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

In the trap – Europe in the vacuum

Why the “Merkel system” has long since been incapacitated and Euro Europe must be a nightmare.

Many have seen it already, the twilight of a Chancellor, but Angela Merkel still shines out in radiant colours and overwhelms her opponents in inexplicable ways. The fact is: German politics no longer exists. It has been led into shallow waters by personal striving for recognition and the maintenance of party-political power, where it wallows while the Euro loses more and more value, and will continue to do so until the Germans, and the world, finally realise: Germany is bankrupt, although it is still made clear to the people: the economy it is good shape, what is also true. But economics and business management are two completely different things. Something that nobody in politics talks about, and which the press is also eager to conceal.
The national bankruptcy which the Merkel/FDP government is hushing up from the German people, the Europeans and other people of the world, and delaying, is a fact which can only be hidden because the German economy continues to do well, and because that is still interested in the Euro, because the single currency brings advantages, above all that the German market has been extended from one to 16 countries. A paradise for the export nation of Germany. In addition, German industry (and also that of France or Spain) no longer needs to respond to the ratings of the individual trading partners. Two-thirds of German exports go to EU countries, more than 80 percent of exports are invoiced in Euros. If the Euro becomes weak, this means an end to profitable trade. The industrial and trading nation of Germany is therefore dependent more than ever on the preservation of the Euro and compels Mrs. Merkel to act accordingly. And she proclaimed: “I want the Euro.” Seen in this way, it is clear that no further arguments are needed.

With the Schengen Agreement, the countries of the European Community created a basis for cooperation in European. Economically, politically and legally, a union was created which established itself under the Schengen implementation provisions.
On this basis, there existed a common Europe, an idea that European politicians followed to create a community that was similar to the federal system of the USA. Following this model, the Europeans should now also conduct business in a common currency. The European Council decided in 1989 to institute a three-stage plan, which started in 1990 and was realised in 1999 with the introduction of the Euro (17 of the 27 EU countries are currently members of the Euro club).
Economic experts spoke out against this financial union and its currency, because most of the countries of this financial covenant were skating around the edge of foreseeable insolvency, and it was clear that the respective national leadership would lose her face by devaluation of the national currency or currency reform with all its consequences.
In this sense, a crash community came into being, which while allowing the individual countries to save face, nevertheless did so at the cost of the dream of a united Europe, based on the USA system, an attempt at currying favour, which suffered from a financially weak backbone, and which tied democracy as a form of government to a disaster called money. As a result this meant that the basis of democracy, or democracy itself was weakened, as well as the purchasing power of the people of the respective countries.

In the vortex of the crisis
The Euro crisis has been inevitable since the Greek government admitted in October 2009 that the national deficit (for the year 2009), instead of 6% as claimed, would increase to more than double this amount, i.e. to more than 12% of the gross domestic product (GDP).
As a whole, the total debt of the country had never been calculated accurately. In 2004, it emerged that new borrowing in the years prior to the introduction of the Euro (1998 and 1999) had been significantly above the 3% of GDP laid down in the Maastricht Treaty.
Economic experts calculated that Greek debt by the end of 2010 would be more than 140% of economic output. The rating agency Fitch downgraded Greece’s creditworthiness, followed by other agencies. The Government wanted to save, but it quickly became clear that Greece’s austerity measures were insufficient to reduce the deficit, so that further downgrades were applied.
In the Euro zone, the fear is growing that the Greeks will announce national bankruptcy, and, according to various press releases, “that this could infect other countries”. The so-called risk of infection was a synonym for national bankruptcy, and Euro-Europe feared it might become public that all Euro countries were bankrupt, because these had also circumvented the Maastricht provisions of the 3% threshold in various ways, carrying forward the national debt into the next year or reconciling it there.

The Greeks however went on strike against the savings policy of their government, and unrest, looting and conditions almost like civil war were reported in the European press. It became clear to the Europeans beyond Greece what a decline the Euro guaranteed them, and the heads of state and government of all those countries who wanted to be re-elected and wanted to stay politically important, decided to support the ailing partner Greece financially, as they said, in order to secure the stability of the Monetary Union. In return, the members of the pact demanded of the Hellenes that they should save, save, save, but Greek financial statistics remained inadequate. The Greek government announced additional austerity measures totalling € 4.8 billion, which is equivalent to about 2% of Greek GDP.
After several rounds of negotiations, in which it became clear that the noose of the Euro crisis would be drawn around all Euro countries, the EU Finance Ministers decided to grant loans to Greece in the amount of € 110 billion; € 80 from the Euro countries, with € 30 billion coming from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The funds were credited to Greece’s account 10 days following this decision. The Greek government asserted its intention to save, to reform the economy and to privatise state-owned companies. On the capital markets, Greece can still only refinance itself at high interest rates - the rating agency Standard & Poor’s assesses the country’s national bonds as “junk”.

