Monday, October 27, 2025

Beatrix von Storch, September 24, 2025, Trump and Turning Point

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/27, p. 2854. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

Authoritative powers believe that with the foreign policy it still goes further-so as in the time of Fischer and Baerbock, now somewhat less shrill, yet somehow further-so: Rainbow flags on German embassies, flights of Afghans to Germany, a climate foreign policy, and quite a lot of gender. Trump, you want to wait out, somehow out-last, hoping in the midterms and in the time after Trump. I believe you do not understand what just happened in the U.S.A. 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): But you do!

While in Germany the last remains of Fridays for Future crumble, in the U.S.A. begins a revolution, and indeed a spiritual one. 

I am just returned from America which, following the murder of Charlie Kirk, is no longer the same America as before and never again will be. The MAGA movement experiences in these days a fundamental transformation. This movement is now greater than Donald Trump. After him, no void will arise. It will be filled in the sense and spirit of Charlie Kirk. That will change not only the U.S.A., but the entire West and beyond. 

Since the 60s, leftist ideas have determined the direction of the West, and that now comes to an end. The SPD might here in house win the fight over the delegation meeting rooms; the fight for hearts and minds, you have lost. 

Charlie Kirk was a danger for the left not only because he like Trump could mobilize the conservative base, but he could convince young people who were never conservative. Thus, he needed to die. Yet following his death, his ideas will now become still more powerful than they were in his lifetime, much more powerful. 

            Sara Nanni (Greens): AfD for the spiritual revolution! I never reckoned on that!

If you believe that you can wall yourself off in a woke fortress in western Europe against that, 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): “Highway to Hell” is what you’re doing here!

then you are blind to the spiritual, moral and political collapse which is taking place in western Europe: Crisis of state in France, revolt in Great Britain, and the black-red after 100 days in principle already at an end. 

Milhail Gorbatschov said: Who comes too late, he is punished by life. 

            Inge Grässle (CDU/CSU): Who comes too early, he also!

You come too late. 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): Life has already punished you! 

            Hannes Gnauck (AfD), turned toward Ralf Stegner (SPD): You say that,                                Herr Stegner? Take a look in the mirror!

History passes you by, since nothing is as powerful as an idea whose time has come, and this idea is not leftist and woke and green and godless. 

            Stefan Schmidt (Greens): Can you say something on the budget?

We stand at a Wendepunkt, so christened Charlie Kirk his movement in 2012: “Turning Point” – Wendepunkt. And Europe will turn itself in spirit to the ideas and beliefs of Charlies Kirk, to freedom, 

            Boris Mijatović (Greens): Do you speak on the budget?

family, fatherland, but first and foremost to Jesus Christ. 

Many thanks. 

            Sara Nanni (Greens): I don’t get it! Love of neighbor, that was Jesus Christ!                           Impossible!

 

[trans: tem]

Sunday, October 26, 2025

Tomasz Froelich, October 21, 2025, Serbia

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2025)10-21(2-0502-0000). 

Frau President. 

What do you actually want from Serbia? Do you want to make Serbia a second Ukraine? Legitimate student protests against corruption are being mis-used for geopolitical purposes. You goad on assailants who batter the Serbian police. You destabilize a country which has had very, very bad experiences with Western intervention policy. 

Why all of this? Because Serbia maintains pragmatic relations with China and Russia. That is  Serbia’s good right, for Serbia is a sovereign state, and the Serbs are a proud people – a proud people who do not want your arrogant tutoring. And if you doubt your own unpopularity, then simply take a look at the newest numbers of the Eurobarometer: Just every third Serb is for an EU accession – a record low.  At the same time, 60 percent of Serbs are for an accession to the BRICs. You are driving Serbia out of Europe. A fatal failure, since we need Serbia as a strategic partner, perchance in the fight against illegal migration, yet in Europe only Fico and Orbán grasp that. Hands off Serbia. 

 

[trans: tem]

Monday, October 20, 2025

Rüdiger Lucassen, September 17, 2025, Defense Procurement

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/24, pp. 2531-2532. 

Herr President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

There is nothing more useless than the so-called politicians’ ranking. Defense Minister Boris Pistorius is in first place. 

            Sara Nanni (Greens): Jealous?

