal is of great importance. Nevertheless, this presents merely a drop on the hot stone in relation to the explosive tax scandal of 2020. Since the citizens’ trust in the state of law is shaken to the limit and not only due to the latest scandals of the so-called “progressive coalition” of SPD, FDP and Greens. What is more, investigating committees were rejected for the clarification of the attacks on “Nordstream” as well as the Cum-Ex scandals. A motion for the appointment of a “Cum-Ex” investigating committee will again be brought in and decided, presumably in the middle of September. The Ampel’s postponement is the to highest degree alarming, since an appointment before the summer pause would have led to that already possible evidentiary motions are able to be presented so as to summon possible witnesses in September. Investigating committees are the sharpest “sword of the Opposition” and are not allowed to be blunted so as to perhaps destroy possible evidence. 

 

[trans: tem]

Beatrix von Storch, July 6, 2023, Assisted Suicide

German Bundestag, July 6, 2023, Plenarprotokoll 20/115, pp. 14083-14084. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

The Federal Constitutional Court in 2020 declared the ban on commercial promotion [geschäftsmäßigen Förderung] of self-killing to be null. Pandora’s Box was thereby opened. 

To declare suicide to be an act of personal autonomy leads us, in my firm conviction, to a terrible and deadly path. The Netherlands have gone before us in this way. The result is devastating: In 2021, 7,666 deaths by assisted suicide, and in that regard overwhelmingly by means of killing on demand [Tötung auf Verlangen]. That is 4.5 percent of all deaths there, 10 percent more than in the previous year, ten times more than traffic deaths. Calculated for Germany, that would be 34,000, three times more than presently. 

When the assisted suicide law was decided on in the Netherlands, it was about extreme cases in which people were severely ill, without a perspective of survival. Now it is not only about incurable illness, it is ever more about physically healthy people who still have a long life ahead of them who actually need and seek assistance. 

Kingston University made a study in the Netherlands. There, people with mental handicap and autism are legally killed. The study uncovered 39 such cases from 2012 to 2021 by means of a random sample of 900 from 60,000 cases. If that is calculated for Germany, then that would be 11,500 people in Germany, mentally handicapped and autistic, who would have been killed. A particularly tragic example from the study: A young man in his 20s who named the reason for his death wish: Social isolation. He wanted to die because he was lonely. 

The circle of those affected thereby becomes almost limitless. In surveys of socio-economic panels, 42 percent of Germans declare that they feel lonely. The Dutch psychiatrist Dr. Bram Sizzo explains the motivation of people seeking assistance for suicide. I cite: 

They believe this will be the end of their problems and the end of the problems of their families.

That means, they take their own lives because they do not want to be a burden on their families. That is terrifying. 

The draft laws put forward emphasize that the suicide should result from one’s own accord as an autonomous decision. They thus see entirely the danger that people take their own life under social pressure. I do not believe that they will prevent that; not one of the drafts. Against social pressure helps no double consultation obligation and no remark on a consultation document. Precisely in times of crisis, the pressure grows on the old and sick – not only on them, but on them especially – to be a burden on no one. We will have very many old and sick without families and very many more crises. 

The Chancellor has spoken for more respect. The reality appears otherwise. A frequent headline in the spring was “Housing Emergency in Germany: Pensioners Live Too Grandly”. Regensburg University has proposed forcing the pensioners into smaller residences by increasing the rental prices, and in Berlin the Berlin Church Institute has shown the door to 110 seniors. 

And added to that: The entire infrastructure of supervision, counseling and care of the old, the sick and those needing assistance, and of physically and mentally ill people, finds itself in an existential crisis. Care homes in great numbers are going insolvent. In Hesse, 25 percent closed this year. 60 percent of hospitals are in a business imbalance; many will close. The local provision for old and ill people is already bad and is becoming much worse. The emergency is growing. The average wait time for a therapy place for people in psychological distress amounts to five months. What will be the consequences if, in view of the crisis in care and health provision, it will be simpler to receive a nearby, open-ended [ergebnisoffene] suicide consultation than a care or therapy place? Before we strengthen the suicide prevention, you want to be concerned with open-ended suicide consultation. 

These are not my values. We should live our lives in freedom and responsibility before God. The beginning and end of life lie alone in the Hand of God. In that, I believe. 

Many thanks.

  

[trans: tem]

 

 

Christian Wirth, June 22, 2023, Domestic Terrorism and Surveillance

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/112, pp. 13757-13758. 

Frau President. Valued colleagues. 

Herr Grötsch, I really almost thought I would be obliged to thank you as you had begun to say what is important: All here in house are against any kind of terrorism. I owed it to you. Unfortunately, you again disappoint in this narrative: Most of the danger proceeds from the right. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Yet that is no narrative! 

            Uli Grötsch (SPD): It is proved! For years!

