Talk:Rainer Barzel

ALLEGATION NEEDS SOURCING

Is there ABSOLUTE PROOF that the no confidence motion failed because of "Stasi bribes"? This needs to be established if such a damning statement is to remain in the article. Otherwise, it seems like an extreme violation of the NPOV rule. Ken Burch 8:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

It is always very difficult to prove these things which people want to hide. The WDR TV (Cologne) ran a program maybe a year ago that the supporters of Helmut Kohl, i.e. industry, paid Barzel DM 250,000 per anno to vacate the chairmanship in Kohl's favour. Kurt Biedenkopf was in the video, then solicitor for Henkel. It is not mutually exclusive, but the Stasi archives should be somewhat public now with the exception of what the Americans stole. All the moneymen, though, seemed to have an interest in lifting Kohl. The suicide of Claudia Barzel caused quite a stir in the young generation at the time; I had connections to Bonn then. If you look at the timing, she might have well realised how corrupt her father was when cash was flowing too freely and been teased by other young people before she cracked. It is an assumption but the timing is a hint. 2001:8003:A02F:F400:6949:DAF0:FD1F:C5F3 (talk) 00:19, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

PS: The bribery issue was known as the Steiner-Wiegand Affair, and bribery was not proven what is not surprising. They are very skillful in covering up bad deeds but even if that had not happened it would have suited them really well to distract from their own (Barzel/Kohl/Biedenkopf) corruption by saying something which keeps people busy and will not be proven one way or the other. These tactics are these days called 'dead cat strategy', i.e. throw a dead cat on the table and prevent them from discussing the real agenda. Claudia Barzel died in 1977, and Barzel sold his position to Kohl starting from Mai 1973. It may be too long for there to have been a direct connection. 2001:8003:A02F:F400:A135:31D8:58EB:2A06 (talk) 02:38, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

As a more general comment, there is soooo much more that could be written about Rainer Barzel than, till now, appears in english-langauge wikipedia. Quite a lot of it already appears in German-language wikipedia. If you - or anyone else reading this - has time and inclination to take time out from the day job - or maybe over an otherwise underused weekend - and do the necessary, it looks as though you may have the skills and knowledge to do a great job. And ... please. Charles01 (talk) 08:50, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

As a victim of the Leuna-Minol/elf Aquitaine affair I only have an interest in unmasking Kohl and the fraud that hit me. Until the WDR had that docu I was not aware that Kohl had purchased his position, or rather his powerful and rich friends did it for him. Kurt Biedenkopf seemed to be involved, judging from the vision. He later fell out a bit with Kohl (I heard from someone in Biedenkopf's entourage).

Kohl's 'Chancellor Matter", how he made a secret deal with France, the documentation of which was shredded to hide their evil deeds, is the real scandal, although Barzel's preparedness to sell his position so Kohl could become a candidate for Chancellor is coming close. Other than that, Barzel is a side issue. Do I have to say sorry? I'd devote time to the Kohl corruption that hit me (Prenzlauer Promenade 191) plus make people aware of the breathtaking collusions in the German establishment. Almuth Hauptmann-Gurski (Australia) 2001:8003:A02F:F400:309E:508B:2B37:25A5 (talk) 04:49, 12 March 2020 (UTC)