In Germany meanwhile, the Federal Constitutional Court rejected an urgent application against the Greek aid package. Following the adoption of the law on Greek aid in the Bundestag, five scientists had filed a constitutional complaint. Their argument: The aid is in violation of the EU treaties, and in particular the prohibition of mutual liability in the so-called no-bailout clause. The experts spoke of “a disastrous inflation policy” which would result from the breach of the clause, because the clause was introduced specifically to prevent such encroachments.
The European Central Bank (ECB) decided to buy up government bonds of crisis-hit countries, and indeed did so. This is intended to avoid countries no longer being able to service their debt, because the interest increases continually. In order to keep the currency reasonably stable and to counteract impending inflation and deflation, the ECB went far as to circumvent its statutes, which state: the ECB is prohibited from buying bonds from the issuers, and for this reason the Bank now trades on the public and private bond market (the so-called secondary market).
At this point, the crisis can no longer be stopped, and this breaking of the taboo is a clear indication of this fact, since the ECB had long rejected the idea of bond purchases to combat the crisis.
Possibly the worst step, because the pace of the crisis was once again increasing, was the foundation of the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF), which the Euro Finance Ministers passed off to the press as a rescue package. This fund amounts to € 750 billion. The Luxembourg special-purpose company was to be able to take out loans on the capital market in order to financially support flagging Euro countries. But since the coffers of all Euro countries were empty, the Euro countries were to guarantee the loans - in the case of Germany by up to € 148 billion.
The EFSF was long considered safe in terms of rating, even though the actual loan capacity was always below € 750 billion, because this required the top rating of AAA called for high guarantees, which no Euro country could have supported. And this, although for economic reasons, Germany and France were still rated at triple-A, although both countries should long since have made their way to the insolvency courts.

Legal agreements were therefore sacrificed to the crisis, and even economic principles, but these cannot be changed. They can however be covered up, and that is the political business of our times. People no longer count in such a case. They have degenerated into a mass, which pays the bill for the games of politics and stands surety for the resulting debts. And a politically obedient press hawks the supposed successes instead of showing the real picture. This lie is so morally reprehensible that it borders on treason!

In the letters to the members of the Bundestag of 19th May 2012 and 23rd May 2012 , the Alliance for Democracy described how the introduction of Euro-bonds is equivalent to German national bankruptcy. This would not only be the final stage of the Euro crisis, which itself would then expend itself in a crash, but would also be a political bankruptcy of the Merkel government, which in particular failed to take measures of currency reform at the appropriate time, but instead stuck pigheadedly to a concept of Europe which is now impoverishing the whole of Europe. Although all Chancellor conducted business by means of loans and accumulated debts, it is in particular down to the Merkel/FDP government that all national budgets since 2010, with the corresponding supplements, to the draft of the national budget for 2013, have been doctored budgets, which were agreed and signed off by all parties in the German Bundestag with the necessary majority by means of decisions of conscience by the members. This too has also been forcibly stated by the Alliance for Democracy to the government, and their acolytes, such as the Finance Minister and the parliamentarians.

Methinks the lady doth protest too much
Chancellor Merkel announced that as long as she lived, there would be no Euro-bonds. Apart from the fact that this would mean that she would have to die in office, or govern as long as she lived, Merkel had so far always left open the possibility that there could be Euro-bonds, although nobody could ever have believed this.
First she referred to the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany, which prohibits community bonds, and which she always quoted, when for example her favourite former President Nicolas Sarkozy again brought up the subject of Euro-bonds (as in summer 2011). But Merkel could never agree to these Euro-bonds, because this would mean national bankruptcy (whatever the Constitution says). In this respect the Constitution serves as the cloak of a political rout - after all, who wants to have a national bankruptcy during their term of government? Certainly nobody who might want to be re-elected. So not Angela Merkel/(Philipp Rösler) by any means. The result: concealment of the facts; delaying of bankruptcy, abandonment of democratic principles!
But the Euro zone is calling for such bonds, while Angela Merkel continues in didactic vein. Merkel, from one of the better-off northern countries, and for the same reasons of concealing the national bankruptcy, said neither yes nor no to the southern countries more heavily affected by the crisis, and who were begging for Euro-bonds, because in this way fresh funds would once again be flowing through their empty coffers. She mentioned that she had no objection to the introduction of Euro-bonds for the southern countries, but explained that they would first have to save and implement reforms, before Euro-bonds could come into play.
And now the government colleagues of the southern countries have choked back their anger long enough after being taken for a ride by Angela. Recent developments suggest that, as described in the “Bombshell of the Week”, the heads of government of the southern Euro countries are now sitting in a position at the negotiating table which allows them to overrule Mrs. Merkel. And the question then must be: How will all the heads of government manage to conceal or dress up their national bankruptcy for domestic information sources, while still managing to play the hero?
Euro-bonds have however already been around for a long time, albeit unofficially, for the ECB injects the banks with funds by buying up ailing government bonds, which other than in the case of genuine Euro-bonds, do not lead to official national bankruptcy, and would not result in immediate pension reductions. The payments would initially remain the same, but would be eroded by inflation. The working population will have compensation commitments over and above those with which they have been saddled by previous governments; that means: The children of the older generation and their children will be strangulated by the state.
In this respect Merkel & Co. are violating not only their oaths of office and other professional promises, such as, for example, the Coalition Agreement ; they are acting against the good of the people, and quite deliberately, with the aim of preserving political face. And for this they are prepared to accept that all performance levels decline, the purchasing power of the currency is reduced, the country lies in the throes of insolvency, necessary reforms cannot be implemented, budgets are just so much waste paper and all state enabling laws are effectively suspended. The community of the Germans will be just as little a community as the community of Europeans. Concertedly wrong policies have been steering us towards this catastrophe for decades.

