Beatrix von Storch, October 29, 2020, Corona and Democracy

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/186, p. 23382.

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable colleagues.

Democracy and parliamentary government in Germany are in a deep crisis – not just since Corona – and the crisis has a name: Angela Merkel. In the euro crisis, she loaded trillions in charges onto the citizens – in violation of the European treaties. In the asylum and migration crisis, she allowed millions of illegals into the country – in violation of the Basic Law and without parliament. And since Corona, she practically governs with an emergency regime together with the Minister-presidents, the pestilence regime. She kills public life – without debate,

            Carsten Schneider (SPD-Erfurt): Then just what are we doing here?

without scientific basis and again without parliament.

The FDP’s criticism of that is correct, yet it naturally comes entirely too late. On March 23, Frau Aschenberg-Dugnus had already moved that of which you are speaking,

            Konstantin Kuhle (FDP): Nonsense!

namely, to limit the term of the extraordinary emergency situation to one month and then re-evaluate it after one month – Drucksache 19/18159, Herr Kuhle, look it up. The FDP rejected that. On April 21, we moved to examine weekly the adopted preventative measures and for the  Bundestag’s participation therein in suitable ways – Drucksache 19/18738. The FDP rejected that. And on June 30, we presented a motion entitled “Deep Intervention in the Basic Rights Requires Parliamentary Control”. And the FDP rejected that.

Now then, the members of the German Bundestag were presented with faits accomplis; that today was criticized multiple times – we learned of all that, the complete Merkel lockdown, from the news services. That is not disregard of parliament, that is contempt of parliament. The fate of millions of employees, of hundreds of thousands of businesses and the stability of the German economy are not to be left to the random discussions of a video conference or to the vanities of Herren Söder, Laschet and Ramelow. The result then of video democracy is pure arbitrariness: The new preventative measures themselves are plainly absurd when in regards the factual epidemiological danger; and that also was said multiple times today.  

If anyone has observed the distancing regulations, etc., it was the restaurant trade. And what do you do? You close the restaurant establishments – 1.8 million employees, 65 billion euro turnover – and that, even though the RKI [Robert Koch Institute] – the holy RKI – as we read, has expressly stated: They are not centers of infection. – The canteens remain open, yet the restaurants shall close. Really now?

And to meet my neighbor, now I must take the subway; since I may not see her at home. Day-cares and schools were not closed; das ist gut. Yet then why the lodging ban? Where does a virus prefer to circulate, in a classroom, or in a hotel room, or in vacation house? Tourism: 3 million employees, 290 billion euro turnover.

Do you on the government bench actually know what you are doing, or is it all the same to you?

            Alexander Gauland (AfD): Nay, they know nothing of that!

You have no scientific basis for that which you are doing. For that very reason, what you are doing is arbitrary, and the arbitrariness is illegal, and the illegal begets rage.

            Karin Maag (CDU/CSU): Do you actually listen to the experts on occasion?

I say to the millions of employees alone in tourism and the restaurant trade whose workplaces are threatened and to the businessmen who stand before ruin and the end: Remember next September which party has done this to you. If you want an end to this mischief, then support the AfD. That is the only language this government understands.  

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bernd Baumann, October 30, 2020, France and Islamism

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/187, pp. 23648-23649.

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen.

France is burning, primarily the Christian: In one year, 874 churches go up in flames or were laid waste, among which are cathedrals almost one thousand years old. Worse yet: Hundreds of French were massacred. Two weeks ago, an Islamist zealot cut off the head of the teacher Samuel Paty, in the public street, in broad daylight, while still living. Why? Ladies and gentlemen, Samuel Paty, this upright middle-school teacher from the small town of Moulins in the Auvergne, had a goal: He wished to educate his children to be a free people, to be citizens of the proud Republic of France; therefore, he must be bestially destroyed. He had shown his students caricatures of Mohammed so as to teach them the great good of freedom of opinion. Ladies and gentlemen, Samuel Paty embodied the best of our culture, the belief in the cultivation of a free people. For that he risked his life and for that he gave his life. We bow before the courage of this man.

