Bernd Baumann, December 2, 2022, Immigration and Residence

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/74, pp. 8745-8747.

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen.

The government today puts forward two draft laws and has a third ready in cabinet.With these, it wants to make immigration to Germany even easier, it shall become even simpler to receive a German passport. In current polling, two-thirds of the people reject that. Respect that! Stop this policy!

            Kassem Taher Saleh (Greens): No!

Hundreds of thousands of migrants ought already to have left Germany because they have an obligation to depart. Their asylum grounds have been ultimately rejected because they were often only feigned. The Ampel now does not want to deport them all; it now wants to ultimately keep all in the country. From illegal shall become legal – what a mockery of the state of law!

Worse still: Tens of thousands of officials needed to work for years on the asylum procedures. Magistrates, state attorneys, police thereby spent millions of work hours and now comes the left-green government and says: All of that simply no more interests us. All asylum seekers remain here. What disdain for the state’s servants, ladies and gentlemen!

The government’s new cabinet draft goes still further: Foreigners no more need to have lived in Germany for eight years until winning a German passport; in the future, five years suffices, in many cases even three. Why so short a time period? Because the Syrians of 2015 can also quickly become German – almost one million –

            Filiz Polat (Greens): Who now already have been naturalized!

in addition to hundreds of thousands of Afghans, Iraqis, Moroccans, Somalis, Senegalese. All shall become German – the total sell-out!

That is nevertheless not allowed to be, ladies and gentlemen.

To make German citizenship even more tasty for the migrants, they are allowed to retain the old passport. Dual citizenship becomes the norm. Even for the illiterates, there are new rules for quick naturalization. Even Oriental marriage relations with countless wives are no more reason for prevention.

            Helge Lindh (SPD): Man, man, man!

All of the laws aim in the same direction: All may come, all may remain, to become German. What a flagrant invitation to the entire world! No other country does it so, ladies and gentlemen.

Why do you do it thus? Skilled labor comes, you have said. In that regard, all the numbers prove the contrary: Almost 70 percent of Syrians live on Hartz IV, and seven years after their arrival; for Somalis, Afghans or Ghanians it is similarly dramatic.  

Thus: Why do you do this? “Humanitarian grounds”, you have said. We need to help those seeking shelter. For the Ukrainians, that is right; here, women and children flee. Yet most of the migrants of the last years come from the Orient and Africa, predominantly young men.

            Clara Bünger (Linke): Fake news!

Even EU commissioner Johansson now concedes: The great majority require no shelter; they come for economic reasons, like for example Faisal S., who lately said in the press: “I came in ten days from Damascus to Dresden for 6,500 dollars”, – verbatim, he further says: “Everyone now wants Germany, if he can raise the money” – for the traffickers. Such people come to Germany.

            Petra Sitte (Linke): Fake news!

There are all too often no humanitarian grounds. In the mass come neither skilled labor nor those in need of shelter. Yet the Ampel government opens further the sluices, against the will of the Germans: 80 percent demand better border defense. Agree to that! Respect that!

There remains the pestering question: Why do you do that? Even as a member of the Hamburg parliament I had wondered, as a Green member spoke thereon, that in a few years the Germans will be in the minority in their own country.

            Christina Baum (AfD): Yet that is what they want!

And they add, verbatim: That is good so.

Frau Göring-Eckardt, for many years Green delegation chairman here in the Bundestag, said during he 2015 refugee stream – I cite: “Our country will change, and indeed drastically. I am glad of it.”

            Bruno Hömel (Greens): Yet it is so! All changes!

And the chief of the Grünen Jugend spoke of a – I cite: “disgusting white majority society” which she no more wants.

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): The misanthropy definitely comes from you                                    and not from us!

Alone since 2014, over eight million foreigners came to Germany. The Linke and Greens rejoice; here, for them, a great project will be implemented for which they long: A transformation into a quite different republic which threatens to dissolve all that we name “our homeland”, ladies and gentlemen.

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Rubbish!           

           Clara Bünger (Linke): Conspiracy theory!

This transformation is more radical than most citizens can imagine and from it, if it continues, there is no more a return. It is the ideology of an anonymous, diverse world society, a leftist utopia, a health concept of which the motto runs: “No borders” – keine Grenzen mehr – , “no nation” – keine nation mehr, primarily no German one – “one world” mit mehr Diversity, that is, diverse.

            Erhard Grundl (Greens): You cite John Lennon!

All in all mingled, limitlessly colorful, mixed, all achieved by open borders, migration and accompanying quotas, compulsory quotas. We do not want this great transformation [Umgestaltung], this leftist chimera. We do not want it and it ought not to be in Germany, ladies and gentlemen.