For the Western world, especially due to the dependence of the USA on Europe and its own bankruptcy situation, which is being delayed, it is obvious that after the fall of Communism, the Capitalist system has also outlived itself. The last chance is a complete new beginning - but please with other political incumbents, who must be controlled by the people and basically demonstrate a different quality, other than party-political manoeuvring. In addition, politics must also serve, and no longer govern in its own interests. As said former Chancellor Helmut Schmidt, an excessive accumulator of debt and joint contributor to the debt crisis, in a broadcast with Mrs. Maischberger - “Democracy invites the accumulation of debt!”.

In this respect it seems only new to the people that the state is apparently there to incur debts, in order not to develop itself further, and to cheat its citizens out of their belongings. Despite the fact that this state calls itself a welfare state, and progress, prosperity and participation are enshrined in the Constitution. The Alliance for Democracy sees a need for reform here, and for control of those in power, as described in the article System correction 2011.

And so nobody amongst the people should believe that the call for a referendum [] is meant seriously – this is only one possibility of passing this time-bomb on to the people and clinging on to power. The demand for genuine popular participation cannot come from politics, because it fears too much that it will be stripped of its power. Genuine popular participation must be fought for, and must result in real, direct democracy , anything else would be unfit for purpose.

ESM/Fiscal Pact
Anyone who on 29th June 2012 voted as a member of the Bundestag/Bundesrat in favour of the ESM/Fiscal Pact has only contributed to drawing out the Euro crisis; this was also a vote for the decline of the currency, the maintenance of power of party-politics, and above all the end of the Euro, because the ESM/Fiscal Pact will inevitably involve the introduction of Euro-bonds and is completely stupid: it will then be the Euro countries who decide, and not Mrs. Merkel, and certainly not the German people!
After several members complained during the voting phase that they did not even know what they were voting on, it becomes clear how incapable the class of people’s representatives really is. And the practice is spreading - of taking one step forward and two steps back - something in which all political leaders are well-versed.
In times of unstable conditions this may also be justified; in times of national bankruptcy, in which people are cheated out of their future, it is unacceptable. And it then becomes grotesque, when former Finance Minister Peer Steinbrück, together with the whole Troika, claims to have overlooked that the support of the SPD announced by him in the coalition governments to obtain a majority in favour of Euro-bonds in the Bundestag would not produce the desired result, as described by the Alliance for Democracy. And it is therefore hardly questionable any longer why this Mr. Steinbrück, as a so-called world economist, now recommends to the thinkers of the Seeheim Group of the SPD that this support of the SPD for the coalition government parties can no longer be maintained; and yet: Most members of the SPD, faithful to the party line, voted in favour of the ESM/Fiscal Pact. And so the damage has long since been done. The party diplomacy has been preserved, and how can Mr. Steinbrück be blamed if he is now forced to distance himself?
This example reveals the whole misery of the crisis, and most importantly, how it is being artificially kept alive. Politics is concerned with votes, with cronyism, with who supports or alienates who, it is about the party line, the party, the preservation of the caste; is it not about Europe, not about people. The question is: what were they thinking, the “thinkers” of the Seeheim Group of the SPD?
And in the middle of this rigmarole, Helmut Schmidt crowns the new heir apparent by considering Peer Steinbrück as the best possible candidate for the post of Chancellor.
In over 60 years, the Germans became accustomed to miscalculations on the part of politics; in times of crisis is clear, what excesses this madness can lead to, and how it encourages fickleness, and even Sigmar Gabriel cannot absolve himself of this, although as the current manager of the SPD, he should know better. Because he too suffers from political delirium. In his statement of opinion before the Federal Constitutional Court on the ESM and Fiscal Pact decision of the German Bundestag, Mr. Gabriel said on 10th July 2012 in Karlsruhe, “that we had already had Euro-bonds for a long time”, which is true when seen from the economic point of view, since such communal liabilities have long since been assumed by the purchases of junk national bonds by the European Central Bank (ECB) and the bank support in the form of financial injections by the ECB to the tune of trillions. This does justice to the situation, but it is also does not conform to the fact that the Troika and hence Mr. Gabriel are concealing from their own party members and their potential voters that ESM/Fiscal Pact and Euro-bonds will inevitably entail national bankruptcy. And because the SPD also entertains hopes of a convincing election victory in the election year 2013, it is also breaking its oath before even entering into office, and presuming to present solutions, but can actually also do nothing other than to postpone national bankruptcy as long as possible, because a SPD Chancellor candidate does not want a crash during his time in office!

It will be interesting to see to what extent politics manages to dig itself out of the debacle of the ESM/Fiscal Pact. Many things are possible, even that the head of the Constitutional Court Andreas Voßkuhle turns out to be a rescuer in this emergency, by declaring the whole matter constitutionally irrelevant, and thereby giving German politics time to think, and some freedom of action, in the game of poker with its European colleagues over the Euro. The principle of “we would if we could, but national law is sacrosanct”, would also mean that the national bankruptcy so carefully covered up so far would still be impending. It will therefore be in the interests of the government to have won some time – the question is: How has the government used this time?

Another conceivable scenario: In the event that the Federal Constitutional Court also gives its blessings to the ESM/Fiscal Pact, subject to certain changes, and then buys up junk government bonds of ailing Euro countries to preserve monetary stability, and floods the market, so that despite all the current recessionary effects of the prescribed savings policies and reforms, an overlapping of this negative effect will take place due to positive inflation which can no longer be compensated for. All this would have to happen with the approval of the ECB (although it would be contrary to their statutes) and would also mean state financing, which is not in the purview of the ECB and is fundamentally prohibited at European level. And of course this flooding of the market would have no limit! It will be exciting to see what laws and regulations would have to be bent or broken for such transactions, and how this would be done. And this would also mean that the German national budget, which anyway already stands surety for large parts of the rescue packages, which are as large as the budget for the year 2012, would also have to take a share of the losses of these ECB actions, so that without any safety net, the national budget would still be pledged to such aid, before it has even been ratified.