And the situation worsens daily. Just yesterday, Islamic perpetrators cut off the head of an old woman in the midst of the cathedral in Nice. All France is falling into a crisis of identity. Throughout the country, there is naked angst; for the problem extends much, much deeper. In ever more cities and regions, opposing societies grow, frankly proliferate. Ever greater portions uncouple themselves from French society – they despise the free state, they spit on Western values, orient themselves on Oriental behavior and models. In France, within the French burns the deep angst for the loss of their way of life, their tradition, their identity, their chez nous. As patriots, they wish to defend their home and they are entirely right.

President Macron, himself a pupil of the left-green Zeitgeist, must suddenly acknowledge the colors and show his French a realistic general plan. He now speaks of a “contre-société”, of a contra-society with a – verbatim – Islamic separatism which grows ever further in the midst of France. It has, per Macron verbatim: The final goal of assuming control, and indeed completely. The old France was frankly broke, ruled by a – listen up! – cultural insecurity; for France was paralyzed by a form of self-hatred, stirred up before the background of its colonial past.

President Macron now demands a reconquest; that is, a kind of Reconquista. He demands of the French, verbatim: We must reconquer everything. And he demands “une mobilisation de toute la nation”, a mobilization of the entire nation. The AfD does not say that; France’s state President Emmanuel Macron says that.

                Franziska Brantner (Greens): You are taking the citation out of context. That is                        underhanded [unterirdisch]!

With us in Germany, however, would such a speech be placed under observation by the Constitution Defense, it would never appear on the ARD or ZDF talk shows, and it remains to be excluded from the Evangelical Church Assembly.

               Franziska Brantner (Greens): You take the citation out of context, as it suits                          you, Herr Baumann!

These are the problems, which I have named, long since colossal in the whole of Europe. Therefore, we ought no longer trivialize [verharmlosend sprechen] parallel societies; it is much more authentic contra-societies which arise here and further grow. They long since grow prolifically in all the Western countries, whether Great Britain, Belgium, Germany or the Netherlands. In Sweden and Denmark, even the Social Democrats have caught on to that, ladies and gentlemen.

And in Sweden, the conflict is escalating. In the U.S.A., the conflict escalates much worse, contra-societies are forming between blacks, whites, latinos. Militias and gangs arm themselves with weapons of war. A little spark suffices, and immediately entire city sections burn and are plundered.

            Konstantin von Notz (Greens): What does Islam have to do with that?

What Macron openly addresses is no longer a fight for France or for Germany or for the U.S.A. Ladies and gentlemen, it is a fight over the fate of all of Western civilization which is playing out before our eyes.

The future therefore does not belong to left-green ideologies which are blind to the distinction of cultures, which look away, which cry “no borders” and “one world”. The future belongs not to the globalists. The future belongs to the patriots!

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gottfried Curio, October 30, 2020, France and Islamism

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/187, p. 23642. 

Right honorable President. Ladies and gentlemen.

A teacher is beheaded because he teaches freedom of opinion. France is shocked, Macron wishes to act. Yet, as indicated by the new attack on praying Christians at a church in Nice: He arrives too late, the terrorists are long since in the country. This murderer arrived in Italy as an illegal refugee. Under Salvini, the victim would still be living. Allowing illegal migration kills.

And now France finally acts. There are raids against Islamists, deportations of those posing a threat, closing of radical mosques. It is acknowledged that for far too long has been neglected how parallel societies drift apart, how fundamentalists overtake entire quarters. One study says 75 percent of European Moslems regard the Koran as “to be taken literally”. Macron now wants to mobilize thousands of soldiers in the country around churches and schools – a cautionary example. Let us not allow it to go so far.

And what does Germany do? The government’s letters of condolence do not acknowledge the Islamist character of the acts. With such a soothing, Germany goes in exactly that wrong way which in France has now finally come to an end. We in this country do not want yet further attacks, but the prevention of attacks by means of deportation. There after all cannot be a defense of those posing a threat which exposes one’s own population to a deadly danger.

After France, Germany has the most Moslems in Europe. To see what is now happening in France is like a glance through a window in time at Germany’s near future. And we in Germany, owing to the migration policy and the ghettos in Duisburg, Cologne, Berlin, are long since on the way to the French situation. Quite surely, we require no further migration by the hundreds of thousands from Islamic countries. What is required is a training in the laws, in the willingness, to take those posing a threat into custody and to deport; and before all, to name the thing by its name.  