This left-green experiment of a rainbow world society also proceeds with speech bans, with cancel culture against all critics, meanwhile with allies in all social organizations: In churches and schools, in print media and public broadcasting, in parties and parliaments and now even in sport. The German national team has been ruined by hours-long discussions concerning a rainbow on the upper arm. We do not want that the German nation is also ruined, ladies and gentlemen.

Two-thirds of all people in Germany say they no more trust to openly state their opinion. University professors cry out because they can no more freely do research. Actors and writers are openly pressured, they should show an attitude in the sense of an ideology. And over all waves the rainbow flag.

            Irene Mihalic (Greens): You have forgotten the Einhorn!

Which plainly does not stand for the state of law, which does not stand for freedom and human rights. It is the leftist symbol of a diverse, colorful, compulsory society. The colors of the leftist rainbow do not stand for the freedom struggled for in German history; for that stand black, red gold. Those are the colors of freedom and democracy. Those are our colors, ladies and gentlemen.

            Bruno Hömel (Greens): For whom do you speak? You do not speak                                        for the Germans!

            Thorsten Frei (CDU/CSU): Yet neither you!

 

[trans: tem]

 

           

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gottfried Curio, December 1, 2022, German Citizenship

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/73, pp. 8538-8539.

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen.

The prerequisites for the acquisition of German citizenship are completely razed. Integration requirements: Down! Basic knowledge of civics: Down! Time periods: Almost halved. The intended target groups are thereby in no way either economically or culturally integrated. That is indeed unfortunately the reason for ever again lowering the requirements for residence, for citizenship. Over-proportionately represented are receipt of social assistance, criminality, a forgoing of education. All these problems of the immigrants shall be hushed up with a sleight of hand by which the numbers will be incorporated into the total German population. In that regard, according to a poll, two-thirds of Germans want no simplification of naturalization [Einbürgerung]. Yet the government, with Brecht, asks: Would it not be most simple to abolish the people and select another?

The Ampel now takes that seriously. It wants to make faits accomplis and, as to the foreigners imported and fed since 2015, finally also direct their voting. After just five or even three years they receive citizenship. The language and Einbürgerung test will simply be eliminated for those who for long are here, with whose knowledge of German it is apparently preferable not to reckon. Arrangement in the German lifestyle? No more a theme. Islamic polygamy? No problem. Yet an Islamization does not occur. Poor Germany, ladies and gentlemen.

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Are you called “Ahmet”, or are you still not Islamized?

Merkel sowed in 2015. Now is harvest time.

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): What is that then for a motto?

When sufficient new citizens have been created, the interdiction of the German journey begins. The German voter population shall be determined by an army of foreign social assistance recipients. First, half the world will be enticed by increased social benefits – here, sold as the tear-inducing “refuge” – , then all the unentitled receive the residence permission as an “opportunity”, then, simply by expiration of time, the German passport. The whole is a coup d’état in the voter demography, ladies and gentlemen.

Minister Faeser asserts: He who wants a passport gives a strong avowal for Germany, says yes to a free society, Basic Law and equality of rights. Nein, he does not say it. He much more accepts the right to vote so as to change the country. And as a sign that full integration is simply no more a prerequisite, that the right to vote can be much more easily seized in the short-term, the whole is in form an anti-integration law.  

Thereby he who takes in hand the right to decide the direction of the country should actually be a democracy pro. Yet the people come from a political-cultural circumstance which is entirely foreign to our concepts, which will certainly quite clearly not intensify these ideas in five or indeed three years, if at all. In truth, it needs be turned around: First must a real integration ensue, and be an endeavour for citizenship – and not the other way round.

            Götz Frömming (AfD): Jawohl! That is so!

            Till Steffen (Greens): You must first integrate yourselves!. That would help!

No pain, no gain. You are squandering the passport on the insufficiently integrated. That is a construction program for parallel societies, ladies and gentlemen.

             Till Steffen (Greens): You are the parallel society!

Accordingly, any reason for a more rapid acquisition of citizenship cannot at all be named. To now want to rapidly name simply all as Germans only shows a contempt for one’s own people. Of identification with the nation, its values, history, culture – not a word. In the coalition contract is wanted a campaign which extra advertises for acquisition of citizenship. That need is obviously greater on the part of the parties than in regards those actually addressed. It is about a presumed choice of the voters for one’s own party. For that, the fate of Germany is sold dirt cheap. Comrades without a fatherland, like it is in the book, ladies and gentlemen.  

The Chancellor complains: Nine million citizens live and work without citizenship. – The truth: Of almost 12 million, 4.5 million work. Yet not only the quantity is lacking but also the quality. He should be naturalized who decides for identification with Germany.

            Konstantin Kuhle (FDP): Then you need to be deprived of citizenship!

What does one do for that? The double passport is made the rule, the plain opposite. Which means the Basic Law, with the people, is not first of all origin and bearer of the nation’s statehood. These plans are plainly unconstitutional.  