The other variant is called banking license, and is already haunting the pages of the newspapers. This states that in the event of even limited recognition of the ESM/Fiscal Pact, the ESM will be provided with a banking license, or will be considered as such, and in this way will surreptitiously be able to provide prohibited state funding. It will then be possible via the ESM, as from other banks in the market, to obtain direct loans from the ECB, in addition to the funding by the Euro countries provided for in the ESM, so as to be able to provide direct support for banks in addition to the support given to the countries themselves.
Incomprehensible? Certainly – and it shows how hopeless the struggles of the Merkel/Rösler government have become.
In both cases, legal issues also arise in addition to the moral and economic questions.
In one case, the FDP announced that it intended to submit a complaint to the European Court of Justice (ECJ), if such a law were adopted. In the other case concerning the banking license for the ESM, legal questions also arise with regard to the regulations provided for in the ESM and how these could be reconcilable with the criteria for the granting of a license as a bank and ESM bank.

Both cases however will achieve the same end economically: There will be a flooding of the money market with an enormous expansion of the money supply, which will no longer be recoverable in time, as should be the case. This has the consequence that inflation will be created over and above the recessionary effect, where parts of the inflation could be neutralised, and this to a degree that was common in the days of the last world economic crisis of the 1920’s.
Uncertain of whether politics is clear what it is conjuring up here, the daily business of politics continues. In the summer recess, the “Linken” offered to form a coalition with the SPD from autumn 2013. This offer came from the leader of the “Linken”, Katja Kipping, and prompts the Alliance for Democracy to ask at what point the ESM opponents of the “Linken” and the ESM proponents of the SPD intend to come together to develop a common policy? And when will the Greens step in as a possible coalition partner, and what will they demand?

It can only be assumed to what extent such ideas could be realisable, and to what extent a coalition between the SPD, the “Linken” and the Greens, as could now theoretically be possible, could have any prospect of success, because the fact remains: All this shows that it is simply a struggle for the survival of politics, while blithely accepting even the most abstruse consequences for the people of the country.

It is no longer acceptable that “representatives of the people” continue to represent the people in this way! And this runs through all political strata and concerns all politicians, no matter what their political affiliation. This form of democracy has therefore outlived itself, because no more progress can be made in the monotony of incompetent decision-makers. It is now a matter of creating a different, better form of government and above all the aim must be to control all power.

The hesitant, the reported and the omitted
In the course of the persisting crisis, the Alliance for democracy has pointed out in many articles the consequences or the possible quick end of the Euro (crash or currency reform), and wondered how it can be possible that the contemptible press has reported surreptitiously or out of context. The press today appears to have two faces: One that presents Mrs. Merkel as the one who negotiates adroitly, correctly and always in the interests of the German people and the whole of Europe; The other face is announcements, speculation and reports about an Angela Merkel who has long since lost control of the tiller, and in the vortex of the crisis no longer knows her right from her left, and no longer has the closed ranks of the CDU/CSU behind her. Surveys repeatedly make it clear that Mrs. Merkel is appreciated by the people. She is regarded as crisis-proof and is showing the Euro countries where to go. What is suspect is that these values have remained unchanged since the beginning of the crisis and never come to a different conclusion, although the Germans are already feeling the loss of value of the money in their purses; that turmoil rages in Euroland, and that Mrs. Merkel is actually incapable of action, or that any actions she takes can only result either in the crash or a currency reform.

Particularly strange is that such values are always peddled by the press when Mrs. Merkel had suffered a serious defeat, such as that when 160 German economists drew attention to the delaying of bankruptcy, and the impending national bankruptcy that must inevitably result from the trickery over the 2013 budget. The mathematical calculations were countered by 17 economists in the Springer press (Bild, 26th July 2012, p. 2), who claimed that there was no need for alarm, and that Mrs. Merkel had everything under control.

An example of this is the book by the publicist Gertrud Höhler (published around 20th August 2012), which is entitled “Die Patin” (“The Godmother”), and is supposed to be a settlement of accounts with Angela Merkel. In several talk shows, political shows, and in the press, Mrs. Höhler described how she had arrived at her claims against Mrs. Merkel. These are by no means new, but were:
      1.Merkel is concerned only with the retention of power.
      2.Merkel suppresses competitors.
      3.Merkel stands for no values, no conviction and could not care less about the CDU programme, because she does whatever she likes.
This book was followed on 29th August 2012 by that same Forsa survey , which found that Merkel (i.e. really the CDU/CSU) had recorded the best figures since the inception of the coalition in the year 2008.

Now there can be two possibilities: Either Angela Merkel must counter the abuse of Gertrud Höhler with some value which creates the impression amongst the people that the people are more than satisfied with Mrs. Merkel. This would mean: Mrs. Merkel takes Mrs. Höhler’s book seriously, and wants to prevent alleged discontent which could arise amongst readers by referring to the survey results, which state: Other readers nevertheless considered Mrs. Merkel’s policy to be unscrupulous. This would pacify the briefly outraged reader and leave in Mrs. Höhler a sticky impression of the envious former policy advisor who once earned her pay in the Kohl Cabinet and has nothing more to say in the Merkel Cabinet. All in all: 1-0 to Angela Merkel.