Laws and penal codes do not prevent acts, but what remains decisive is the character of the people who wish to come here and live. Why should they give that up when the reception society wishes to have no frame of reference of its own and does not want to stand up for what is particularly its own? They sense the cowardice, the self-loathing, the identity vacuum. Islamism is to be fought not only with laws; it is a fight for the civilization. Who does not see this dimension has already lost.

At a Duisburg spa, some wish to forbid women from wearing skimpy bikinis: Not for all will freedom of choice be tolerated. So it goes. It is not only about acts of terror but also about its enabling surroundings. Was the father of the student who brought the character assassination and the fatwa in rolls a person posing a threat? Were the students who were questioned about the teacher by the murderer in front of the school Islamists? Yet the fatwa was carried out, yet they delivered it at knifepoint. Spiritually [geistig], they had never arrived here. Let us not still deny it!

And in the German schools, the path is being paved to a catastrophe. The German teachers union speaks of a “climate of shock” by Moslem students and parents. Female teachers complain of Moslem students who pose as machos towards the women. They know their Koran: Castigation command against the married woman. The “Welt” says 50 teachers report Moslem students who openly threaten and insult them. One teacher was slapped, non-believing students beaten. What we then do not need here are teachers in headscarves to spiritually guide the next generation of those posing a threat.

The headscarf is by no means a symbol of religious Islam but of an aggressive, women-despising Islamism. Paty died because he wanted to convey to his students what it means to be free. But to be a teacher in times of Islamic mass immigration has become a high-risk occupation. We do not want that here!

Hundreds of persons posing a threat are running around Germany. And the knife murder in Dresden was such as act: A pseudo-refugee, he propagandized the fight against non-believers. Such a person in Germany will be neither deported nor watched full time. The result after five days of freedom: One dead, one seriously wounded.

This government prevents returns to Syria or to third states. An agreement is finally required with the countries of origin to take back their citizens. The people do not understand why that has not happened. Finally apply yourselves to the necessary measures. In regards a lockdown, you certainly are not hypersensitive.

If enlightened Moslems like Rushdie, Seyran Ates, Hamed Abdel-Samad can still only live under police protection, that means that too many Moslems still do not live spiritually in the modern world. These then are not able to live together here with us. Macron defends freedom, he is a son of Voltaire. Merkel is no daughter of Kant, she is a daughter of Honecker.

            Marianne Schieder (SPD): Geht’s noch platter?

We must remove the teachers from the assaults, must secure the conveyance of values and – France shows how it is done – we must finally give notice of combat against Islamism and act before here also it is too late.

 

[trans: tem]  

 

  

 

 

Ingo Hahn, October 28, 2020, Environment

Bavarian Landtag, Plenarprotokoll 18/58, pp. 22-25.

Frau President, right honorable ladies and gentlemen.

Conserve resources? – Yes! Secure the means of livelihood? – Yes! We all hope for the best for Bavaria’s future in 2050. Yet if we thusly continue, Bavaria’s future in the aforesaid year appears to be entirely other than positive.

I for once ask you quite openly: How then are resources conserved? By, for example, setting up  efficient technologies and innovations. I further ask: How then are the means of livelihood secured? – By being concerned for the good of those who supply us with food. The last question: How is Bavaria’s future through the year 2050 secured? – Quite simple: By not being afraid in the year 2020 to set out on a path of cool, blue reason instead of a planned economy path of over-heated folly. Herr Minister, you seek a new, blue infrastructure. There, you sit well forward and better positioned than ever, and that in full strength, in contrast to other half-delegations in this house.

Outside of Bavaria, we are admired not only for our beautiful farms and beautiful nature. Before all, economic success brings us recognition. This success is in turn a basic pillar of our prosperity. Why do I say that? – Quite simple, because one must be able to afford environmental protection, ladies and gentlemen. The Söder government, however, by means of ever greater charges, puts in play our prosperity and thereby also puts at risk those precautions which may yet be of use to the environment. The Greens are neither in the Federal or the State government, yet have nevertheless transformed you, ladies and gentlemen of the CSU and the Freie Wähler, into the Greens 2.0 and 3.0. It is no longer of significance how you call yourself or to which delegation or party you belong, since you pray to the same idols as the Greens.

