share Recommend this site to a friend
deutsch deutsch
bombLetter to the IMF relation to the
Headbombno-value-ECM - 05/12/16
bombLetter to the CDU Youth Union - 14/11/16 bombLetter to the IDW regarding
Headbombthe EFSF’s Financial
HeadbombStatements – 19/10/16
Headbomb+ Correspondence IDW -> MFD 15/11/16
Headbomband MFD -> IDW 16/11/16
bombLetter to the european Financial
HeadbombSupervision relation to the
Headbombno-value-ECM - 03/10/16
bomb14th Letter to the Parliament for Judicial
HeadbombReview of the Free-Trade
HeadbombAgreements - 27/05/2016
bombApplication to the Constitutional
HeadbombCourt for Judicial Review of the
HeadbombFree-Trade Agreements - 27/05/2016
bombBILD - Pillory of Shame - 21/12/15 bombCriminal charge of making a false
Headbomballegation against - 17/09/2015
Headbomb+ response of Public Prosecutor in
HeadbombBerlin - 20/05/2016
bombLetter to the Ifo President - 05/11/14 bombComplaint to the German
HeadbombPress Council - 21/11/13
bombLetter to the IMF - 17/10/13
Headbomb+ Supplementary letter 22/11/13
bombLetter to the EU Commission - 17/10/13 bombLetter to the Presidium of the ECB - 17/10/13 bombAgainst the dismissal of
HeadbombFederal President Wulff - 13/06/13
Headbomb+ Response from the Hannover
HeadbombPublic Prosecutor's Office 25/07/13
Headbomb+ Opinion of the Alliance for
HeadbombDemocracy 21/08/13
Headbomb+ Letter to Celle General State Prosecutor’s
HeadbombOffice 10/10/13
bombPetition for the independence of the
HeadbombJudiciary and State Prosecutor - 06/05/13
Headbomb+ response by the Petitions Committee of
Headbombthe German Bundestag - 08/06/16
bombPetition for the introduction of genuine, direct
Headbombdemocracy - 25/04/13
Headbomb+ reply of the Bundestag - 14/11/16
bombPetition against corruption - 25/03/2013 bombCriminal complaint re. Target 2 10/11/2012 bomb1st Constitutional Complaint - against the
HeadbombFederal Government - 21/03/12
bomb2nd Constitutional Complaint - ESM incl.
Headbombsupplement - 12/06/12
bomb3rd Constitutional Complaint - ESM incl.
Headbombsupplement - 18/09/12
bomb4th Constitutional Complaint - Federal
HeadbombGouvernment against the ECB (by CJEU)
Headbomb+ response of Federal
HeadbombConstitutional Court - 06/06/16
bombPress reports 27/6/12 + 24/10/12 bombSpringer complaint 28/09/11 bombDelayed insolvency bombPetition to the German Parliament 31/05/11 bombPetition to the European Parliament 21/06/11 bomb1st Letter to Members of Parliament 23/06/11 bomb2nd Letter to Members of Parliament
bomb3rd Letter to Members of Parliament 19/05/12 bomb4th Letter to Members of Parliament 23/05/12 bomb5th Letter to Members of Parliament 20/06/12 bomb6th Letter to Members of Parliament 27/06/12 bomb7th Letter to the Parliament 27/9/12 bomb8th Letter to the Parliament 15/10/12 -
Headbombagainst Corruption 15/10/12 in addition to
HeadbombPetition 25/03/13
bomb9th Letter to the Parliament 24/10/12 bomb10th Letter to the Parliament 05/12/12 bomb11th Letter to the Parliament - 20/05/13 bomb12th Letter to the Parliament - 16/10/13 bomb13th Letter to the Parliament - 10/12/15 bombQuestions to the Bundestag 27/28/06/12 bombTo the members of the Bundesrat 14/06/12 bombTo the minister of finance 12/06/12 bombSecond Letter to the Finance
HeadbombMinister - 27/02/15
bombObjection to Hartz IV - Judicial Review
HeadbombComplaint BVerfG
bomb1st Lawsuit against Federal government
bomb2nd Lawsuit against Federal government
bombOpen letter 16/18/02/11

Questions to the Bundestag

On 29th June 2012, the parliament and the state representatives will vote on the ESM/fiscal pact. Apparently a few rebels intend to vote against this destruction plan (rightly so, you heroes!); the other members of parliament are sticking to the party line, either because they are afraid of putting forward their own proposals, or they are hoping by this means to take another step upwards on the career ladder, or that they all believe that they will (still) receive their next salary.