The FDP – at a low in the polls – which already gave the nod to this in the coalition contract, now suddenly simulates a bellyache. Yet only the time point is not acceptable; they find the content okay. Ladies and gentlemen, since 2005 we have a net emigration of Germans, yet immigration is drummed up. Pure population replacement! The most frequent comment below articles for an Einbürgerung offensive is: I emigrate. – No wonder should one trample underfoot the country when departing.

Yet the Chancellor knows: For the most concerned, the Einbürgerung celebration belongs to what he has experienced. Devoid of all substantial argument, one falls back on a sob story. It becomes an evil when one hears so much emotion: You should consider voting for German citizenship. – He means of course: Voting for the SPD.

The fact is: The more foreigners immigrate and are naturalized, the more Germans emigrate because the taxes to finance the fun are too high. The whole is a unique skilled labor expulsion law. It is the Ampel for foreigners. Yet no one need vote for it; since there is still the Alternative for Germans.

I thank you.

            Till Steffen (Greens): Good night!

 

[trans: tem]

 

           

 

Markus Frohnmaier, November 23, 2022, Foreign Office

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/69, pp. 8070-8071.

Herr President. Ladies and gentlemen.

Frau Baerbock, you have directly said: You stand on the side of the Ukraine, all the same what happens with the citizens in Germany,

            Jamila Schäfer (Greens): That is a lie!

with the nine year old schoolgirl or with the pensioner. I say to you one thing: We of the AfD, we stand at the side of the German people and we do politics for their interests.

More than half the expenditures for the Foreign Office serve for the securing of peace and stability. Yet does Frau Baerbock trouble herself about peace and stability in the Baltic Sea? On September 26, Nord Stream 1 as well as Nord Stream 2 were blown up: What have you done about that? I therein recall: As a couple of pieces of Ukrainian rocket debris fell on Polish territory and there were also unfortunately two deaths, all of NATO sounded the alarm. The Polish government even considered whether it called for the preliminary stage of an instance of the alliance. Baerbock on the same evening made known on Twitter that she found herself in close agreement with the Polish allies.

Ulrich Lechte (FDP): Then with whom else? You called upon your friends in the Kremlin!

Yet what did the Foreign Minister do when there was an attack, a terrorist sabotage against the Nord Stream pipelines? Nothing! She did nothing! And today this house still knows nothing of what actually occurred. Silence in the forest.

Thus was the Foreign Minister, who otherwise is always good for giving advice, quite silent. And more still: Up to today, the government has undertaken nothing for hastening further clarification. Four billion euros for the securing of peace and stability and nothing when a pillar of the German economic and energy supply is blown up.

The fourth largest economy on Earth – you yourself have also noted that – is either incapable, that we see when you send divers to the Baltic who lack the necessary equipment to dive 70 meters deep to be able to pursue a reconnaissance; or – this is the other conjecture which we have lately – you even do not want to clarify. Since whoever blew up Nord Stream 2, he actually has implemented your Green Party program, Frau Baerbock.

            Kay Gottschalk (AfD): Party politics before security policy!

You have wanted to make Germany dependent on fluttering electricity and hydrogen. Know that that has not escaped us: There was quite a clandestine joy of the parliamentary arm of the “Last Generation”, thus, of your party, the Greens, when Nord Stream was blown up.

            Jamila Schäfer (Greens): You should be ashamed!

When I take a look at your Instagram account – your story – you nevertheless are not dancing, that’s something – then I ascertain that you apparently interest yourself in all possible things in the world: Multikulti in Canada, feminism in Afghanistan, climate protection in Egypt, weapons donations to the Ukraine, a fight against rightist extremism in foreign countries

            Alexander Lambsdorff (FDP): We will also fight you at home until                                        you are again gone!  

in regards to a contemporary elimination of foreign cultural work promoting dialogue. Only for German interests, nothing will be found in the Instagram story of the Foreign Minister. Since your foreign policy proceeds on the principle – I cite you word for word: “…all the same, what my German voters think”. That is the value-based, feminist foreign policy of which you are always speaking. We say: An end to that.

            Nils Schmid (SPD): Just listen to that!

When the Ukraine is attacked by its neighbor, then there is a sanctions orgy. When Azerbaidjan bombs Armenia, then there are no sanctions. On the contrary: Then you, Frau Baerbock, make a fat gas deal with Baku. When in Iran women remove the head scarf, then this government rejoices. When however in Germany anyone says something against veiling, then the Haldenwang pounds on the door.

            Derya Türk-Nachbaur (SPD): You haven’t caught it, or?

When Russia bombs, you call upon the Hague. When U.S. President Obama – as we recall – illegally attacks and kills hundreds of people with drones, then he may place a Nobel Peace Prize in the window. And, quite moved by values, the Greens of that time, Renate Künast and Jürgen Trittin, explained that was a “signal of revolt” and a demand for disarmament.

