A president who knows what of he speaks 103
From Yahoo News:
The European Union has turned into an undemocratic and elitist project comparable to the Communist dictatorships of eastern Europe that forbade alternative thinking, Czech President Vaclav Klaus told the European Parliament on Thursday.
Klaus, whose country now holds the rotating EU presidency, set out a scathing attack on the EU project and its institutions, provoking boos from many lawmakers, some of whom walked out, but applause from nationalists and other anti-EU legislators.
Klaus is known for deep skepticism of the EU and has refused to fly the EU flag over his official seat in Prague during the Czech presidency, saying the country is not an EU province.
He said current EU practices smacked of communist times when the Soviet Union controlled much of eastern Europe, including the Czech Republic and when dissent or even discussions were not tolerated.
"Not so long ago, in our part of Europe we lived in a political system that permitted no alternatives and therefore also no parliamentary opposition," said Klaus. "We learned the bitter lesson that with no opposition, there is no freedom."
He said the 27-nation bloc should concentrate on offering prosperity to Europeans, rather than closer political union, and scrap a stalled EU reform treaty that Irish voters have already rejected.
Klaus said that questioning deeper integration has become an "uncriticizable assumption that there is only one possible and correct future of the European integration."
"The enforcement of these notions … is unacceptable," Klaus said. "Those who dare thinking about a different option are labeled as enemies." Observers had been expecting Klaus to deliver a critical speech during his first and only visit to the EU chamber at a time when his country holds the EU limelight as chair of the 27-nation bloc.
"I have never experienced a situation where the presidency of the European Union … compares the EU with the Soviet Union," said Belgian lawmaker Ivo Belet.
Daring to use freedom 32
Again the Czechs delight us.
Czech artist David Cerny has produced a work depicting his view of the member countries of the ghastly EU which should have all Europe laughing at itself, and the rest of the world laughing with it. Some are laughing, but it has aroused official fury.
Bulgaria is the angriest because it is shown as a Turkish toilet.
Holland is under water with minarets sticking out of it.
Britain is happy because it is left out.
Read all about it here.
Taking the head of a Muslim 265
More on the new President of the EU, Karel Schwarzenberg:
The Schwarzenbergs were Austrian princes. There is an equestrian statue of Prince Karl Philipp (1771-1820) in the Schwarzenbergplatz in Vienna. But more interesting to us is the Schwarzenberg who was one of the leaders of the troops against the Ottoman Turks in the Battle of Vienna in 1683. Although outnumbered, the Austrians beat the Ottomans, and by doing so stopped the advance of Islam into Europe. The victory marked the start of the Habsburg dynasty. It was also (so legend has it) the occasion for which the delicate croissant bread roll was invented to commemorate the defeat of the Muslim armies with the crescent on their flag. And ever since then, the Schwarzenbergs have had the head of a Muslim on their coat of arms.
During the Second World War, a Schwarzenberg duchess in Czechoslovakia, ancestress of Karel, refused to speak German to the Nazi occupiers although it was her native tongue, always using an interpreter to make communication as difficult as possible.
Now that Islam is conquering Europe by stealth, it may be a hopeful sign that once again a Schwarzenberg is in a position of authority and speaking out against the renewed advance of militant Islam.
The new EU president supports Israel, condemns Hamas 96
Here is news worth reporting because such understanding, and such plain speaking of the truth, is unusual among EU leaders.
The Czech foreign minister has taken over the presidency of the EU – not the president of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Klaus, as was expected. Fortunately, Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg shares some vital principles with President Klaus.
In reply to the out-going EU president, Sarkozy of France, who condemned Israel’s operation against Hamas, Schwarzenberg said: ‘Let us realize one thing. Hamas increased steeply the number of rockets fired at Israel since the cease-fire ended on December 19. That is not acceptable any more. Israel has the right to defend itself.’
He also blamed Hamas for the civilian death toll in Gaza, pointing out that the terrorist organization put its bases and gun warehouses in densely populated areas.
One European leader worthy of respect 20
Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic, is about to take over the presidency of the EU, which he thoroughly despises. He has declared it to be as dangerous as the old Soviet Union.
We agree with him.
We also agree with him that ‘global warming’ is a myth; and that the US and global economic crisis was caused by too much government ‘regulation’ – ie interference – rather than too little.
Of course the New York Times is against him. You can find its typically narrow-minded lefty piece on him here.
The Times of London is only a little more objective in its account of Klaus and his opinions.