However the vote turns out, we would still like to put a few questions … to the members of all parties who simply intend to cling on to their seats and their party badges, and drive the people into the poorhouse:

  1. How long do you intend to let yourselves be led around by the nose by the super-debt duo of Merkel and Schäuble?

  2. Howard you assess the latest opinion surveys of the leadership of the Pirate Party, that the CDU, which like all other government parties has squandered away the national budget, still has the image of being “economically skilled”?

  3. The Pirates vote for a basic income and also for a planning policy in the sense of a social order in all areas in accordance with our link “System correction 2011” – what do you think of being controlled again, and political work subjected to criteria that apply to employees in commercial companies?

  4. The first appearance of having overreached oneself, which you have supported in all majority decisions, is the North-South divide of European Monetary Union, and next the budgets of Spain and Italy will be no longer fundable, when the risk interest rates have reached the critical limits of over 7% (Spain) and over 6% (Italy) – this stubbornness bordering on madness is no longer supportable. Are you aware of this?

  5. The European citizen, including we Germans, stands security for every decision made by politics, with taxes, pensions and subsidies such as those for training and education – why is it obviously unclear to you that you are also responsible for this adventure? Your children, relatives and friends. Think of them when you are asked to vote in favour of the ESM/fiscal pact? Or, have you as a member of Parliament (with insider knowledge, recalling the Steinkühler case) already secured your share of speculation business from the Euro, the rapid achievement of consensus in favour of the ESM/fiscal pact cannot be explained in any other way. In which case the profit from this business must have been so great that you could afford to give up your seat in parliament, because you will have to do so if you vote for the ESM and fiscal pact as a first step to Euro-bonds (which all of Europe’s leaders demand from the Germans), and the Merkel government then falls, because the national bankruptcy which Angela Merkel would then have to announce would be her political demise!
… to the members of parliament of the SPD

  1. The SPD has decided to agree to the introduction of Euro-bonds, and this despite the constitutional prohibition and even though you must be aware of the consequences of Euro-bonds: the bankruptcy of Germany! Do you want Germany to go bankrupt so that the SPD can take over the government? Do you believe that you would have success with the voters in this way? Do you simply want the appease Americans, the French, the Spanish – who all demand that Germany should finally agree?

  2. Do you see yourselves in any way in agreement with the article “The controlled collapse – Preparation for the coming World Government”? You can read this article under “Matrix – Neues Denken – Wissenschaft/Politik/Kultur of June 2012”.

  3. Do you consider it socially democratic if you support laws and regulations which are really harmful to Hartz-IV recipients, who will demonstrably be paid less than they would be entitled to?

  4. Why has the Chairman of your party only now become aware of the inequality of women compared to men? Women have earned less than men for years, and women in the East therefore the least of all, because wages there are generally lower than in the West. And why do you not link these matters with Euro-bonds?

  5. Social democracy has been severely damaged; its objectives, which it still held a hundred years ago, are lost or betrayed and sold. For the benefit of party acolytes who promoted their advancement at the expense of the many, and offered SPD voters nothing more than mediocrity. Are you not embarrassed by all this? Do you have so little decency, so little political willpower, that you still toe the party line? We do not need any foreign managers to tell us what we can do with what we have earned, in order to stand surety for other European excesses, which nobody can be responsible for any longer. Do you not want to finally do something which is socially democratic?

… to the members of parliament of the Greens

  1. Since the founding of the party, the Greens have been economically quite weak in the knees. Perhaps you did not want to take up economic issues, because you were interested in other topics, but now as an established party it is incumbent on you to take decisions that serve the economy or not. Such a decision is the vote on the ESM/fiscal pact. Why not simply say: we agree to it, because we have no idea what we are signing! Turn away from your policy of lies, by joining in the discussion and voting, although it must be clear to you that you are betraying many of your own goals. Do you see no other possibility of turning away from this policy of lies?

  2. You complained to the Federal Constitutional Court that you had not been provided with enough information regarding the vote. Do you see any possibility in future of doing your homework properly and devoting some thought to the matter? Then would you have noticed that you are supporting the impoverishment of the country. You can be sure: Nobody will be interested in anything else any more.

  3. You have always been in opposition – why do you not finally fulfil this task and become the arbiter which controls the power? We have relied on the fact that Green representatives also represent the interests of the people, and this control can no longer be exercised solely by the FDP, as Mr. Rössler recently proclaimed!

… to the members of parliament of the CDU/CSU

  1. Are you familiar with the no-bail-out clause? This specifies in Art. 125 of the TFEU that no Euro country is allowed to impose its debt on another. Or rather was allowed, because the clause was changed, and then to infringe it by saying that something has to be done or something does not have to be done. This coup is one of many that followed the breach of the Maastricht Treaty, in order to save the Euro. Are you aware that you probably thereby damaged the Euro more severely than you saved it?