Another variant might be: Mrs. Höhler, who incidentally as a political adviser of Kohl supported the Euro madness, or at least did nothing substantial to oppose it, although the economic malaise of the currency, and above all the economic viability of the individual Euro countries, even before the introduction of the Euro could be foreseen, published this polemic, in order to shower a wave of negative criticism over Mrs. Merkel, but which cannot be confirmed by anyone (and Mrs. Höhler is also unable to prove this in her book). This means: Anyone who maligns someone else contributes above all to their good sides being considered, and in the final analysis Mrs. Merkel would emerge as the unjustly maligned party, although she does her job well, and there are of course always envious people; so again, 2-0 to Angela Merkel.

The last category of media work during the crisis is that of the “omitted”, and also plays Mrs. Merkel’s hand, because it brings nothing unpleasant to the fore or the sensitive reader/listener. An example of this genre is the following:
At a press conference in Ottawa, where Angela Merkel recently made a state visit, she announced nonchalantly that she agreed with the plan of the Council of the European Central Bank (ECB), that the Federal Reserve should now be allowed to buy up government bonds without limit, and bring new money supplies into circulation for this purpose. She would do this, Merkel said, because she would in any event do everything to preserve the Euro.
This agreement is the tapping of a source of money which as a broad flood would wash away European national debts. Continual saving would be forgotten, companies could look forward again to government contracts and this would ultimately also make shareholders happy.
The bloodless whiners of the southern countries, who wanted to force Angela Merkel into providing more funds at the negotiating table would be appeased, because with this money, there would come new life. And Angela Merkel can also achieve another side-effect with this agreement: She becomes more independent of the decision of the Constitutional Court, which will give its judgement on the ESM/Fiscal Pact on 12th September 2012. If the Karlsruhe judges declare the ESM/Fiscal Pact to be unconstitutional, the market will be flooded with money, and money is the best palliative for the nerves of the heads of all Euro countries. So much for the good news. Should they agree, Merkel would have to take the oath of disclosure, because the agreement to the ESM/Fiscal Pact, for which she once pushed so hard, and to which she swore all parties, is just another word for the delaying of national bankruptcy, which will inevitably be followed by the crash. Mrs. Merkel has now recognised this, and as usual reacted immediately. The lesser evil is now: the purchase of junk government bonds via the ECB. This will give her a few more months of leadership of the country. The other side of the coin is: Savers and non-shareholders will suffer from the printing of money, because their investments depend on interest rates, which will increase. And that will ultimately affect the national coffers, which benefit more from low interest rates. And this is what Mrs. Merkel will never understand. She has already feathered her nest!
Even worse is the fact that the ECB as the monetary authority is not there in order to pump out money to people and countries in an inflationary way, because inflation (or deflation) weakens any currency. The statutes of the Federal Reserve therefore prohibit such purchases. In addition, interest rate ceilings for every country were also under discussion, which would also have been good for the stability of the currency, but now this has disappeared from the agenda. Instead the ECB is surrendering its mandate to safeguard the stability of the currency!
And in this respect it is not sufficient to reject the introduction of Euro-bonds; it must also mean that countries have to register their debts in the year in which they arise, and not in later years, as is possible through bond purchases. National bankruptcies which can be further delayed by a flood of money provided by the ECB can also no longer be an attempt at a solution to a crisis which is irresolvable, and which is delayed by the world of politics by printing money only in order to preserve party-political face, and instead to throw away the welfare state, democratic values and national law, and to build a Europe which is no more than a poorhouse.

All the newspapers reported what Mrs. Merkel said and did, but none said what it means if the ECB is allowed to violate its own statutes. And this would have been useful to bring about different results in future polls and surveys, if they are actually carried out and not paid for in advance.
The Alliance for Democracy hopes that the division of the German press will perhaps take on a little more weight in favour of those who dare to report and comment, even if this is not entirely to the taste or credit of Mrs. Merkel; and then it remains to be hoped that the survey institutes ask the right questions, such as: Do you want the total Euro? And if that would then explain the small print, this means: Virtually no purchasing power, inflation, small pensions, small social allowances, no reforms.
And it would also be highly desirable if there were more independent survey institutes and economic institutes and research organisations and newspapers and TV programmes!

Mrs. Merkel does not govern alone!
The popular parliamentary representation with about 620 members must inevitably come to nothing, if it is not properly informed, as the Federal Constitutional Court found in June 2012 as part of information law and the information obligations to the parliament by the Federal Government. As long as this is not the case, the entire German Bundestag is incapacitated, i.e. incapable of decision, although it continues to make decisions . The question then arises of decisions of conscience, if actually nobody knows what he is voting for, but nevertheless agrees, because this is expected by the party line. To have a direction is of course basically good; not to parrot the words of others, or to follow their decisions is however something that should be learnt in the 1st grade. Why parliamentary representatives all seem to suffer from a loss of memory on this point and no longer want to recall this great moment of their primary school education will remain inexplicable, but what can be explained from this is how it can be that politics and parliament fail so regularly.
This applies to the first rescue package act of September 2011 and also the decisions made in the Bundestag, including the agreement to the ESM/Fiscal Pact on 29th June 2012.
A Federal Chancellor and the Federal Government she represents have set themselves on the course of overturning European law, and thereby probably infringing the self-proclaimed absence of any alternative to the Euro and the hoped-for Euro-Europe. The measures adopted will not save the Euro. Loss of purchasing power and the proven shorter life expectancy of a population living below the subsistence level is one consequence of this strange policy, which has allowed the rich to become richer and forced ordinary citizens deeper into poverty, and therefore justifiably emerges as a policy which for the working population is redolent of slavery, and under which saving and investment for one’s own welfare and future have become impossible.
With real wages at a static level (for approx. 20 years), approx. 2.4 million employed people earn between three to six Euros per hour. Interest from savings and investments (for savings after tax and inflation) amounts to more or less zero, and this means: At the end of the month, no money is left over when the loss of buying power and inflation are taken into account. The causative factors also include steadily and continually increasing prices of food, energy and fuel.