Yet who profits from the first place? No one. Who profits from this first place? The SPD not once, see Nordrhein-Westfalen.  Boris Pistorius, also not; since he cannot transmute his favorability into political success. That hinders his party friends; see conscription. Pistorius wants it, his party wants it not. And who still believes that the SPD will send Herr Pistorius into the running as the next Chancellor candidate plainly does not know the SPD. Nothing in this party is so unloved as success. The SPD since Gerhard Schröder always decides for mediocrity. See Heiko Maas, see Norbert Walter-Borjans, see Saskia Esken, see Bärbel Bas, see, see, see. 

Who unfortunately also has nothing of the favorability of the Defense Minister are the Bundeswehr and Germany’s security, since, except for announcements and an explanation that runs at length, Boris Pistorius has delivered nothing. 

Ladies and gentlemen, the Federal government’s 2025 defense budget suffers from a lack of concept. The government with the debts empowerment bowls over the future generations and orders everything that the industry offers. Since 2022, the Bundestag has voted for and agreed to 324 procurement proposals, an unbelievable number, without a conceptual basis. No one can say which procurement will be urgently required, and which not. 

Yet what the Defense Ministry has not accomplished is the operationalization of the armament of the Bundeswehr. That would be an urgent prerequisite for the mission-readiness of the armed forces. What shall Germany’s armed forces be able to do operationally? Where shall it be able? How long shall it be able? It plainly does not suffice to throw around keywords like “East Flank Lithuania” or “Hub Germany”. An authentic operational plan needs to go into details and it must set priorities. All of that is not put forward. Thus the coalition also does not prioritize the procurement. You procure what is there, and not what will be needed. 

I want to address a second defect which I hold to be utterly unacceptable, namely the lack of transparency in the armaments procurement. The German Bundestag needs to know to whom are ultimately allotted the weapons which it has agreed to procure. The AfD has basically voted for the armament of the Bundeswehr. We stand for national defense and external security. When however the Federal government takes upon itself the right, immediately upon delivery, to redirect to the Ukraine weapons which we as parliament have procured for the Bundeswehr, that is contempt for the will of parliament, and it is unconstitutional. 

Next point. We also reject the financing of German weapons for the Ukraine by Budget item 60 – primarily because it is German tax money, no political plan is acknowledged beyond the carry-on talk, and the Federal government does not trouble itself for a diplomatic solution of the Russian-Ukrainian war. Yet we also reject these proceedings because it leads to displacement effects in regards our own armaments procurement. You propose to quickly make the Bundeswehr ready for defense, yet with your tax-financed Ukraine procurements, ensure that armaments orders for the German troops will be shoved behind. You thereby sabotage the German defense readiness. 

The Federal government invented the term “Zeitenwende” [change of times], yet cannot do it. The AfD can do it, and we will do it. 

Thank you. 

 

[trans: tem]


Sunday, October 19, 2025

Markus Buchheit, October 8, 2025, Combustion Engine Verbot

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE REV(2025)10-08(3-0208-0000). 

Herr President, my valued ladies and gentlemen. 

In 2019, as the Green Deal stood directly in the starting blocks, and as Greta Thunberg here still strode through the meadow, we already had studies which said that we in the next years alone in Germany would lose 200,000 to 400,000 workplaces in the automobile industry, if it came to the Verbot of the combustion engine. Now we stand here again today, and the question is put: Man, the industry, it goes so badly; we just don’t know why it goes so badly. 

Herr colleague Wölken of the SPD: It goes badly for the industry because people like you want to represent an activating industrial policy, and it is called nothing other – the viewers may want to look at the previous video of colleague Wölken – than a planned economy. You want to interfere in the production management of individual firms, and that certainly cannot be. If here is brought in the examples of iphones and the accomplishment in relation to Nokia, of the horse and carriage and the setbacks of the automobile, then to all that can only be said: These projects, these technologies have succeeded – planned by free undertakings, demanded by free citizens. 

What we require is freedom, not still more planned economy, not still more Wölkens in this house here. We again need freedom for our businesses and for our citizens. In this sense: Away with this Verbot, yet also away with the fleet penalty payments! 

 

[trans: tem]

Tuesday, October 14, 2025

Michael Kaufmann, September 11, 2025, Research and Economy

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/21, p. 2096. 

Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable Frau Minister. Honorable colleagues. 