 You, Herr Minister Glauber, are the greenest environment minister that Bavaria has ever had, and indeed party-green. To me, it is clear that you as an architect would have clearly been a good building minister. But environment minister? – You speak here of the soil. It is not clear to me whether you at all know the difference between soil content [Bodenart] and soil type [Bodentyp]. I still ask in the first semester before Christmas, how does the sub-soil [Unterboden] differ from the topsoil [Oberboden] and the sea horizon. You have in fact generally remained bottomless [bodenlos].

You here unfortunately pursue an eager obedience to the left-green Zeitgiest. What is bad is you assert you would do everything for the good of environmental protection, yet what you always mean by that is the climate protection. You have here again begun with the climate protection.

I want to adhere to two points: First, the climate cannot be protected. The second is climate protection is not environmental protection. Quite the opposite: Your incessant and quite manic focus on the CO₂ output causes massive damage to our nature. With your wind rotors, you yearly kill hundreds of thousands of birds and field mice. You are responsible for that. It comes to billions of insects. The wild animals draw a red trace of blood halfway across Bavaria which you, Herr Aiwanger and Herr Glauber, still wish to extend into the State forests.

Since, for you, the construction does not proceed quickly enough, the windmills shall soon become a question of national security, thereby finally stopping the citizens’ protests which weigh upon you; since, to you all, it is very well clear that the people desire few additional wind propellers. You with good reason complain but that is all the same to them.

Your photovoltaics likewise demand many more victims to be burned on a sea of silicate plates. The utterly degenerate bio-mass production has transformed our fields into monocultures. Rapeseed and corn to the horizon, as far as the eye can see. And you still wonder over the insects dying?

All of your renewable energies have one thing in common: Before all must first yield grazing, hunting and forestry. What a crime against our Heimat! I truly ask you, dear Freie Wähler, dear Minister Glauber: How long will you play along with this nonsense? You were once a solid, Heimat-loving, freedom party, close to the citizens. Under the Söder government, however, you have become one of Green facilitators. Herr Glauber, last week, you were simply shoved aside so that Herr Söder can alone have the stage here for the umpteenth time. Finally understand: You are merely the place-holder for the love affair of the CSU with the Greens. Or, if you wish to extend it to your five water columns, then you, Herr Glauber, are perhaps the sixth column; namely, the temporary water carriers for the Greens.

All of your demands and measures stand on an ostensibly man-made climate change which in your descriptions has today already reached an apocalyptic scale. You know as well as I that there are always changes. In geologic history, there are even essentially greater variations – long before man and also long before industrialization.

You neglect all of this. Yet then where exactly in Bavaria are the damages resulting from your climate change? Tell us, even if we already know your answer! You would cry: Drought, crop failure, storms, floods, heating – no, over-heating! – The answer however is: There was all of that earlier. There is all of that today. Ja, and there will be all of that tomorrow, with and without man.

We of course cannot control nature…

Yet do not misunderstand me. I in now way deny the necessity of protecting our environment – quite the opposite. I want to persuade you to finally pursue a true protection of our nature. I of course do not want that, for E-mobility, entire eco-systems in South America and Africa be destroyed. I do not want that, for technologies from out of the last millennium, our Bavarian forests be cleared away. And I do not want that, for an over-driven bio-mass production, the native variety of species of plants and animals be sacrificed.

I much prefer to relieve our farmers who, conditioned by Biolandbau [organic farming] and monocultures, have been compelled to economize ever more intensively so as to compensate the loss.

Dear State government, it is for this ministry to protect the Bavarian environmental goods which form the means of livelihood of the Bavarian population. That means keeping the air, water and soil clean as well as as the protection of flora and fauna. That, however, plainly does not mean to squander and sacrifice all of these resources, only because one suffers from the megalomania of wishing to play the little, godly creator.  Your example with Gollum is here only strictly speaking characteristic, Herr Glauber. That appears to be a fantasy of yours which can only harm our environment.

Dear Freie Wähler, as to your new role in the Green climate sect, to or fro – it remains as it ever was: True environmental protection is conservative.

 

 

[trans: tem]