How much of the month is left over when the money is all gone is shown by the example of the average recipient of a widow’s pension under the statutory pension insurance scheme, or those who earn minimum wages.
Over the last 10 years, the pension has increased from € 400 to € 450 per month. The devaluation of money during this time has amounted to about 22 to 25% (loss of purchasing power). This means: apparently there is more money, but this is worth less, so that the decline has hardly been offset.
Minimum wage-earners also had to work long hours, because the government did not intervene as a regulator, and so the monthly hours to be worked remained the same for 10 years, and the wages also remained the same, if as in exceptional cases an agreement was not made between employees and employers that the number of hours to be worked for the same low wage (€ 400 limit) was reduced accordingly. Usually it remained the same, although the cost of living (including inflation and devaluation) still continued to rise.

It was completely in order that the FDP should apply for the maximum monthly minimum wage to be raised from € 800 to € 1,000 per month, on which progressive social security contributions would then be due above € 400 per month up to the new limit of € 1,000 per month, as previously on the amount between € 400 and € 800, but it was a scandal not to raise the minimum wage limit of € 400 per month by the same ratio, but initially to leave it at the same level of € 400.
Only in retrospect was it then raised from € 400 to € 450/month. It can quickly be calculated that from € 1,000 to € 800 is 25% more than between € 450 and € 400 (11.5 %). To leave it at a 0% adjustment was a scandal in itself; to make an unequal adjustment is nothing more than fraud and deception. It is hard to see why such a decision was made, since the lower range of € 400 or € 450/month is exempt from social security payments (apart from a small fixed percentage contribution by the employer). The social tax obligation also remains incomprehensible. Even with increasing income it should play no role, if the calculation were made between the former € 400 and € 800, and now € 450 and € 1,000, nor should any distinction be made between the former € 400 and € 1,000/month. To justify this to employees makes no sense.
A possible distinction in the increase could have been intended as bait by the government for all parties, but this argument cannot satisfy workers that an increase to more than € 400 or € 450 would make so many of them exempt to social security, who previously had to pay progressive social security charges in the range between € 400 and € 800. The fact that the government is thereby starving out the lower income ranges, and thereby not encountering any opposition even from the corresponding organisations which are funded by the contributions of the people, in order to strengthen themselves for such requirements, is a puzzle which still remains to be solved.
In addition to Germany, the USA and Japan are prime examples of how totally over-indebted countries delay national bankruptcy at the expense of the people. The fact that these costs are simply passed on to the people, who are additionally burdened with speculative losses, which go hand in hand with the decline of the currency, are unrivalled crimes against humanity and should be prosecuted by the highest courts. The possibility of reasoning in the face of such behaviour that the Federal Republic of Germany or any other country can be referred to as a social state or even a welfare state is no longer justified. Policies or politics which allow this have long since lost their legitimacy. And this is the responsibility of all representatives of the people, all parties, all unions who stick to their cliques and pursue only their own advantages in the field of power-politics.

If control of power was practiced for all areas as the supreme obligation of all representatives of the people, as called for by the Alliance for Democracy , (including the abolition of the right of government through laws, legislative interpretations and politicised jurisdiction), then such a “socialisation” of institutional losses to people as individuals would not be possible. And then democracy might provide a stimulus to something other than incurring debts. This shows how necessary it is to prevent such stimuli in future.

If that which has been given the blessing of the co-called representatives of the people comes to pass, German democracy will degenerate into a dictatorship through political law-breaking . A situation by which false politics keeps itself alive by means of the security afforded to it under the basic law, against all reason, and which can only be eradicated by the introduction of genuine, direct democracy.
The Alliance for Democracy believes: This is the only alternative. And the supreme objective.

Party games – or Panem et circensis (Bread and circuses)
We have already had the example of the “Linken”, who want to form a coalition with the SPD in order to freshen up the election result. This shows in what an abstruse way politics is conducted for its own benefit. And we can find more examples of this. Besides the “Linken”, who for a hundred years have wanted to cuddle up to the Social Democrats, but at the first attempt of the merger of the SPD and the KPD into the SED in East Germany cannot look back with any conviction, there are also the Greens, who like to hang on to the skirt-tails of established party work. The “Greens” have actually long since ceased to exist – there are only the “red/greens”. The noble principle of separation of mandate and office reads like a history, the realists and the fundamentalists have become the “Linken” and the “reformers”, most of them “Linken”, belong to all camps, and somehow also to the SPD, because although their own electoral success lead to joint determination in all committees, the merger of the Greens and the SPD is a safer electoral combination than that of the Linken/SPD, which already has a state failure behind it, and would never be able to shed the image of the GDR government. The Greens lead the field as detractors from the image of the SPD, but are inseparable as possible partners. There is consensus between the two parties about the coalition, particularly with regard to the next Bundestag election.