  2. Are you aware that the debt repayment fund under discussion by the Council of Experts basically means, apart from a splitting of the debt of up to 60% of gross domestic product and then the excess debt, where the latter is then brought together in a debt repayment fund as a bad bank, nothing more than the transition to Euro-bonds by the, at least taking into account the economic consideration applied here – has that ever become clear to you?

  3. Have you heard the reply of Finance Minister Schäuble to this question?
    “What do you think of the debt repayment fund proposed by the Council of Experts?”
    “This fund is currently not feasible because it violates European treaties, such as the no-bail-out clause, according to which the countries are not liable for the debts of other countries. Without a common fiscal policy you cannot communitise the liability. This would create disincentives. Otherwise, a country could incur debts at the expense of other countries, this is not acceptable. Who pays must also decide. If I pay their debts and I can then control nothing, they are free in their spending.”

  4. Are you of the opinion that such comments disqualify a Finance Minister?

  5. Mr. Schäuble claimed recently that he had reduced the national debt during his time in office – it has been proven however that the debts of the country steadily increased. What do you think of this statement?

  6. The fiscal pact can never fulfil a fiscal policy. It remains to be seen to what extent the Federal Constitutional Court finds after examination of the facts: the ESM and the fiscal pact are unconstitutional. How will you explain that after having signed? Why did you vote for it?

  7. The Euro countries could stick to the common currency, but then, national peculiarities would have to be taken into account, because Germany must not lose its standing as a welfare – what do you think of that?

  8. Like Mr. Sarrazin in his book “We do not need the Euro”, you are of the opinion that the demands of Germany’s welfare state would have to be scaled down drastically, and you are in the process of doing this, even if with the ESM you first drastically increase only the debts of the Germans, but as a result of which, in the event of the unavoidable currency reform, you also drastically reduce the quota remaining to the people due to the costs of delayed insolvency, which you alone have caused?

  9. Mrs. Merkel called off Finance Minister Schäuble, who had announced that there would be a referendum on the ESM/fiscal pact (which Horst Seehofer had long demanded). She justified the pull on the reins by declaring that she would not agree to Euro-bonds, so that no discussion on a referendum was necessary. Has it struck you that Mrs. Merkel cannot agree to Euro-bonds, because then she would have to announce the national bankruptcy and significantly reduce all social and/or transfer payments. This would make the people increasingly poorer – is this what you want to vote for? And has it struck you that in case of a referendum, the people will always be the loser? If it agrees, it would thereby accept the whole European policy of the last 60 years, the Euro policy, the debt, the delaying of insolvency, and finally the crash. The government could then always say: You wanted the Euro. We have done all that was necessary to keep it. If the people say that they do not want the Euro, then the government can say that it always assumed that the people wanted the Euro, and that the delaying of bankruptcy (as practised so far) was better than bankruptcy itself. The people are therefore always left holding the baby, it stands security with its taxes for the adventure in which all governments of the last 60 years have indulged by borrowing in order to finance national budgets. During the Euro crisis, this was then compounded by the fact that these loans also had to be sufficient to cover the debts of other countries. Do you find that fair and just? Do you believe that this is acceptable for a people?

  10. We believe that there are other questions which must be asked. Because a people should decide on the future, not about something that is in the process of resolution, because this is something for which it is not responsible.

  11. Mr. Rössler announced recently that he intended to ensure that insolvency regulations would finally be introduced. We assume that he did not want to wind down the state of Germany by this means, although Germany will have to follow its fellow Euro countries sooner or later. It is amazing that no German politician and unfortunately no German members of parliament proposed the adoption of insolvency regulations along with the introduction of the Euro. It is a shabby claim, and only political manoeuvring, which now produces such proclamations. Is clear to you that the FDP has also lost its credibility with this demand? It is clear to you that such a policy of delay, as supported for years by the FDP on the side of the CDU/CSU, has helped to commit the greatest fraud against the creditors, i.e. the taxpayers – the German people?

  12. The Springer press recently mentioned that the naive pirates, still incompetent in material issues, represented a substantial, new voter potential. Potential for Angela Merkel – Do you believe that people who vote for the pirates would ever vote for the CDU/CSU?

The Alliance for Democracy also knows that members of parliament have little consideration for their fellow citizens, but think at times about how difficult it could be for you to be one of those who have supported this coup and deception of the people.

We still live in different times, but perhaps other times will follow once again in which people are marked this time not for their service to the people! Do you want such a label on your coat, on your forehead, around your neck?