I want to tell you one example. In the year 2022, in the area of phenomena of “right extremism, right terrorism” – in any case, too much – 19 proceedings were initiated by the Federal Prosecutor General, in the area of phenomena of “left extremism, left terrorism” one proceeding, and in the area of phenomena of “Islamic-motivated extremism/terrorism” all of 236 proceedings. 

Matthias W. Birkwald (Linke): It does not depend on proceedings! It depends on verdicts!

This standard picture, “most of the danger proceeds from the right” – you thereby certainly do not mean terrorism – is a narrative the propagation of which has two reasons. 

One thing is quite clear; that, with these billions against the right, NGOs shall be fed which have, for example, been paid for having meanwhile flown in 52,000 for the 250 Afghanistan local auxiliaries as reported by you. 

For another, Herr Haldenwang yesterday has confirmed, as he stated on public television: The Constitution Defense is not alone responsible for reducing the AfD’s polling numbers. That is a quite clear sign that not just in this legislative period under you, in the SPD’s Interior Ministry, but already in the CDU’s Interior Ministry, an order has been given to the Constitution Defense, to clear away a politically disagreeable opponent – and nothing else other. Yet this will have its consequences. 

            Alexander Hoffmann (CDU/CSU): Ever the same story!

We have already spoken of diverse cases. In the case of Castrop-Rauxel, Syrians seeking protection have attempted to carry out an attack with Rizin. According to careful estimates, some 30,000 to 40,000 dead and injured were to be tallied. We already previously had such a case with a Syrian in Nordrhein-Westfalen. Those are real dangers, which gives one to think, if one does think, how many victims of Islamism there have been in Europe in the last years. Those are the dangers with which we need to deal. 

These dangers unfortunately are often imported. We have for 2022 registered 530 persons posing a danger in the area of phenomena of “religious ideology”, and an additional 503 as so-called relevant persons. 317 of those posing a danger remain in Germany, and 448 of the relevant persons. 132 of those posing a danger do not possess German citizenship. It needs be said: They still do not possess it. Of the relevant persons, 171 are foreign citizens. Almost half of those 132 posing a danger in the area of phenomena of “religious ideology” with a foreign citizenship are Syrians; 62, so as to say exactly. Deported in the first three quarters of 2022 were 17 persons from the Islamic spectrum of whom five were those posing a danger. Merely five of 132 of those posing a danger were deported. This cannot continue. 

We have just peeked at the situation. I will not now return to the mass attacks in the swimming pools. Yet we see it in Nordrhein-Westfalen, in Castrop-Rauxel, Essen, Cologne: What is happening there? Turks, Lebanese and Syrians give themselves over to a war, a gang war, a clan war, on German streets. With up to 500 participants. These Syrians have well integrated themselves. They learn from the Lebanese that here one can carry out his power politics on German streets. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Auweia!

Law we give them in the area “Precaution, security custody, preventive detention”. 

A quite important theme which should concern us all is of course the online search and sources of telecommunications surveillance. Actually, the Ampel coalition had announced to quickly deal with these themes, just as the Greens and the FDP had asserted in the last legislative period that, following the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court, they had found the stone of the wise. This is indeed not so. 

            Vice-president Yvonne Magwas: Please come to a conclusion.

The new speed limit in Germany is indeed to be measured by the freight bicycle, with one forward movement and four backwards. Here we need to quite quickly act. We owe it to the victims, the potential victims and certainly to the victims of child abuse. 

            Vice-president Yvonne Magwas: Last sentence Herr Dr. Wirth, please. 

Many thanks.

  

[trans: tem]

           

 

 

 

Peter Boehringer, June 21, 2023, Debt Brake

AfD Kompakt, June 21, 2023.

The proceeding in Karlsruhe for the 2021 second supplementary budget is of utmost importance for the future of the debt brake. The Constitutional Court has in hand the presumably last chance to save the debt brake, after this in the last years was systematically circumvented. Especially the trick of parking credit authorizations in reserve in whichever special fund presents a striking violation against the per annum principle and leads to that the debt brake idles throughout the year. The Court is requested to end this practice. The Federal government at this point in time should not budget this 60 billion.

And if the AfD delegation does substantially support the Union’s complaint for the 2021 second supplementary budget, the degree of hypocrisy which the Union manifests in this connection is not to be overlooked. The formation of credit-financed reserves and the alienation of Corona emergency funds obviously violate fundamental, normative fiscal principles, yet the Union-led coalition took in hand exactly these same maneuvers for the 2020 second supplementary budget as well as in the 2021 budget. At that time, the AfD delegation, as the only delegation, attempted to stop these proceedings by means of a normative control procedure (Drucksachen 19/22926, 19/26549). At the time, no Member of the other delegations wanted to join in these motions. It remains to hope that the Union’s intercession for the debt brake also still has standing if it ever again should arrive at responsibility for the government.  

[trans: tem]