We doubt that Klaus is ‘close’ to Putin as the reports allege. If he is, it’s one thing about him that we don’t applaud. But for the most part he is an admirable conservative free-marketeer who values the nation state and knows that there are worse threats to civilization than the weather.
One European leader worthy of respect 33
Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic, is about to take over the presidency of the EU, which he thoroughly despises. He has declared it to be as dangerous as the old Soviet Union.
We agree with him.
We also agree with him that ‘global warming’ is a myth; and that the US and global economic crisis was caused by too much government ‘regulation’ – ie interference – rather than too little.
Of course the New York Times is against him. You can find its typically narrow-minded lefty piece on him here.
The Times of London is a little more objective in its account of Klaus and his opinions.
We doubt that Klaus is ‘close’ to Putin as the reports allege. If he is, it’s one thing about him that we don’t applaud. But for the most part he is an admirable conservative free-marketeer who values the nation state and knows that there are worse threats to civilization than the weather.
Leading us to shipwreck 45
It seems likely that the man who wins the presidential race gets the booby-prize. The new president’s task would daunt Hercules.
The difficulty of guiding and protecting America, leading the West, and keeping guard over the whole seething world at this point in human affairs should be too formidable for any man or woman of normal intelligence to think of tackling it.
Either both candidates have a measure of self-confidence in their capabilities amounting to almost lunatic self-delusion, or both are astonishingly blind to what they’d be undertaking.
America is in the grip of an economic crisis that no man and his dogs can save it from. Only time and free economic activity can eventually restore confidence and prosperity. But both candidates propose regulation: one of them full-blown socialism. Their remedies can only make the crisis worse. The winner will be blamed and damned for that, but even if he should decide not to regulate, blame and cursing is what he’ll get.
The world is threatened by the dark regressive force of militant Islam; by proliferating nuclear arms in the hands of evil men; by an aggressive Russia and the rising power of Communist China; and by the slow but steady pre-emptive capitulation of an ignominious Western Europe to all these threats. One candidate seems not to grasp the reality of the dangers, and might even have sympathy with the ideologies behind them. Neither candidate could bring himself to warn Islam, or the evil despots, or Vladimir Putin, or the Chinese potentates, that America is willing to use its military might to force them to change their ways. Without that threat and a manifest resolution to carry it out, nothing will stop them.
While we fall ever deeper into debt with China; while Russian warships cruise the Caribbean and Russian arms and technology strengthen our enemies in South America and the Middle East; while every day Islam advances further until it can overwhelm us; our Don Quixote in the White House will go to war against the weather. Some will praise him for that, no doubt, until real disaster ruins him and them.
In the light of all this, competing for the presidency looks very like competing for the captaincy of the Titanic.
If one of the candidates should suddenly see clearly what he will be confronted by if he wins, he might do everything he can to hand the victory and the burden to the other. Perhaps John McCain is doing just that. It’s the only plausible explanation for his failure to use the potent ammunition he’s got against Barack Obama, to defeat him in the contest for the dreadful job of leading us to shipwreck.
Jillian Becker
October 2008
Should the US pull out of NATO? 140
More wisdom from Thomas Sowell:
Some people seem to think that, if we had already included Georgia in NATO, Russia would not have attacked. But what if they attacked anyway? Would we have done any more than we are doing now?
Would that have protected Georgia or would our inaction have just brought the reliability of our protection of other NATO countries into question?
If anything, we ought to be thinking about pulling out of NATO ourselves. European countries already have the wealth to produce their own military defense. If they do not have the will, that is their problem. What American officials can do is keep their mouths shut if they don’t intend to back up their words.
Read the whole article here.
Who’s afraid of the big bad bear? 104
Who’s afraid of Russia? NATO is, and the EU, and Bush and Rice.
On August 15 President Saakashvili of Georgia made an impassioned plea for effective help against the invasion of his small democracy by Russia. He stated bluntly that NATO’s rejection of Georgia’s application for membership of NATO on the grounds that there were territorial conflicts within Georgia [created and stirred up by Russia] had been ‘asking for trouble’ from the Russians. Putin, he explained, was testing the waters – how far could Russia go? At what point would there be an angry enough growl from the Western alliance to indicate ‘so far and no further’? No growl came. At the same time – a stretch of some years – Russia was preparing to invade Georgia, extending (for instance) railway lines through North Ossetia, which is in Russia, to faciliate the transport of men and material to the borders of Georgia. Then they built tank bases inside the two disputed territories of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Then they put military specialist in them, and then paratroopers. Step by step they prepared their invasion. Georgia, Saakashvili said, ‘screamed to the world’ for help. The West remained unmoved. The Russians took note, and continued to build up an infrastructure for invasion, and to send troops. Finally, Russia brutally invaded sovereign Georgian territory.