            Kay Gottschalk (AfD): Double morality!

I believe Germany has enough of this double morality, of this values-based, feminist foreign policy. We say quite clearly: No more meddling in the internal affairs of other states. Commerce and economic cooperation, yes; but, without giving ourselves over to dependencies, protection of German key industries from foreign takeover and primarily an end to the arrogant and tutelary Green foreign policy, ladies and gentlemen.

            Vice-president Wolfgang Kubicki: Herr colleague.

You here need not bellow so. Just listen for once, then you may learn something.

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

Michael Espendiller, November 23, 2022, Foreign Minister Baerbock

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/69, pp. 8058-8059.

Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable colleagues. Dear spectators in the hall                        and on YouTube.

For 2023, the Foreign Office may rejoice over 7.5 billion euros for expenditures. The Ampel is thus really busting out and others here in the hall applaud. Only we say: It is too much, and before all in regards to the fascinating questions: What actually happens with the money? To where does it flow and does it do what it should? In the coalition contract, the Ampel parties are understood to have a “result-oriented budget management” [„wirkungsorientierte Haushaltsführung“]. Yet we have seen very little of that. When the budget title somehow sounds good and “climate“ or “sustainability“ are therein, then the billions fly out the window to foreign countries.

Let us for once be definite – we have already spoken of it in the deliberations. There is the so-called Federal Office for Foreign Affairs. That is a chic, new authority in the portfolio of the Foreign Office in beautiful Brandenburg on the Havel, and there work any number of motivated experts. We could once inspect it together with the Minister and it was really very interesting. One of the department leaders explained to us that in his department in this year 62 co-workers were at work on 1,900 projects, projects in 130 countries of the world with a value equivalent to 2 billion euros.  

If we reckon that up, we see: Every single expert is responsible for worldwide projects of a total value of 32.3 million euros – one co-worker, 32 million euros. Here, we naturally asked: How can a single expert comprehend and examine such a large sum, whether the money really matters and effects something? The answer ran: It will be kursorisch [cursorily] examined. We take a peek in Duden, which says:

Kursorisch: …continuous, quickly proceeding from one to another, not exacting                            in details…

Simply stated: When you  propose money for a project, it will be briefly examined, stamped; the money will be allotted, afterwards a brief report written – “all was super fine” – done, into the files. – Following our criticism, the Minister amplified that the Foreign Office’s projects were pre-tested, primarily however by the project partners. Nevertheless, Frau Baerbock also said – cite: “We do not control each, single invoice. We do not control each, single bill. We simply cannot do that”. End citation.

Look, precisely there lies the snag; since it is by no means that you cannot control each, single bill but that you simply do not want to. The funding sections [Förderabteilungen] of the Foreign Office see to the expending of money. Were it important to you, Frau Minister – wherever in fact you are – you would reconstruct the section; you would expend no money without controls. Yet you do precisely the opposite.

And in which countries then will the money generally be expended? For example, yesterday you approved an additional 33 million euros for the Republic of Moldavia, for the most part in the area of energy security. A glance at the corruption index of Transparency International shows no good picture for this country. There, the Republic of Moldavia lands in place 105, the same as Panama, and thereby is at the fore in matters of corruption, even though still slightly behind the Ukraine.  

I think, Frau Hagedorn, many people can thoroughly comprehend the government’s disposition to help that country.

            Ulrich Lechte (FDP): Frau Hagedorn has much more an idea than you!

The country is heavily affected by the war. Yet certainly in regards to the corruption, it should nevertheless be an especial concern for you to here enforce an ordinary control – a control whereby the money really produces something. Yet you simply do not do it, and you also will not do it merely because you say that here. Trust is good, control is better. In case someone here now says, “Yes, man, for that we have the Federal Audit Authority“ – that is a mistake. It of course controls no projects. It simply does not have the capacities for that.

How thus precisely the taxpayers‘ money will be dealt with is thus a switching point which you need to take in hand., Frau Minister. Yet you and your house control, ja, not any single invoice and not any single bill.

Yet do you know who needs to do that? The taxpayers in Germany who generate the money that you grandiosely distribute. The citizens need to precisely watch every euro; since normal people can expend the money only once. The citizens also need to preserve every, single invoice; for their tax statement, for example. If you conduct a business in Germany, you even need to do that for ten years. If then one fine day the tax audit arrives – it arrives as surely as the amen in church – then will the tax examiner inspect every, single bill and every, single invoice. May God have mercy on you if then something is thereby not right. Thus when you so lightly speak of that, that you simply cannot so precisely examine all of that, then you thereby reject for yourself a standard which is an obligation for millions of Germans. – Frau Minister, no head shaking helps here. This is just a fact.

Aside from distinctive foreign policy concepts, we here demand from you more effective controls. For that, you are more than obliged to the taxpayers in this country.

 

[trans: tem]