The objectives of the ESM/Fiscal Pact and also the introduction of Euro-bonds were identical. They have thereby demonstrated that they can neither think nor act in economic terms, and so still don’t know that Germany is bankrupt, nor are interested in the material security of the population. Party-political games, brotherhoods, cliques, the day-to-day business: No names, no pack drill. The opponents: the government parties; the prize: the power of the state. And in this respect the CDU/CSU cannot score any points, if it presents on the occasion of the commemoration of Helmut Kohl’s taking office as Chancellor of Germany 30 years of power of the CDU/CSU, and actually represents 30 years of government debt and failure. A theatre beyond compare, which perhaps makes a pleasant meeting place for the party supporters, and a blessing to those who still believe that politics will set everything right.

The Alliance for Democracy says: It is high time to draw a balance, and to establish what politics has actually achieved! Now it sits helplessly in the trap and reacts senselessly, simply as the situation demands. Fight or flee is the motto; this has long since had nothing more to do with justice, the state and security. It is only a question of time until the Merkel system succeeds in abolishing itself. Until then, the old law of physics applies: In a vacuum, all bodies fall at the same speed. Anyway, in this way a people is at least committed to its leadership regime.
The Financial Dictatorship’s Democratic Façade is Crumbling
On the 2017 Federal Elections
No Restraint
Trump’s Election is a Warning for Germany’s Political Parties
Year-End Selection of Texts
CDU Party Congress 2016
IMF Crisis Management a Failure
Deployment of the Bundeswehr in Germany
Crucial Test with International Implications
Ever Closer?
On the 2016 German State Elections
Revealed: Colossal Public Fraud in Germany and Europe
Nettlesome Politics
The Press
As We Begin 2016
Legal Action
Clever Shifting Tactics
New Charges in an Ongoing Saga
Evil under the Sun – The G20
Political Paradox
Game over for Merkel
The Greeks are making history
Clash of the Titans
FIFA Roulette
The Beast Roars
The Silver Lining
Pulling in Opposite Directions
The Deafening Silence
Texts on the liquidation of the euro
Wasting Time
New Rules, Same Impetus
Call in the Army
Politicians Run from Themselves
Tax Policy Loopholes
Europa without the Euro
Alternative to the Euro
Easter 2015
Tidying Up
Insolvency Statute
Heiner Geißler
Germany Corrupt No More
India’s GDP growth
Rescue Fever
Unbridled Power
Heaven on Earth
Getting down to the Nitty Gritty
1-0 in Favour of the Opposition
The Junk Currency
Oil War 2014
Golden Goodbye
The Ukraine Aid Debacle
World Tax Authority
Demonstrations in front of the ECB
Promises and Trust
Democratic Deficits
Nothing is safe
Fit for a Museum
At Christmas 2014
Family Voting Rights
Clueless Advisors
Pension Debacle
The Balanced Budget Lie
The Wimpy Currency
Acid Test
Two Very Different Issues
Who is Ruling the World?
More Clandestine Employees
The Recession Principle
Is This Really Better?
Kohl and Merkel
Debt Brake Debate
Merkel and the democracy
Tax Losses
Totalitarian Collectivism
Regrettable Incident
Wulff’s Attorney Brings New Legal Action
The ECB in the Crossfire
Former Constitutional Judge Sceptical
A Lovely Gathering of VIPs?
German Banks Need Money
Stumbling Match
Deutsche Bank under Pressure
The Crow …
Papier‘s Morality
Shot in the Arm for the Economy
Political Crime Novel
ECB Soon to be the Eurozone‘s only Bad Bank
Demonstration for Democracy
Award for responsible action
Recommendations in case of a crash
Final move
European rating agency
The last elections
Hartz-IV is enough
Mr. Putin, please cry!
No longer worth anything
Free trade agreement
1st September 2014
The election in Saxony
Special European Summit
Bankers are counting on it
Debt cut á la state
Immigrants criticised
Unbelievable assets
Bundesbank closes Money Museum
Lawsuit against bank union
Only the penitent …
ECB stability report
Cowardly warriors
The financial industry has learnt nothing
Bribery of MP’s
They are also blind on 2.
The Stability Pact
Avoid Obama
Thoughts on Merkel's birthday
Megalomania’s children
Niebel’s Low Points
On László Andor’s speech
Snowden should say nothing
Reduction of interest rates
OECD report
A great blunder
Germany as a driver of growth?
Farewell, housing allowance
Sick health service
The EU Commission knows about popular deception
Draghi gives a warning
Self-praise stinks
A forced affair of the heart
Drawn from left to right
The aftermath of an election
65 years of the Basic Law
Who will save the life-insured?
Minimum wage
Minimum Wage I
Minimum Wage II
Minimum wage III
Minimum wages IV
The minimum wage V
Arise for revolution
The European elections are an act of dictatorship
Switzerland and Europe
Protection of the Constitution and services
The impossible triangle
The standard pension
Schäuble tricks again
The old “Welt”
The Union wears the trousers
Zeroes – commas – nothing!
Book publication
Court Condemns Politicians
The highest German court
Parties for the European election
Freedom of the press
Dispensation from obligations
European Elections
European election