In reply to this, Condoleezza Rice had this to say:
That President Bush had sent her to Georgia ‘to show the solidarity of the United States with Georgia and its people [sic] in this moment of crisis’. Big comfort for the country ‘and its people’?
That [verbally, theoretically, gesturally] the US supported Georgia’s independence, territorial integrity, and democracy’, as did ‘the Europeans as well’. So reassuring to the country ‘and its people’!
That the most urgent task was to get the Russian forces out of Georgia. Great! How?
By having President Saakashvili sign a six-part ceasefire accord brokered by France. Has he signed it? Yes. And that will do the trick? Well, no, because the Russians haven’t signed it yet.
Still, Rice declared: ‘This is the understanding I had with President Sarkozy [of France] yesterday, which is that when President Saakashvili signed this ceasefire accord, there would be an immediate withdrawal of Russian forces from Georgian territory. Sheer magic! And did that happen? Well, no. Why not? Because the Russians haven’t signed the agreement.
So next effective step? ‘We need international observers on the scene fast,’ Rice said. That will make the Russians tremble! But wait, that is not all. ‘Eventually,’ Rice went on, ‘we need a more robust and impartial peacekeeping force that would follow these [hypothetical] monitors.’ And will they be able to keep the peace, although the record of such peace-keeping forces – for example in the Middle East – has been one of utter failure? Hmm … well… And who will provide them? Hmm… Well ….
But wait – that still is not all. The United States, Rice assured the Georgians, is ‘already providing humanitarian assistance’ to them. [A planeload or two of some useful things] Thanks. And? This humanitrain mission will be vigorous and ongoing. What is more it will be ‘headed by the United States military’. By the military? That sound strong. You mean, some US soldiers will dole out the useful things? Good. And?
Well, ‘when the security situation is stabilized’ [that is to say, when the Russians have withdrawn which will be if and when they decide to do so] ‘we will turn immediately to reconstruction’. Ah, you mean you will give money? Yes. The G-7, the IMF ‘and other international financial institutions’ will ‘rapidly develop an economic support package’. They will? When the security situation is stabilized? You are sure? Fairly sure. But how is the stabilization to be brought about?
Well, one step at a time, Rice said. First things first. The ceasefire agreement has been signed (by one party to the conflict, anyway). ‘It is a ceasefire agreement,’ she repeated four times. It didn’t ‘prejudice future arrangements’.
So what is the sum-total of the achievement of NATO, Europe and the United States so far in helping Georgia against the Russian invaders? They have got the president of Georgia to sign a ceasefire agreement. One side of the arranged marriage has agreed to it. First things first. And maybe nothing coming after. Or perhaps some money. Eventually. Maybe.
And will these steps deter Russia from trying the same thing on again with other states in the old Soviet sphere ? Poland say? The Ukraine? The Baltic states?
That question, Rice said, would be addressed next Tuesday by NATO. She was sure that there would then be ‘confirmation of NATO’s transatlantic vision for Georgia [whatever it may be] as well as for Ukraine, and of NATO’s insistence that it will remain open to European democracies that meet its standards’. NATO’s insistence, eh? That should be worth something, shouldn’t it?
And what was even more, the North Atlantic Council will ‘also have to begin a discussion of the consequences of what Russia has done.’ Really? There will be consequences for Russia for invading a small neighbouring country? Well … discussion of consequences anyway.
Finally, Rice assured everybody that there was no need to be afraid of NATO. Especially, she went on to stress, Russia had no need to be afraid. It should not fear the US missile defense system which Poland has agreed to have on its territory. It is not designed to deter Russia, only ‘small missile threats of the kind one could anticipate from Iran, for instance’. NATO, she said, ‘has never been aimed at anybody’ [except the Serbs, of course], and is certainly not aimed at Russia.
Now Russia can breathe easy. (Though not Georgia, Poland, the Ukraine, or the Baltic states.) Thank goodness for that!
Eurocrats enraged by a democratic vote 141
Ireland voted no to giving the unelected bureaucrats who govern Europe still more power. The bureaucrats are furious and unlikely to take no for an answer.
Read here how ‘anti-Americanism and naive pacifism’ are turning Europe into ‘one big soup, ready to be consumed by immigrating Islamic hordes’.