I have the impression that the governing delegations have placed this extra theme on the daily order in the current hour because they have nothing else to present. But let us look more closely. In your Hightech Agenda is initially one positive thing: You finally admit that we in many areas of research and innovation no longer stand at the top of the world, and that we in many fields are in danger of losing the connection. That is honest, and that distinguishes you from earlier governments which ever only spread the rally cry of carry on. Only he who unsparingly describes the starting point can at all achieve improvements. 

But then: Much paper, little plan. Your Hightech Agenda is full of programs, roadmaps and hubs, yet without clear measurable goals. Who wants to, can lose himself in this wasteland, but it does not indicate the way to the future. Just quite at the end, there will be a few more concrete – for all that – yet too few. Explanations of intention are no strategy. 

I do not want to contest that you have good intentions. Yet your euphoria I share not at all; for all of your predecessors have promised one thing: Dismantlement of bureaucracy. And what has happened each time? The opposite. Each year new prescriptions, new formulas, more bureaucracy. You, Union and SPD, have shown in the last 20 years that you cannot do bureaucracy dismantlement. Why should it this time suddenly be different? And, hand on heart: Have you ever dared in Moloch Brussels to defy a new bureaucracy? 

            Holger Mann (SPD): Come still to the theme?

And in regards the financing, there remains disillusionment. The means in the core budget stagnate for years, and a couple of billion euros of special debts alter nothing of that. You speak of a “big heave”. Yet where is it? With the 2025 and 2026 budgets, half of the legislature is already committed. 

            Florian Müller (CDU/CSU): Ja!

Thus when does the game-changer come? In the second half, or not at all? 

You yourselves speak of deficits in regards transfer from research to the economy – fully right. Yet you conceal the origins: Research in Germany, yes; foundings, no. In Germany, research still pays, but foundings long since no longer pay. The highest taxes, ruinous energy costs, bureaucracy without end. So long as it remains so, value creation emigrates to foreign lands. So long as you change nothing of that, your technology transfer remains an illusion. 

The fact is: Our research landscape is exploited so as to create value elsewhere. This is no longer allowed to remain so. You talk of gigafactories in Germany. But you tell me: Where actually is the announced megaplant for chips in Magdeburg? Not even the sponsored 10 million euro subvention could move Intel to this investment. 

            Holger Mann (SPD): You wanted it just so not!

And now gigfactories for giga euros, only with billions from the pocket of the taxpayers. Under today’s conditions, no energy-intensive plant comes to Germany. 

Without fundamental reform, your promises remain illusions. A change of the economy with you, honored colleagues of the CDU/CSU, is not for the making. That, you showed yesterday as in regards TOP 5 – Economic Change for Germany – precisely five CDU/CSU members sat in the plenary session. The Hightech Agenda should be your business plan for the future. Yet quite frankly: Would you approach a bank for credit with this paper? Ich nicht; since explanations of intention replace no concrete measures; vague sketches are no strategy. We need no colorful roadmaps. You need an authentic plan, and which I do not see here. 

            Stephan Albani (CSU/CSU): You need only use the eyes!

You’ve recognized many problems. That is the first step. But now you need to deliver; otherwise, our country’s future is in danger. And, for that, you bear the responsibility. 

Thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Saturday, October 11, 2025

Volker Schnurrbusch, October 8, 2025, EU Digital Rules

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2025)10-08(3-0217-0000). 

Frau President. Valued colleagues.

The core of the EU is the Common Market. Yet what does this Commission do? It builds one hurdle after another. It would be nice if we too had a Silicon Valley. Yet instead of complaining that a few U.S. firms dominate the tech market and the platforms, it would be the duty of the EU to promote the entrepreneurial spirit which first made this dominance possible. Why does the risk capital flow to California and Texas and not to Germany and France? Why do IT professionals emigrate from Asia to the U.S.A. and not here? Why do we experience the emigration of our programmers? 

Because this Commission is hostile to business and growth; because it constructs ever higher bureaucratic hurdles; because it understands the market not as the exchange of ideas but as something un-regulated which is to be surveilled. Thus it invents tools like the Digital Markets Act and the Digital Services Act. The EU wants to control, it blocks entrepreneurial freedom, and it wants to censor freedom of opinion on the internet so that only its own propaganda will be spread, as in Roumania, as in Moldavia, as in Georgia, and lastly also in the Ukraine. We reject that. 

 

[trans: tem]