The resurrection of "doctor" Schavan
Per capita assets
Federal Constitutional Court – Accrued gain and provision
ESM - ECB - the flood of debt
The hysterical Republic
Review proceedings against Wulff
The own goal of the High Court
Judges helpless
Schavan and zu Guttenberg
Human rights
Counterfeit money and false fifties
Fight against tax fraud?
New fellow citizens
So many ministers
Democracy the Turkish way
But will every European pay?
Data protection
Tax havens
Free Trade Agreement
Data thieves at work
Expropriation of the citizen
Soon without cash
NSA Investigation Committee
Dutch rating agencies
Officials in the German Bundestag
Snub for banks
Repeated deception of the people
GroKo = Große Kosten (great costs)
The sluts of the SPD
What the grand coalition will present to us
Federal Public Prosecutor versus the NSA
The new “tithe”
The people’s sense of justice
Trauma of coalition negotiations
When will it finally come, the Constitution for the united Germany?
Investors and savers
Finally, Mr. Ströbele
Church and State
Left party politics
Is the Constitution democratically legitimised?
Needs must when the devil drives
Wiki-Leaks +
The CDU and its donors
State of emergency
High finance and party-politics
People and stock market
The person and their office
With full intent
Private retirement provision
It’s all about the quota
Deception over the Fiscal Pact
The failure of the government
Not really more money for the unemployed
Surpluses in health
Euro rescue by means of inflation
Asylum for the Chancellor
Discussion over democracy
Complaint against ...
The apparent vote ...
Courage, Mrs. Merkel!
Paid E-mailing
Only one month to go
Siegfried the Brave
Draghi wants more...
Fraud by forecast
Germany illegitimate
Election gifts
Left out
Youth unemployment
Public relations...
Leaders in politics
The rubble women
Every effort ...
Berlin Joint Welfare...
The casino of Cyprus
Ratings and bank union
A Conservative party...
Employees of public...
Bank union
lose links and ...
Democracy in Germany
Our money is not safe
Out of order
More spirit of ...
TV duel
France in need
Finances in the ...
False average
The fight against corruption
Parliamentary absentees
Bravo, Mr. Weidmann!
At the end, Mrs. Lagarde?
On the subject of Cyprus
The wool has been ... I
The wool has been ... II
The problem of inertial ...
Schroeder’s homage
Gay marriage: only policy
The budget in NRW was ...
Penalties for bankers
Bank bailout fund
The female quota
News about the Euro rescue
The war of the currencies
Stalemate in Italy
Merkel’s interests
NPD ban
Rating agencies
War-games again
S&P’s in the stocks
Political control
Mrs. Schavan, how...
Begging at a high level
Spain in the trend
Treaties between friends
Joint determination...
The most blatant lie...
Lower Saxony has...
Elections in Lower Saxony
Why have we called...
Something is rotten...
Secret agreements
Wulff has done...
Outcray against the ...
Politics is breaking ...
In the trap
The Target-2 system
The Devil returns home
Members’ salaries
The last
Bankruptcy regulations...
The energy revolution
Bank rescue
Inactivity of the ...
So much eeriness at ...
Bad management is ...
Goodbye, Greece
General strike
Media in a fog
Euro Finance Week
The Berlin Bazaar
Careless love
The suffering basis...
Rescue packages ...
Election of the ...
Steinbrück’s earnings
EU Summit in October
Aurea mediocritas
The veneering process
They have lied to us
All scapegoats together
Double accounting
Tour de force
Testament of poverty
€ 8 more
In honour of Helmut Kohl
People have no respect
Nonsense and insanity
Pensions are not safe
Serial Merkel
Bad, bad, bad
People are not ...
Kohl’s merits
Deliberate false statements
Outwardly fine, inwardly...
Gabriel goes underground?
Kohl’s Ghost
Hopeless bankruptcy delay
Open for business
Outcry against the ESM
2nd Outcry against the ESM
Fiscal Pact
Government bonds
Germany is bankrupt
Loss of democracy
Deception of investors
Merkel Referendum
The election in NRW
Ongoing election campaign
The aberrations of E. Pols
Speaking ban
Criminal complaints
Fear of publicity
Top experts
Real, direct democracy
Get rid of German President
Back-door politics
Competition for the office
Angela's wrinkles
Vultures gather
2011- System correction
Rating Agency Foundation
Contact men
Leading politicians
Transfer union
Membership fees
Referendum S21
Misplaced doctors
State Trojan horses
Petitions ignored
The lever effect
Bonds by the ECB
Member states
No access
Political lobbyism
Conditions like in the East
Sponsorship funds
Development aid
The transfer procedure
GER is doing itself away
Rescue packages
Supercrash in USA and EU
The 'Soli'-Lie
Vladimir Putin
A plea for direct democracy
Distrust of the Chancellor
More control
Flight of capital
Euro summit
It's war
The C in CDU and CSU
Deceit and lies
Germany getting screwed
Investments in countries
The illusion of a ...
General statements
GER-insurance society
Debt brake
Costs of members
Deceit and lies
Retirement provision
Medal of Freedom
Euro-thugs / Polit-thugs
We are the people
Security authorities
National debt and ...
Apology from the bankers
The Merkel Adventure
Party Competences
The East-Mark, ... ,Euro
Sister Merkel
Ruck-Rede & Oath of Office
The casino operation
Rescue Reactor
Euro rescue